Newspaper of The New York Herald, January 10, 1862, Page 1

Newspaper of The New York Herald dated January 10, 1862 Page 1
Text content (automatically generated)

T H WHOLE NO. 9252. NEWS FROM WASHINGTON. Speech of Mr. Sumner in the Senate on the Trent Affair. The Position of England and the United States as Regards the Law of the Ocean. Great Britain Pledged to the Maritime Code of America. She Secretary of the Ifavy Roughly Bandied in the Senate. The Financial Operations of Morgan ana Cummings Under Consideration. IMPORTANT ARMY BILLS BEFORE CONGRESS. Arrival of tlie Released Prisoners from Richmond, Ac., Ac., Ac. Washington, Jan. 9,1862. MB. BUMNEK'S BPBECH ON THIS TRENT AFFAIR. The speech of Mr. Sumner in tho Senate to-day, on the Trout affair, was a masterly and conclusive exposition of the triumph of American principles as applied to international law. In all his arguments and illustrations he left our respected mother England "out in the cold." He demonstrated that by all other leading European Powers tho American doctrine bad been recognized and admitted for many years, and that Englaud alone had opposed H. The inconsistency of the present position of Ihgland, with her policy in all the past, was admirably illustrated, and the conclusion, thatQreat Britain ' Is now stopped from any future assertion of her doctrine In reference to the right of visitation and search, was hrilllant and eflhetive. The speech was impressively delivered. The galleries of the Senate were densely crowded. Notwithstanding tho inclemency of the weather, the ladies' gallery was filled to overflowing. Mrs. Vice President Hamlin and a party of her friends occupied seats |Bthe diplomatic gallery, which was also filled. Secretaries Chase and Cameron occupied seats on the floor of the chamber, where were also the French, Russian, Austrian, Prussian, Danish and Swedish Ministers. Lord Lyons was not present, as etiquette required that he should not be there on such an fiMifiAn Thi? NrvArnh wu liitaned to with flxad at tan. ttoD by Senators Bright and Powell and ex Senator GreenII. Herder, the French Minister, occupied a seat next to Mr. Bright,and exchanged salutations with Mr. Sumner aat the conclusion of the speech, ss did also most of the ether foreign dignitaries. Mr. Sumner's speech hss created a marked impression n the public in regard to himself. It has removed much prejudice that existed against him, and added greatly to his reputation as a profound statesman. The impression prevailed that, with all his learning, bis extraordinary acquirements, and splendid talents, he oould not avoid the introduction of bis peculiar views in reference to Slavery; and on account of the strong anti-slavery proclivities of England hitherto, and the sympal by heretofore from this cause existing between leading English politicians and our own anti-slavery men of Mr. Sumner's class? M was apprehended by many that he would be inclined to loan towards Groat Britain in this controversy. His course to-day was, therefore, an agreeable surprise. The absence of any allusion in his speech to the negro qucs tion demonstrated his ability and willingness to rise superior to the one idea attributed to him, and the scathing exposition of British inconsistency in regurd to the right of search, and tho dignified rebuke he ad. ministered to England, exhibited his capacity to regard public affairs with the eye of a genuine statesman. The applause accorded to this really great production is universal and unqualified. GENERAL STONE AMD TBI RENDITION OF FUOITIVE ILAVK, Some three weeks since, it was announced that General Stone, commanding a brigade in General Banks' column, was tickling the rebels bjr returning fugitive slaves, and that he compelled Massachusetts soldiers In his command to perform that service. This announcement not only aroused the indignation of Governor Andrew, of that State, but that of the Senators and moet of the representatives from Massachusetts. Senator Sumner, a few days afterwards, in commenting in his place in the Senate upon the order of Gen. IJalleck concernmg the disposition of slaves that came within his lines, took occasion to allude to Gen. Stone's course in returning fugitives, the facts concerning which I understand Mr. Sumner fully satisfied himself about. The Senator's notioe of Gen. Stone was brief, but pointed. A few days afterwards Senator Sumner received a letter from Gen. Stone, the contents of which are the subject of street comment, and do not reflect creditably upon General 