and courteous to all who were brought into connection with him.

DICK, Prof. WILLIAM, a veterinary surgeon, teacher, and author of works on veterinary science, born in Edinburgh, May, 1793; died in that city, April 4, 1866. He received his medical training at Edinburgh University, and took his diploma as a veterinary surgeon at the London College. In 1818 he founded the Edinburgh Veterinary College, an institution which from the first has enjoyed the highest reputation as a school for that branch of science and practice. In 1823 the college received the patronage of the Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland, who conferred on him the title of professor. At the public exhibitions of that society his skill was in constant requisition, and as a judge of horses he was probably unrivalled. He had also an extensive acquaintance with all kinds of cattle disease, and on the outbreak of the rinderpest he was called extensively in consultation, and was at once appointed inspector for the County of Edinburgh. Prof. Dick was for a long period secretary and treasurer of the Royal Physical Society. He contributed many valuable papers to the Highland and Agricultural Society's "Transac tions," and to the Royal English Society's "Transactions; " also to several sporting journals, and was the author of the article on veterinary science in the seventh edition of the "Encyclopædia Britannica," which has since passed through two editions in book form. His appointments were numerous, and embrace that of veterinary surgeon to the queen, and veterinary inspector to the ports of Leith and Granton.

DICKINSON, HON. DANIEL STEVENS, an American statesman, born in Goshen, Litchfield County, Conn., September 11, 1800; died in New York City, April 12, 1866. He removed with his father's family in 1807 to Chenango County, N. Y., and, with no better advantages for obtaining an education than those derived from common schools, he qualified himself for the duties of a school-teacher at the age of twenty-one years, and, without the aid of an instructor, mastered the Latin language, and became well versed in the higher branches of mathematics and other sciences. In 1822 he married Miss Lydia Knapp, a lady of fine intellectual attainments, and soon after turned his attention to the study of law, was admitted to the bar in 1828, and removing to Binghamton, N. Y., at once entered upon an extensive practice, in which he met and successfully competed with the ablest lawyers of the State. In 1836 he was elected to the State Senate for four years, and, though one of the youngest members and inexperienced in politics, he speedily became the leader of his party-the Democratic Jacksonian. During this time he was also judge of the Court of Errors, and subsequently president of that court. In 1840 he was a candidate for the Lieutenant-Governorship, but was defeated. In 1842 he received the nomination for the same

office, and was elected by a large majority. As Lieutenant-Governor, he was presiding officer of the Senate, which was then a court for the correction of errors, and Mr. Dickinson gave frequent opinions on the grave questions which came before that court for final adjudication, many of which may be found in the law reports of the day.

In 1844 Mr. Dickinson was a State elector of the Democratic party, and as such cast his vote for James K. Polk and George M. Dallas, as President and Vice-President of the United States. At the expiration of his term of office as Lieutenant-Governor, in December, 1844, he was appointed by Governor Bouck to fill a vacancy in the United States Senate, and on the meeting of the Legislature the appointment was not only ratified, but was extended so as to embrace a full term of six years. During the period of his service in the Senate, he took an important part in the debates of that body, and held for a number of years the important position of chairman of the Finance Committee. Upon the exciting questions of the day Mr. Dickinson always adhered to the Conservative side, and advocated non-intervention on all matters relating to slavery. In the National Democratic Convention held at Baltimore in 1852 he received the vote of Virginia for President, but being himself a delegate favoring the nomination of General Cass, he withdrew his own name, in a speech which has been univer sally commended for its elevated tone and classic beauty of style. In the same year (1852) President Pierce nominated Mr. Dickinson for Collector of the Port of New York, and he was soon after unanimously confirmed by the Senate without reference; but this honorable and lucrative position Mr. Dickinson declined.

