DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



281 



fallen, because of its infraction and because of the fail- 

 ure of the consideration contemplated. 



I observe that Lord Granville says that her Majesty's 

 Government have reached the conclusion that a pro- 

 longation of this discussion is not likely to lead to any 

 E-actical result, and also says that Great Britain has 

 rge colonial possessions and great commercial inter- 

 ests, which render any means of unobstructed and 

 rapid access from the Atlantic to the Pacific a matter 

 of the greatest importance to Great Britain. In the 

 conclusion of this discussion, you may say to Lord 

 Granville that this Government fully appreciates the 

 importance to Great Britain of an unobstructed and 

 rapid access from ocean to ocean, and has no disposi- 

 tion, as stated in my instruction to you of May 8, 1882, 

 to impede Great Britain in -the enjoyment of such an 

 access, and that this Government believes that the two 

 nations willj in due time, reach a satisfactory solution 

 of the questions that have been considered in this cor- 

 respondence. You may read this instruction to Lord 

 Granville, and leave a copy of it with him should he 

 desire it. I am, etc., 



FREDERICK T. FRELINGHUYSEN. 



The trial and conviction in London of Pat- 

 rick O'Donnell, an alleged citizen of the United 

 States, for the murder in South Africa of James 

 Carey, was the occasion of considerable cor- 

 respondence covering the period from Septem- 

 ber 24th to December 15th. 



Under the first-mentioned date Mr. Hoppin, 

 the American secretary of legation in London, 

 informed Secretary Frelinghuysen of the arrest 

 of Patrick O'Donnell, and of his anxiety to 

 have a solicitor appointed to undertake his de- 

 fense. He further informed the secretary that, 

 in response to a communication from the 

 deputy-governor of Millbank Prison, he had 

 stated that there was some doubt as to 

 O'Donnell's identity. He had added that, 

 supposing the prisoner's citizenship to be es- 

 tablished, he did not believe it to be the duty 

 of the United States Government under ordi- 

 nary circumstances to provide professional 

 legal assistance for one of its citizens accused 

 of crime in Great Britain, even if he were 

 destitute of means, and that there seemed to 

 be nothing in this case to make it an excep- 

 tion. He had therefore declined to instruct 

 some one to defend him, except under direc- 

 tions from the Department of State. Mr. 

 Hoppin inclosed in his communication the 

 letter of the governor in charge of Millbank 

 Prison, and his reply thereto. Under date of 

 Oct. 5, 1883, Secretary Frelinghuysen wrote 

 to Mr. Lowell, directing him to ascertain 

 whether O'Donnell was a citizen of the United 

 States, and, if so, to do whatever was neces- 

 sary to secure his proper defense. Inclosed 

 in this communication was a letter from the 

 Hon. John F. Finerty, of Illinois, transmitting 

 resolutions adopted at a meeting in Chicago, 

 urging upon the Secretary of State the ne- 

 cessity for immediate action by the United 

 States to vindicate the right of O'Donnell to 

 a fair trial. The reply of Secretary Freling- 

 huysen to Mr. Finerty was also inclosed, and 

 in it the Secretary said : 



It is not doubted that the accused will receive a 

 fair trial according to the usual forms of law, which, 

 in England, are substantially those hi force in this 



country, and that any proper aid to that end which 

 it is within their power to furnish will be given by 

 the representatives of the United States in London. 

 Such aid would be given, as a matter of course, with- 

 out specific instructions from this department, to any 

 American citizen accused of crime in any foreign coun- 

 try where this Government is represented. 



Under date of Oct. 9, 1883, Secretary Fre- 

 linghuysen inclosed to Mr. Hoppin the request 

 of the Hon. John A. Logan and others that 

 William F. Hynes and William W. O'Brien be 

 authorized to appear in court on behalf of 

 O'Donnell. He also inclosed his reply there- 

 to, stating that he understood that Gen. Pry or 

 and ex-Judge Fullerton, of New York, were 

 to take part in the defense. Mr. Lowell being 

 absent from London, Mr. Hoppin replied to 

 the last communication, stating that he had 

 come to the conclusion that the certificate 

 of naturalization produced by O'Donnell was 

 either granted to some other person " bear- 

 ing the not unusual name of Patrick O'Don- 

 nell, or that it was fraudulently obtained by 

 the prisoner." It is possible, he said, that 

 the State Department may decide that the 

 simple fact of the prisoner's possessing a cer- 

 tificate of naturalization in his own name is 

 sufficient proof of his citizenship, without re- 

 gard to antecedent facts. It seemed to him 

 that O'Donnell's defense had been properly 

 secured, and that 'it was not necessary for him 

 to take any further steps in that direction. 

 It was hardly necessary for him to show the 

 immense inconvenience, if not absolute imprac- 

 ticability, of providing, as a matter of course, 

 professional assistance for destitute American 

 citizens accused of crime in all parts of the 

 United Kingdom. Such action would throw 

 upon the legation judicial duties which would 

 materially interfere with its legitimate work, 

 and would entail great expense upon the Gov- 

 ernment. 



Under the date of October 23d, Mr. Hoppin 

 informed Secretary Frelinghuysen that he had 

 made further inquiries concerning O'Donnell's 

 alleged citizenship, and while it was impossible 

 for him to give an authoritative opinion upon 

 the question, he could say that he was im- 

 pressed with the apparent truth of O'Don- 

 nell's statements. The question of O'Don- 

 nell's citizenship was summed up in the fol- 

 lowing communication from the Secretary of 

 State to the President : 



In response to your direction I have the honor to 

 inform you that an investigation was made of the 

 right of Patrick O'Donnell to claim citizenship in the 

 United States, the result of which I have the honor 

 to communicate to you herewith. The statements 

 made in behalf of O'Dorrnell's right to claim Ameri- 

 can citizenship are conflicting, tt is asserted that he 

 is a citizen, first, by the naturalization of his father, 

 Michael, while he, the son, Patrick, was yet a minor; 

 second, by reason .of service in the army of the United 

 States during the late civil war ; and third, by natu- 

 ralization as one who resided in the United States for 

 the three years next prior to his coming of age, and 

 continuously thereafter up to the time of his making 

 application for citizenship. The claim to citizenship 

 through his father's act rests upon his own' state- 