8tone, who, it is said, employed language towards tho Massachusetts Senator which la characterised by those who have read the letter as being unbecoming a soldier, much less an ofllcer of the distinction and position of General Stone. Mr. Sumner treats the letter with contempt. The whole subject is in the hands of General McClellan at present; but It is the determination of sevoral Senators to brlug the subject beforo the Senate. DIHAOKKEMKNT BETWEEN GENERAL MANSFIELD AND GENERAL WOOL. General Mansfield, who is at present In command at Newport News Point, is pressing a demand for removal to some other position, on account of an unpleasant disagreement between himself and General Wool. It appears that on tbs recent occasion, wliea a body of the rebels crossed New Market Bridge General Mansfield went out with a force to repulse them. There was a group of houses on each side of the creek. Those ncureat to the federal fortification afforded shelter to our soldiers, and those on the other side wore used lor protection by the rebels, in the skirmishes that occurred at tliat point, the rebels in retiring bnrnt the houses that sheltered our troops, and General Han wilcld, to deprive the rebels of tho advanUgo they had, burned these on the other side. For this be was severely censured by Gen. Wool, who, In general orders, characterized the act as a pieco of Vandalism. This public censure, for doing what he deemed a duty in exercising a precautionary care for the salety of his troops, has rendered Gen. Mansfield's position peculiarly disagreeable, but his request for a change has not yet been granted. /r IMPORTANT ARREST. \ Mr. W. T. Bmitbsou, a prominent banker of this city, 1 was arrested yesterday afternoon, upon the chargo of treasonable correspondence with the enemy. Us is a Vir gintan, and has never made any secret of his sympathy with the rebels. Many of the loaders of tho rehollion wore his most lutimale associatos. He was a zealous and influential member of the Methodist Episcopal church flouth, and bis friends are unwilling to believe that ho Vhas been guilty of any Improper conduct. ^ i CONDITION OP OENEKAL M'CLBLLAN AMD OINKHil. MAKCT. Neither General McCIellan nor General Marcy were ont to day, the inclemency or the weather renderiag their xposure imprudent. ALL QCIBT ALONO THE LINE. Everything has been quiet to day along the lines of the army. THE REPORTED BATTLE AT ROMNKT. 80 far as any conflict or skirmishing with the enemy is concerned, nothing of official of the fight nt Rurancy, an aounced to-day, has been received at hoadquaters. ARRIVAL OP THE PRISONERS PROM RICHMOND. The Richmond prisoners arrived this afternoon. They will receive tlietr pay, and those enlisted for three years re ordered beck to their regiments. They complain that DO ration allowance ia granted, alleging that they were ' i 'E NE obliged to expend money to keep themselves from starving. The prisoners number one hundred and ninety, end were comfortably cared for at the Government Voluntary Receiving House, near the railroad station. Dr. A. Trippof Scran ton, Penn., Is among the arrivals. The remainder of the party either went home after arriving in Balti' more from Old Point, or are detained there at the government hospitals, owing to their wounds breaking oat afresh. TBI CONDUCT OP TBB WAR COMHITTKX. The Joint committee appointed on the 10th of December, to examine Into the conduct of the war, have assiduously applied themselves to that duty. They have been in session nearly every day since, and have obtained much valuable information. Senator Wade, the chair, man, is so industriously engaged that he is seldom seen in the 8enate, and then only when important votes require his presence. A BILL TO PUNI8H FRAUD AND BRIBERY. In the House to-day Mr. Harris Introduced a bill to prevent fraud in the public service and punish bribery In certain cases. This bill makes it a high misdemoanor, and a subject for indictment In any United States court having criminal jurisdiction, for any one to promise, offer or give, directly or indirectly, anything to any officer or public agent, elthor before or after his election or appointment, to Influence bis vote, decision or action in any proceeding, or in the discharge of any duty, or to induce him to neglect or omit the performance of any duty, or to use his influence to procure any appointment or emolument, or allowance, or payment. The penalty fixed Is a fine of not less than the value nor more tha# three times the value of the thing offered or given or