At the close of his term in the Senate, Mr. Dickinson returned to the practice of his profession with renewed energy. On the breaking out of the war he indicated his determination to sustain the Government, regardless of all party considerations, and for the first three years he devoted himself to addressing public assemblages on the question of the day, advising his hearers to ignore all party lines and to defend by word, act, and united ef forts the laws, the Constitution, and the country. An estimate of the herculean task he imposed on himself may be formed when it is known that during the period referred to he delivered in New York, Pennsylvania, and the New England States over one hundred addresses, each presenting prominent and dis tinctive features. In the performance of this labor Mr. Dickinson displayed the unlimited resources of his intellect, and enriched the rec ords of American eloquence. On the forma tion of the Union party in 1861, Mr. Dickinson was nominated for Attorney-General of his State, and was elected by about 100,000 ma jority. President Lincoln nominated Mr. Dick inson to settle the Oregon boundary question and the nomination was confirmed, but the po

sition was declined. In December of the same year, Governor Fenton, learning that Hon. Henry R. Selden's resignation would leave a vacancy in the Court of Appeals, tendered the position to Mr. Dickinson; but this was also declined. One of the last acts of President Lincoln was to tender Mr. Dickinson the office of District Attorney for the Southern District of New York-a post which was accepted, and the duties of which he continued to perform almost up to the day of his death, the last case he was engaged in being that of the United States vs. the Meteor and owners.

As a 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 speeches were embellished by graceful allusions to classic poetry and mythology, and were delivered apparently without effort. As a writer, Mr. Dickinson was not undistinguished, and he occasionally 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 integrity, won him the respect and love of all with whom he came in contact.

DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE AND FOREIGN RELATIONS. The Monroe Doctrine.-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 breaches with friendly powers. The letter is as follows:

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, June 2, 1866.

To Judson Kilpatrick, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary:

SIR: Your dispatch of May 2d, No. 7, has been reeved. I appreciate your solicitude that the course of proceeding which this Government has pursued in regard to the war between Chili and Spain should be understood and appreciated. Perhaps, however, the difficulty in the way of such appreciation results from the peculiar circumstances of Chili. Her statesmea 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 daties 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 the last five years. We avoid, in all cases, giving encouragement to expectations which, in the Tarying course of events, we might find ourselves unable to fulfil, and we 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 and insist, with all the decision and energy compatible with our existing neutrality, that the republican system, which is accepted by the people in any one of those States shall not be wantonly assailed, and

that it shall not be subverted as an end of a lawful war by European powers. We thus give to those republics the moral support of a sincere, liberal, and we think it will appear a useful friendship. We could claim from foreign States no concession to our own political, moral, and material principles, if we should not conform to our own proceedings in the needful intercourse with foreign States to the just rules of the laws of nations. We therefore concede to every nation 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 nations which are in friendship with ourselves, if they are not pushed, like the French war in Mexico, to the political point before mentioned, we do not intervene, 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 We understand ourselves to have before described. 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 unswerving policy of the United States. They forget the frequency and variety of wars in which our friends in this hemisphere engage themselves, entirely independent of 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 does not allow the executive Government to en

gage in war, except upon the well-considered and deliberate decree of the Congress of the United States.

A Federal Government, consisting of thirty-six equal States, which are in many respects self-governing, cannot easily be committed by its representatives to foreign wars, either of sympathy or of ambition. 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, adhered to the principle of non-intervention, and have perseveringly declined to seek or contract entangling 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 feeling toward them. Nor do we fear that injurious misapprehensions can long prevail among the enlightened 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. Seward, in

a lengthy communication to the Marquis de Montholon, reviews the position assumed by the United States in protesting against the action of the French Government in Mexico. April 5th, M. Drouyn de Lhuys communicates to the Marquis de Montholon the fact that "the emperor has decided that the French troops shall evacute Mexico in three detachments, the first being intended to depart in the month of November, 1866; the second in March, 1867, and the third in the month of November of the same year."

Information reached the Department of State of a movement, having for its object the enlistment of Austrians for embarkation to Mexico, and on the 16th and 19th of March Mr. Seward calls the attention of Mr. Motley, the United States Minister to Austria, to the fact, and urges the earnest and emphatic protest of the United States to such a proceeding. In a subsequent dispatch of the 6th of April, he says: "It is thought proper that you should state that in the event of hostilities being carried on hereafter in Mexico by Austrian subjects, under the command or with the sanction of the Government of Vienna, the United States will feel themselves at liberty to regard those hostilities as constituting a state of war by Austria against the republic of Mexico, and in regard to such war waged at this time and under existing circumstances the United States could not engage to remain as silent or neutral spectators."

