HOPPIN, Charge d’Affaires ad interim to Benjamin H. Barrows, November 2, 1881

Mr. Hoppin to Mr. Barrows.

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 31st ultimo, addressed to the minister of the United States, covering another from J. R. Tinsley, esq., United States consular agent at Limerick, which inclosed a communication from Mr. James F. Daly, and his certificate of naturalization as a citizen of the United States.

It appears that Mr. Daly has been arrested under the so-called “coercion act,” and is now detained at Limerick jail. He desires that the minister should demand for him a trial or speedy release, and you ask for instructions in this matter.

Mr. Lowell went to the continent upon a leave of absence more than three weeks since and will not return until early in December.

In a communication which was addressed to you on the 1st of September last, in relation to the case of Mr. Walsh, Mr. Lowell stated the reasons why, in his opinion, he should not intervene on behalf of American citizens arrested under the coercion act, unless under extraordinary and exceptional circumstances. I have good grounds to believe that these reasons are not disapproved of by the Department of State.

I fully agree with Mr. Lowell in this view of our diplomatic duties. If no distinction has been made to the disadvantage of the prisoner on the ground of his nationality, and if British subjects are being imprisoned for no more illegal acts than those which he has committed, it seems that, however arbitrary and despotic we may consider the coercion act to be, we are nevertheless obliged to submit in silence to the action taken under it by the authorities, even against our own fellow-citizens.

So long ago as the year 1848, when certain citizens of the United States were arrested and confined in Newgate prison, Dublin, under the law suspending the habeas corpus, Mr. Buchanan in his instructions to Mr. Bancroft said, “If this law, arbitrary and despotic as it is, had been carried into execution in the same impartial manner against the citizens and subjects of all foreign nations this government might have submitted in silence.” It was the fact that a distinction was made to the disadvantage of American citizens that was the ground of intervention in that case.

It is useless for us to apply to Her Majesty’s Government for a statement of the dates, places, and other details of the specific acts alleged to have been committed by Mr. Daly, upon which the warrant for his arrest was issued. We have already asked for similar information on other occasions, and have been told that Her Majesty’s Government consider that no distinction can be made in these circumstances between foreigners and British subjects, and that in the case of the latter the only information given is that contained in the warrant. We have, therefore, to look elsewhere for such information.

If Mr. Daly can show satisfactorily that the acts for which he has been imprisoned are of less gravity and importance than those for which any British subjects have been arrested; that he has been attending exclusively to his private affairs in Ireland, without taking part in political meetings or party disturbances, and that his incarceration is due to mistake and misapprehension, I shall take great pleasure in bringing his case to the attention of Her Majesty’s Government and asking for his speedy release.

I herewith return Mr. Tinsley’s and Mr. Daly’s letters, and the latter’s naturalization certificate.

I am, sir. &c.,