Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 22, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 27 June 1884 — VOORHEES —ONn- BLAINE’S FOREIGN POLICY! [ARTICLE]

VOORHEES —ONnBLAINE’S FOREIGN POLICY!

We extract the following from Mr. Voorhees’ address before the Democratic Editorial Association: “The American official who cons senis to, or in silence witnesses, the arrest of a citizen, at home or abroad, without legal accusation, and his imprisonment without trial, is an ene my to the honor of the Republic ; nd the safety of her people There are some propositions which cannot be too strongly stated, and this is one of them: When the people of the United States are liable to be thrust into prison without sworn charge, denied the right of habeas corpus and refused a fair and speedy trial in the courts, it is JUST CAUSE FOR REVOLUTION at home, and for war on a foreign power when such outrages occur abroad. Our relations with England, engaged as she has been for more th»n 700 years in destroying every vestige of personal liberty in Ireland, as well as our relations with other foreign powers whose subjects have become our citizens, make this question o e of extreme importance in the administration of our Government. The recent nomination of Mr. Blaine for the Presidency also furnishes in his record an illustration of wilful neglect of duty on this subject by a public servant which I can not be expected to overlook in its discussion It appears from official documents laid before Congress at its call that Daniel McSweeney, a fully naturalized citizen of the Unit ed States, and for some twenty-five years a resident doing business at the corner of Ninth and Howard-streets, Ban Francisco, well-known and es teemed, returned with his wife and a portion of his large family to his native land, to remain temporarily on account of his failing health. On the second day or night of June, 1881, be was arrested, without the slightest accusation against him, James G. Blaine was then Secretary of State and in charge of our foreign policy. More than ten months afterward, and while McSweeney yet languished in jail, on the 4th of April, 1882.1 called up his case in the Senate,and amongst other things said: “He was dragged from a bed of siekness, in the presence of his wife and children, by British constables. He was guilty of no crime, not even the shadow of any crime known to the laws of any civilized nation on the face of the globe. No one will pretend that he was; no one will rise here and say so. If the party so long in power in this Government has a friend on this floor who will risk his reputation in trying to point out the guilt of McSweeney, I want to hear him. Let him stand forth at once and reconcile us, if he can, to the policy of the Republican party in relation to foreign-born cit zens. This extraordinary document from the State department tells the whole miserable story. I challenge particular attention to dates. On the 3d day of August, 1881, Julia Mc-Swa-ney wrote tu the Secretary of Slate from the County Donegal, Ireland, in behalf of her husband, and her letter was received here iu Washington on the 16th day of the same month, in that letter the brays, high spirited wife says: ” ‘ Some four years ago I came with my family, on account of my hus band’s failing health, to reside temp orarily iu this country. I was aware that England claimed this island, but I was under the im Tessicn that Americans might venture to -ravel or reside abroad protected by their flag, but in this I was mistaken.’ “Aud then she proceeds, with a woman’s keen sense of wrong and outrage, tu describe the brutal arrest of her invalid husband. She continues: “ ‘lt is not alleged that he committed any crime or violated any law He, being an American citizen. Imine diately forwarded i-is naturalization papers, together with a solemn protest against this British outrage, to the American Minister at London.— That gentleman answered that the matter would be laid bef< re one Granville, and that inquiries would be made as to the ground of his arrest- ” She protests that she knows nothing of Granville, but does know that she is emitled to thejjpiotection o' “the Secretary of Stale of the great American Republic,” and exclaims, with all the lofty for< eof the ancient appeal of a citizen of Rome, when Rome was greatest: “I am an American, my husband is an American cit he has committed no crime.” But this grand hailing cry oi distress found no Roman splrlZ here; it fell still-born in that department where American rights have so long been held cheapest; it was never answered. This American woman, however, making her appeal to her own country meu from a foreign laud, proceeds to state the reasons for her husband’s airesi, anJ to claim protection for herself and her ehialren. Commenting on the kind of Government to which

THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND are subjected. She gays; “One of these tax-collectors, Wybrante Olphert, of this c >unty, sent his horses aud carts and carried away a poor woman’s crop, grown on her own land from seed obtained from charitable sources. This same Olph« ert refused permission te erect school houseson his 20,000 acres to educate his 6,000 serfs, alleging as a reason that if people were educated a land-

lord could n >t walk out of his house. My husband expressed his opinion that these things were wrong, and for the expression of these opinions he was east into a British dungeon.— I ask, will the American Government protect me? This destruction of person and property act spares neither age nor sex. I have opinions; Oiivis already known to the enemy. I am Bible at any moment to be cast into a dungeon. Our arms have been taken from us. My crop is destroyed by vermin My husband is in delicate health pining in prison. Will you leave me unprotected in the enemy’s country, with eight American orphans on my hands?” This burning appeal of an Ameri can woman in behalf of a sick husband in jail and in her own behalf, and tor the protection of her “eight Ameih un orphans,” was made direct Jy to James G. Blaine, Secretary of State, aud was received by him, as the record shows, on the 16th of August, 1881. It was never answered, nor was any notice taken of it in despatches to Mr. Lowell, the American Mln-‘ Ister at London. Mr. Blaine ceased to be Secretary of State about the middie of Dec., 1881. Six months after he knew Daniel McSweeney was in the Dundalk Jail, and his wife and children in peril, and yet during all those six dreadful months to the prisoner and his family, this man of an aggressive foreign policy, who, in seme quarters is relied on to bring on a war with England, uttered not one word, wrote not one line, made no record, lifted not a finger for the liberty of this Irish-American, or for the shelter of his helpless brood. At my seat in the Senate, in the presence of Senators, and cnallenging contradiction on this and on ail the other points in this case, I made the following statement:

According to the published correspondence which, as the Secretary informs us, “contains all the information in regard to tne case at present known to the Department of State,” not a word or sylable emanated from that Department on the subject of McSweeney’s arrest and imprisonment until tne 10th of February, 1882, eight months after ho was known to be in jail. Permit me to read that first utterance, that timid, spiritless dispatch, on a subject that stirs the blood of American manhood like a bugle-call to glorious deeds. [For want of space we omit the dispatch as wel as a letter from McSweeney to his daughter, aud the law governing the case ] Referring t - Mr. Blaine’s faithlessnes to our naturalized citizens, Mr. Voorhees continued: “Sir, a day of rekoning must come to the party in power on this great question, and it may as woll com mence now. The act of Congress of July 28,1868, now.standing as section 2,001 in the Revised Statutes of the United States, has been so grossly, so wilfully and so persistently violated in our foreign relations that somebody ought to answer for it at the bar of this Senate under articles of impeachment.” ******

There is much more in this extraordinary case, and especially in the cowardly and incompetent manner of its treatment by the American Minister at London, on which it would be profitable to dwell if I had not already transcended my time. I submit, the conduct of the Republican candidate for the Presidency of the United States as the strongest illustration to be found in American history of infidelity to duty, and of open vir. olation of law on tne part of a public servant, and on a subject far more vital than life itself. All the vigor of Ijis foreign policy seems to have been expended iu an effort to enforce a claim against broken and ruined Pe ru; none was reserved for the protaction of American citizens against the lawless and brutal power of England.