April 16th. Mr. Seward calls the attention of Mr. Motley to the correspondence between the Governments of the United States and France upon the subject, and says: “These papers will give you the true situation of the question. It will also enable you to satisfy the government of Vienna that the United States must be no less opposed to military intervention for political objects hereafter in Mexico by the government of Austria than they are opposed to any further intervention of the same character in that country by France. You will, therefore, act at as early day as may be convenient. Bring the whole case in a becoming manner to the attention of the imperial royal government."

May 6, 1866. Mr. Motley communicated the views of the United States Government to Count Mursdorff, who, in reply on the 20th of the same month, writes that the necessary measures have been taken in order to suspend the departure of the newly-enlisted volunteers for

Mexico."

May 31, 1866. Mr. Bigelow reports the French Minister of Foreign Affairs as saying: "That they were but too anxious to withdraw their troops from Mexico; that they would be withdrawn certainly not later, but probably sooner, than the time proposed."

June 4, 1866. Mr. Bigelow, detailing a conversation with the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, says: "He said that the imperial government proclaimed its intention to retire from Mexico, because it suited its convenience and interests to retire, and for no other reason.

When, therefore, it announced formally, not merely to the United States, but to all the world, that the army would be withdrawn from Mexico within a specified time, he thought it should be deemed sufficient. The government made its declaration in good faith, and means to keep it. It means to withdraw its army within the time prescribed, and it does not intend to take one or two hundred in the first detachment and one or two hundred more in the second, leaving the great body of them to the last, though it had not deemed it necessary to specify with minuteness details of this kind, which depend upon hygienic and climatic considerations, of which it was the best and the only competent judge;" and explained that the shipment of French troops to Mexico was for the purpose partly of replacing soldiers missing, and without augmentation of the number of standing troops: "He went on further to say that it was the intention of the government to withdraw the army'entirely from Mexico within the time specified in his dispatch to you at the very latest-sooner if climatic and other controlling considerations permitted; and it was not its intention to replace them with other troops from any quarter."

August 16, 1866. Mr. Seward, to the Marquis de Montholon, says: "The President thinks it proper that the Emperor of France should be informed that the assumption of administrative functions at this time by the aforenamed officers of the French expeditionary corps, under the authority of the Prince Maximilian, is not unlikely to be injurious to good relations between the United States and France, because it is liable to be regarded by the Congress and people of the United States as indicating a course of proceeding on the part of France incongruous with the engagement which has been made for the withdrawal of the French expeditionary corps from that country."

August 17, 1866. Mr. Kay reports the assurance of the French Minister of Foreign Af fairs, that "there had been no modification of our policy in that matter, and there is to be none; what we announced our intention to do, we will do."

August 24, 1866, Mr. Seward forwarded to Mr. Bigelow, for his information, the following:

The ports of Matamoras, and all those of the Northern frontier which have withdrawn from their obedience to the

such time as the laws of the empire shall not be therein reinstated.

ART. 2. Merchandise proceeding from the said ports on arriving at any other where the excise of the empire is collected, shall pay the duties on importation, introduction, and consumption, and on satisfactory proof of contravention shall be irrepressibly confiscated.

Our Minister of the Treasury is charged with the punctual

execution of this decree.

Given at Mexico the 9th of July, 1866.

And Whereas, The decree thus recited, by declaring a belligerent blockade, unsupported by competent military or naval force, is in violation of the neutral rights of the United States, as defined by the law of nations as well as of the treaties existing between the United States of America and the afore

said United States of Mexico:

Now, therefore, I, Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare that the aforesaid decree is held, and will be held by the United States, to be absolutely null and void as against the Government and citizens of the United States, and that any attempt which shall be made to enforce the same against the Government

or citizens of the United States will be disallowed.

affixed.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be Done at the City of Washington, on the seventeenth day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, and of the independence of the United States of America the ninety-first.

[L. S.]

By the President:

ANDREW JOHNSON.

WM. H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.
Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Seward.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
PARIS, October 12, 1866.