accepted, and imprisonment in tho penitentiary for not less than one nor more than ten years, and disqualification forever from holding any offico under the United States. The same penalty attaches to the officer convicted of receiving any such bribe, and tho terms "officer" and "public agent" are made to inolude ail who are performing any service for the United States. The bill also provides that any disbursing officer or agent to make contracts or purchases for the government, who shall directly or indireetly accept a present or reward, shall forfeit his office, and be promptly removed. AFFAIRS ON THE LOWER FOTOHAC. There is considerable ice in the Potomac, but the iron clad steamer King Philip keeps the communication open. The steamer Stepping Stones came from the lower flotilla, past the batteries, last night, to the flagship of the upper flotilla. Nothing new had occurred down the river. Tho rebels are thought to be reserving their strength to at* tack the Pensacola when sho goes to sea. THE A KMT. Colonel Friedman, of the Cameron Dragoons, received a despatch to-day from Governor Denniston, of Ohio, tendering him the. command of a regiment of cavalry, to be assigned to Kentucky. Robert J. Baliestier was to-day appointed Second Lieutenant in Captain Holt's old battery. He was at Bull run, where he acquitted himself gallantly. First Lieutenant Stewart, of Captain Hott's battery, who was severely injured some time since at drill, to-day reported himself for duty. All of Captain Hott's officers have been promoted flrom the ranks. The Captain is determined to admit of no other appointments if ho can holp it, and the men under him, knowing this determination, work with a hopeful zeal and courago. First Lieutenant W. G. Mitchell, of the Forty-ninth Pennsylvania regiment, has been appointed Ald-de-Camp on the stalf of Brigadier General Hancock. PAYMENT OF THE TROOPS. All the muster rolls are nearly completed, and arrangements about perfected for paying our troops across tbe Potomac. Major Ritter to day paid off the Forty-third Now York Volunteer regiment, Colonel Vinton. ATTEMPT TO BLOW UP A HOSPITAL AT ALEXANDRIA. An attempt was last night made to blow up the Man. slon House in Alexandria. This was formerly occupied as a hotel, but now as a hospital. A barrel had been secreted in the cellar filled with powder and projectiles, and a fuse was found extending from there to the stable. In proximity to tbe combustibles lucifer matches and Chinese crackers had been plentifully distributed. Tbo f .aecndat the stable had actually ignited; but theacl was fortunately discovered by the guard, and the progi ess of tbe slow lire extinguished. But for this watch fulness and prompt action, not only would several bun" drod lives probably have been lost, but other casualties resulted. NOTICE TO APPLICANTS FOR APPOINTMENTS IN THE NAVY. Applicants for situations as master's mates in the Navy Yard are required to accompany their papers with recom mediations from their last employers, and must have seen three years sou service, and not be over thirty years of age. Acting masters are similarly appointed, with the exception that they must not be over forty years of age. MONETARY AFFAIRS. Treasury notes are four per cent discount. Exchange tn New York X per cent. THE NEW ORANADIAN MINISTER. It is implied in a recent publication that General Ilerran consented to act a? Minister or me legitimate government of New Granada warn bo was made aware that he would not bo received as the representative of llosquera. This is not correct. It well known here that immediately after General Her ran's arrival at New York our government was informed that he would proceed to Washington to act on his former credentials, and before any opinion in that respect could have been expressed by our government. SENATOR BRIGHT NOT TO BE EXPELLED. The Senate Committee on the Judiciary have come to th? conclusion, all to one, to report against tho expulsion of Senator Jesse D. Bright, of Indiana, the question Involving his loyalty having been referred to them. THE PRESIDENT AT THE CAPITOL. The President,accompanied by his prtvalo secretaries, was at the room of the Vice President in the Capitol to-day, attending to public business. NOT A DESERTER. The name of Matbian Spoo, of the Hftta Wisconsin regl. ment, appeared among the list of deserturs published in theHMULD. General Hancock assures me that Spools not a deserter. He was Subject to attacks of insanity, and while suffering from one of these attacks is supposed to have