No. 253.
Mr. Hoppin
to Mr. Frelinghuysen.
London, October 18, 1883. (Received October 29.)
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the reception of your dispatch No. 677 of the 5th instant, addressed to Mr. Lowell, who has not yet returned to London from the Continent.
In that dispatch you instruct him to ascertain whether the prisoner O’Donnell is a citizen of the United States, and if he is, to do what is necessary to secure his proper defense.
In my No. 625, of the 24th ultimo, I stated that I had seen a mutilated paper found upon the prisoner which purported to be an original certificate of the probate court of Lawrence County, Ohio, at Ironton, dated November 6, 1876, to the effect that one Patrick O’Donnell had been duly naturalized as a citizen of the United States; but I added that the fact of the prisoner having borne the name of Michael O’Donnell threw some doubt upon his identity with the person to whom the naturalization certificate had been issued.
I have since made further inquiries upon the subject of the police authorities, and learned that the prisoner was born at Gwedore, Donegal County, Ireland, about the year 1835; that he went to the United States in 1863 and enlisted in the Army, from which he soon deserted, and returned to Ireland on or about the year 1870; that he remained in Great Britain until the year 1874 or 1875, when he went again to the United States; that he afterwards returned to Ireland, and was working at Edinburgh in 1879; that he went a third time to America on or about July, 1882, from whence he returned shortly prior to his departure in the same ship with Carey for Cape Town.
If this account be true, it is evident that he had not resided continuously in the United States for five years next preceding the 6th of November, 1876, the date of his alleged admission to citizenship, which residence is required by section 2170 of the Revised Statutes. And if it is asserted that only one year’s residence was necessary in his case on account of his service in the Array, this is to be answered by the fact that by section 2166 of the Statutes, in order to claim this privilege, he must have proved that he was “honorably discharged,” which, if he had deserted, was, of course, impossible.
I am led to the conclusion, therefore, that this certificate was either [Page 468] granted to some other person bearing the not unusual name of Patrick O’Donnell, or that it was fraudulently obtained by the prisoner.
Mr. Lowell is further instructed, in case it is ascertained that O’Donnell is a citizen of the United States, to do whatever is necessary to secure his proper defense.
It is possible that the Department of State may decide that the simple fact of the prisoner’s possessing a certificate of naturalization in his own name is sufficient proof of his citizenship without regard to the antecedent facts. I have, therefore, to consider whether it is necessary for me to take any further steps than have been taken to secure his proper defense.
It appears that a competent solicitor, Mr. Guy, and a distinguished barrister, Mr. Sullivan, have already been retained by O’Donnell’s friends, and are actively engaged in his case. It is stated that the services of Mr. Charles Russell, Q. C., M. P., have also been bespoken, and that Mr. Pry or and Mr. Fullerton, eminent counsel from America, are to act here in his behalf. His trial has been postponed until November, giving ample time for the production of witnesses.
Under these circumstances it seems to me that O’Donnell’s defense has been properly secured, and that it is not necessary for me to take any further steps in that direction. If, however, the Department should think it desirable that I should employ additional counsel in this matter at the expense of the Government of the United States, I respectfully request that I may be directed by telegraph to do so.
It is proper for me to refer, in this connection, to my No. 625, of the 24th ultimo, in which I informed you of my having declined to employ counsel to defend O’Donnell, except under instructions from the Department.
I think it is hardly necessary for me to show the immense inconvenience if not absolute impracticability 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 Government. It does not seem to me that any serious argument is needed on this point, but I may refer to Mr. Adams’s No. 1490, of the 7th of December, 1867, to Mr. Seward, in which a special application to the Department was judged to be necessary for permission to engage counsel to defend one Ricord O. S. Burke, whose claims to protection were much clearer and stronger than those of O’Donnell.
I shall send this dispatch by mail to avoid delay.
I have, &c.,