SIR: The Marquis de Moustier received the diplomatic body yesterday for the first time. In reply to a question of mine, he said that the policy of his government toward the United States and Mexico would not undergo any change in consequence of the change of his department. His excellency wished me to understand and report to you that he saw the emperor at Biarritz; that his majesty expressed his desire and intention to retire from Mexico as soon as practicable, and without reference to the period fixed in the convention with Maximilian, if shorter time will suffice. His excellency then went on to say that the "dissidents," according to late reports, are gaining ground, but that it is not the intention of the emperor to undertake new and distant expeditions to reduce them; that there was some talk of retaking Tampico, but what was decided upon had not yet transpired in Paris. He said the position of France was a delicate one, and that there was nothing the emperor desired more than to disembarrass himself of all his engagements with Mexico as soon as he could with dignity and honor, and that with our aid-upon which he counted-the time might be very much shortened.

The instructions to Mr. Campbell, the minister to Mexico, dated October 20, 1866, ordering him to proceed on his mission with Lieut. Gen. Sherman, direct "that, as a representative of the United States, you are accredited to the republican government of Mexico, of which Mr. Juarez is President. Your communications as such representative will be made to him, wheresoever he may be, and in no event will you officially recognize either the Prince Maximilian, who claims to be emperor, or any other

first reported to this department, and received instructions from the President of the United States. Secondly, assuming that the French military and naval commanders shall be engaged in good faith in executing the agreement before mentioned for the evacuation of Mexico, the spirit of the engagement on our part in relation to that event will forbid the United States and their representative from obstructing or embarrassing the departure of the French. Thirdly, what the Government of the United States desires in regard to the future of Mexico is not the conquest of Mexico, or any part of it, or the aggrandizement of the United States by purchases of land or dominion; but, on the other hand, they desire to see the people of Mexico relieved from all foreign military intervention, to the end that they may resume the conduct of their own affairs under the existing republican government, or such other form of government as, being left in the enjoyment of perfect liberty, they shall determine to adopt in the exercise of their own free will, by their own act, without dictation from any foreign country, and of course without dictation from the United States. It results, as a consequence from these principles, that you will enter into no stipulation with the French commanders, or with the Prince Maximilian, or with any other party, which shall have a tendency to counteract or oppose the administration of President Juarez, or to hinder or delay the restoration of the authority of the republic. On the other hand, it may possibly happen that the President of the Republic of Mexico may desire the good offices of the United States, or even some effective proceedings on our part, to favor and advance the pacification of the country so long distracted by foreign combined with civil war, and thus gain time for the reestablishment of national authority upon principles consistent with a republican and domestic system of government. It is possible, moreover, that some disposition might be made of the land and naval forces of the United States without interfering within the jurisdiction of Mexico, or violating the laws of neutrality, which would be useful in favoring the restoration of law, order, and republican government in that country. You are authorized to confer upon this subject with the republican government of Mexico and its agents, and also to confer informally, if you find it necessary, with any other parties or agents, should such an exceptional conference become absolutely necessary, but not otherwise. You will by these means obtain information which will be important to this government, and such information you will convey to this department, with your suggestions and advice as to any proceedings on our part which can be adopted in conformity to the principles I have before laid down. You will be content with thus referring any important propositions on the subject of reorganization and restora

tion of the republican government in Mexico as may arise to this department, for the information of the President. The LieutenantGeneral of the United States possesses already discretionary authority as to the location of the forces of the United States in the vicinity of Mexico."

Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Seward.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, PARIS, Nov. 8, 1966. SIR: The Minister of Foreign Affairs informed me on Thursday last, in reply to a question which newspaper rumors prompted me to address him, that it was the purpose of the emperor to withdraw all his troops from Mexico in the spring, but none before that time. I expressed my surprise and regret at this determination, so distinctly in conflict with the pledges given by his excellency's predecessor (M. Drouyn de Lhuys) both to you, through the Marquis de Montholon, and also to myself personally. The marquis assigned considerations of a purely military character, overlooking, or underestimating, as it seems to me, the importance which this change might possibly have upon the relations of France with the United States. I waited upon his majesty yesterday, at St. Cloud, repeated to him what the Marquis de Moustier had told me, and desired to know what, if any thing, could be done by me to anticipate and prevent the discontent which I felt persuaded would be experienced by my country-people, if they received this intelligence without any explanation. The emperor said that it was true that he had concluded to postpone the recall of any of his troops until spring, but that in doing so he had been influenced by entirely military considerations. At the time he gave the order the successors of the dissidents, supported as they were by large reënforcements from the United States, seemed to render any reduction of his force then perilous to those who remained behind. His majesty went on to say that he sent General Castelneau to Mexico, charged to inform Maximilian that France could not give him another cent of money, nor another man. If he thought he could sustain himself there alone, France would not withdraw her troops faster than had been stipulated for by M. Drouyn de Lhuys, should such be his desire, but if, on the other hand, he was disposed to abdicate, which was the course his majesty counselled him to take, General Castelneau was charged to find some government with which to treat for the protection of French interests, and to bring all the army home in the spring. His majesty appeared to realize the importance of having an understanding with the President upon the subject, and I left with the impression that he intended to occupy himself with the matter at once. There is but one sentiment here about the determination of France to wash her hands of Mexico as soon as possible. Nor have I any doubt that the emperor is acting in good faith toward us. The fact which the emperor admitted in this conversation, that he had advised Maximilian to abdicate, has prepared me to expect every day the announcement of his abdication; for such advice, in Maximilian's dependent condition, is almost equivalent to an order. That it would be so regarded is, I think, the expectation of the emperor, and ample preparations for the early repatriation of all the troops have, I believe, already been made by the Ministers of War and Marine. The emperor stated that he expected to know the final result of Castelneau's mission toward the end of this month.

November 23, 1866. Mr. Seward, in a dispatch to Mr. Bigelow, protested against this change on the part of the emperor of the plans of the French Government in withdrawing its troops.

The efforts of General Santa Anna to enlist

the Government in his views in reference to Mexico, received no further recognition than the information that the Executive Government holds intercourse affecting the international relations of the United States and Mexico only with accredited representatives of the republic of Mexico.

CANADA.-The action of the Government in reference to the conviction of persons taken prisoners during the Fenian invasion of Canada, is set out in the following:

TO THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary of State, to whom were referred two resolutions of the House of Representatives, passed on the 23d of July instant, in the following words, respectively:

Resolved, That the House of Representatives respectfully request the President of the United States to urge upon the Canadian authorities, and also the British Government,

the release of the Fenian prisoners recently captured in

Canada.

Resolved, That the House respectfully request the President to cause the prosecutions instituted in the United States courts against the Fenians to be discontinued, if compatible with the public interests.

has the honor to report in regard to the first resolution that the Government of the United States holds no correspondence directly upon any subject with the Canadian authorities mentioned in the said resolution, or with the authorities of any colony, prov ince, or dependency of any other sovereign State, and that, on the contrary, all its correspondence concerning questions which arise in or affect or relate to such colonies, provinces, or dependences, is always conducted exclusively with such foreign gov

ernments.

On the 11th of June last a note was addressed by this Department to the Hon. Sir Frederick W. A. Bruce, her majesty's minister plenipotentiary residing in the United States, of which a copy is hereunto annexed. It is proper to say, in relation to that note, first, that the reports mentioned therein, to the effect that prisoners had been taken on the soil of the United States and conveyed to Canada, and threatened by Canadian agents with immediate execution, without legal trial, were found on examination to be untrue and without foundation in fact. It is due to the British Government to say, in the second place, that the representations made in the said note have been received and taken into consideration by the British Government and by the Canadian authori ties in a friendly manner.

The resolution of the House of Representatives first recited, harmonizing as it does with the spirit of the aforesaid note, will be brought to the attention of her majesty's government and of the Canadian authorities, with the expression of a belief on the part of the President that affairs upon the frontier have happily come to a condition in which the clemwithout danger to the public peace, and with adency requested by Congress may be extended vantage to the interests of peace and harmony between the two nations.

I have already received your directions that the second of said resolutions be taken into consideration by the proper departments of the Government, with a desire that it may be found practicable to reconcile the humane policy recommended with the maintenance of law and order, the safety of the public peace, and the good faith and honor of the United States. Respectfully submitted,

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.