DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE AND FOREICN' RKL.Vi 



267 



ition was declined. In December of the same 

 year, (Jcm-rimr Fonton, learning that Hon. 

 Henry I:. Seldon'a resignation would leave a 

 v:t<Mm \ in the Court of Appeals, tendered the 

 position to Mr. Dickinson; but this was also 

 declined. One of the last acts of Prcsi.h nt 

 Line. .In was to fonder Mr. Dickinson the office 

 of I >Utrict Attorney for the Southern District 

 of New York a post which was accepted, and 

 the. duties of which ho continued to perform 

 almost up to the day of his death, the last case 

 he was engaged in being that of the United 



s M. the Meteor and owners. 



: debater, Mr. Dickinson occupied a front 

 rank. In argument, he was clear, profound, 

 and logical, and not unfrequently overwhelmed 

 his opponents with scathing satire. His speech- 

 es were embellished by graceful allusions to clas- 

 sic poetry and mythology, and were delivered 

 apparently without effort. As a writer, Mr. 

 Dickinson was not undistinguished, and he oc- 

 casionally wooed the muse with success, his 

 lyrical effusions possessing a charming purity 

 and simplicity. Socially Mr. Dickinson was 

 one of the most entertaining of companions, 

 abounding in anecdote and reminiscences of his 

 early career ; and his genial nature and strong 

 personal attachments, as well as his marked in- 

 tegrity, won him the respect and love of all 

 with whom he came in contact. 



DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE AND 

 FORE I < ; N T I : KL ATIONS. The Monroe Doe- 



. Mr. Seward, in his letter' of June 2, 

 1866, defines the position of the United States 

 in reference to wars waged by foreign powers 

 against American Governments. He draws a 

 very clear distinction between wars carried on 

 for the gratification of ambition, for the purpose 

 of substituting another form of government, or 

 the desire of conquest, and those originating in 

 the causes which create broaches with friend- 

 ly powers. The letter is as follows : 



DEPAKTMEXT or STATE, "WASHINGTON, June 2, 1S68. 



To Judson Eilpatrick, Envoy Extraordinary and 

 Minister Plenipotentiary : 



SIR: Your dispatch of May 2d, No. 7, has been re- 

 ceived. I appreciate vour solicitude that the course 

 of proceeding which this Government has pursued 

 in regard to the war between Chili and Spain should 

 bo understood and appreciated. Perhaps, however, 

 the difficulty in the way of such appreciation re-tilt -s 

 from the peculiar circumstances or Chili. Her states- 

 men and people, like the statesmen and people of all 

 countries, may be expected to interpret not only 

 the rights of that republic, but the capacities and 

 duties of other States, in the light of their own in- 

 terests and wishes. 



The policy of the United States in regard to the 

 several Spanish-American States is, or ought to be, 

 well known now, after the exposition it has received 

 during thu last five years. We avoid, in all coses, 

 giving encouragement to expectations which, in the 

 v.irvmjf course of events, we might find ourselves 

 unable to fulfil, and wo desire to be known as doing 

 more than we promise, rather than of falling short 

 of our engagements. On the other hand, we main- 

 tain mid insist, with all the decision and energy com- 

 patible with our existing neutrality, that the rcpub- 

 Jican system, which is accepted by the people in any 

 one of those States shall not DC wantonly assailed, and 



that it shall not be subverted M an end of a lawful war 

 by European powers. We thus give to those repuMi- s 

 nil support of a sincere, liberal, and wo think it 

 u ill appear a useful friendship. We could claii 

 foreign States no concession to our own political, 

 moral, and material principles, if we should not con- 

 form to pur own proceedings in the needful inter- 

 course with foreign States to the just rules of the 

 laws of nations. . We therefore concede to every na- 

 tion the right to make peace or war for such causes, 

 other than political or ambitious, as it thinks right 

 and wise. In such wars as are waged between na- 

 tions which are in friendship with ourselves, if thcv 

 are, not pushed, like the French war in Mexico, to 

 the political point before mentioned, we do not inter- 

 vene, but remain neutral, conceding nothing to one 

 belligerent that we do not concede to the other, and 

 allowing to one belligerent what we allow to the 

 other. 



Every complaint made by the Chilian agents of an 

 attempt on the part of Spain to violate the neutrality 

 of the United States has been carefully and kindly 

 investigated, and we have done the same no more, 

 no less in regard to the complaints instituted 

 against the neutrality of the agents of Chili. We 

 certainly thought it was an act of friendship on our 

 part that we obtained assurances from Spain at the 

 beginning, and at the other stages of the present 

 war, that in any event her hostilities against Chili 

 should not be prosecuted beyond the limits which I 

 have before described. We understand ourselves to 

 be now and henceforth ready to hold Spain to this 

 agreement, if, contrary to our present expectations, it 

 should be found necessary. In this we think we are 

 acting a part certainly not unfriendly to Chili. It 

 was thought to be an act of friendship when we used 

 our good offices with both parties to prevent the 

 war. We have thought that we were acting a 

 friendly part, using the same good offices to secure 

 an agreement for peace without dishonor or even 

 damage to Chili. 



Those who think that the United States could 

 enter as an ally into every war in which a friendly 

 republican State on this continent became involved, 

 forget that peace is the constant interest and un- 

 swerving policy of the United States. They forget 

 the frequency and variety of wars in which our 

 friends in this hemisphere engage themselves, en- 

 tirely independent or all control or counsel of the 

 United States. We have no armies for the purpose 

 of aggressive war, no ambition for the character of a 

 regulator. Our Constitution is not an imperial one, 

 and docs not allow the executive Government to en- 



age in war, except upon the well-considered and 

 eubcrate decree of the Congress of the United 

 States. 



A Federal Government, consisting of thirty-six 

 equal States, which are in many respects self-gov- 

 erning, cannot easily be committed by its represen- 

 tatives to foreign wars, either of sympathy or of am- 

 bition. If there is any one characteristic of the 

 United States which is more marked than any other, 

 it is that they have, from the time of Washington, ad- 

 hered to the principle of non-intervention, and have 

 perseveringly declined to seek or contract entan- 

 gling alliances, even with the most friendly States. 



It would be pleasant to the United States to know 

 that the Government and people of Chili have come 

 to a correct understanding of our attitude and feel- 

 ing toward them. Nor do we fear that injurious 

 misapprehensions can long prevail among the en- 

 lightened and spirited people of that State. 

 I am, sir, your obedient servant, 



WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 



The condition of affairs in Mexico and the 

 presence of the French troops in that country, 

 formed during the year the basis of an extended 

 diplomatic correspondence. 



Under date of February 12th, "Mr. Sewurd, in 



