the note, that they view the conduct of the aforesaid authorities as a violation of the law of nations; that they disapprove of it; that they disapprove of the sanction which was given to it by Major-General Butler.

After having thanked the President and the Government of the United States therefor, I must permit myself to remark, Mr. Secretary of State, that a circumstance which, from the inception, the consul of the Netherlands is reproached with, must evidently be attributed to a want of clearness in the statement made by Major-General Butler.

According to your note, he says, "that he had been informed that a very considerably sum, belonging to insurgent enemies, was secreted in a certain liquor store of the city;" whereupon, you observe, "that he sent, very properly, a military guard to make searches at the place indicated." But it appears to be proven that the money and articles in question were not by any means in this liquor store, but in a very different place in the city. If, therefore, Mr. Couturier was accosted in the aforesaid liquor store, his commercial establishment, he might have said, with truth, that all that was in that store was his personal property. There would, therefore, be want of clearness on the part of Major-General Butler in making the celaration of Mr. Couturier bear upon the kegs, &c. Upon other allegations of Major-General Butler, differing (contrary to) from the allegations of the consul, I would not desire more than yourself, Mr. Secretary of State, to express an opinion. Major-General Butler makes a very serious charge against the consul, which involves a proceeding deserving a removal from office of the one or the other; that of the consul if he has in reality received, "with connivance," as Major-General Butler pretends (alleges), a {"fraudulent" deposit; that of Major-General Butler if he fails to prove that charge. For to take from one his honor is no less culpable than to take from him his property, his life. Left the Government of the United States, Mr. Secretary of State, in order to throw light upon its information or knowledge, have the affair examined and investigated ("investigate the transaction which has been detailed") before it pronounces between the accuser and the accused. This could not be impugned by me; but that I appoint some one to take part, to assist, in this species of inquest, which, by the proceedings themselves of the military authorities, can no longer take place upon a state of things untouched-the kegs and the boxed having been carried off without any seals, having been, as it appears, opened by Major-General Butler. This I could not do without granting, in some measure, a bill of indemnity to that which has occurred. It is what I could not take upon myself without receiving upon that point the instructions of the Government of the King. There are, besides, in affair circumstances which strike me. It seems to me that when the question relates to "fraudulent deposit," to "connivance" in acts of high treason, one should not impute, as Major-General Butler does; one should rather accuse. One should not limit himself to seize upon the proofs; it would also be natural to make sure of the accused persons; and notwithstanding the consul, to whom they impute so serious an act, was under arrest but during a few hours, during the searches made in his vault, whilst the agent of the house of Hope & Co., who, if the consul be guilty, must be so at least as much so as him, has not been, to my knowledge, arrested. These are circumstances, mr. Secretary of State, which seem to me of a nature to cause one to rather presume the innocence of the agent of the house of Hope & Co. and