wandered outside of our lines and to have been raptured by the enemy's pickets. Aside from 8|>ooand anther crazy soldier, who is now in an insane asylum, there has not been a desertion from General Hancock s brigade. TnK UNITED RTATT8 AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY. The I'nitod States Agricultural Society to day ro elected President Hubbard, Secretary Poor, Treasurer French, and nearly all the old Vico Presidents. The F-xocutivo Committee was reorganized, and consists of Marshall P. Wilder,of Massachusetts;Fredk. Smyth,of New Hampshire. Isaac Newton, of Philadelphia; ("has. B. Calvet, of Maryland; tagrand By ingtnn, of Iowa; J. n. Sullivan, of Ohio, and M. Meyers, of California. President Lincoln's recommendation of the establishment of an agricultural and statistical departmont was warmly commended, and he was elected an honorary member. The suggesLifina of tha Pr?li(l?nt'fl AiliirpRN worn riBhitArl ami ?n. dnrwd, and a large edition ww ordered to be tainted. 1 ho eaiabliahmeni of en agricultural department waa diecuated aud recommended. Tbero waa a decided esprea eton of opinion axainat national cihlbitione. unlcaa they can be beld at Waablngton. THIRTY-REVKNTH COKURBII. F1BHT MCftflfON. Senate. WaauinaToa, Jan. 0,1M2. rni mad rrnri ofnrt. Mr. Cm.iA**n,(rep.) of Vt. ,from the Poat Ofllre Committee, reported back tba bill to promote the efflelancy of thalicad letter t'fllcc. Ihe bill provider that all dead letter* be returned to the writers Instead of being destroyed. After a loug dtacuaelon the bill waa potlponed Mil tomorrow. tirrino.v or wauto n. /omta<a,or Huwirai MrTaramu., (rep.) of III., reported from the Judiciary OMMBIttoa in favor of the resolution to expel Waldo H. Johcaod, of Mlarourl. Miirraav avrarm, arc. Mr. Wtiaow, (Wf ) of Haas., reported a bill to provide for the ftgnal department of the army. Alao a bill for the .ergantaatloa of tba staff of the 41vlatona of tbearmy. ' W YO NEW YORK, FRIDAY, Alao a bill to increase the clerical force of the office of the Adjutant General. ' Mr. Sherman, (rep.) of Ohio, from the Select Committee j on Compensation, Ac., In the departments, reported a bill, i Alao a bill to regulate the compenaatlon of offlcera of 1 the army. Mr. Cowan, (rep.) of Pa., preaented a petition from the homeopathic surgeons and physicians employed In the army. Alao a bill in relation to the appointment of chaplains in the army, and to allow Jewish chaplains. aiXBUBD UEKAT FRAUDS BT ilMT AND NAVY OOKTIUCTOFa. Mr. Hals, (rep.) of N. H., preaented a petition from citizens of Pennsylvania, which states as follows:? Whereas, great frauds have been perpetrated on the Treasury by the appointment of Mr. Cummlngs by Mr. Cameron, ana the appointment"of Mr. Morgan by Mr. Welles, we therefore ask that a statute be enacted to prevent the appointment of persons without the statute therefor. rmismasT or frauds on tub treasury. Mr. Ha lb also Introduced a bill to punish fraud on the Treasury. The bill provides that any person obtaining money fraudulently be punished with a flue to the amountof money and imprisonment at hard labor for not more than ten years. If any officer of the government do it he be discharged and punished, and ever after held Ineligible for any office. Referred. Raron or ths sanitary romnsuoN. A communication was received from the War Department transmitting the report of the Sanitary Commission. Referred. . TUB TARIFF ON SUGAR AND COrrBB. The House resolution in regard to bonded coflbe and sugar, laid over yesterday, was taken up and.passed by yeas 28, nays 16. BrBBt H or MR. sumnbr ON TBS TRENT AW AIR. The communication from the Secrotary of State in regard to the Trent alTair was taken up. Mr. Si'mwzr, (rep.) of Mass., said?Mr. President, every principle of international law, when justly and authoritatively settled, becomes a safeguard of peace and a landmark of civilization. It constitutes a part of that code which Is the supreme lew, above all munlcipul laws, binding the whole commonwealth of nations. 8uch a settlement may be by a general congress of nations, as at Munster, Vienna or Paris; or it may be through the general accord of treaties; or it maybe by a prccedont established under such conspicuous circumstances, with aH nations as assenting witnesses, that it shall at once become in itself a commanding rulo of international conduct. Especially is this the case, if disturbing pretensions long maintained to the detriment of civilization, are practically renounced by the Power which has maintained them. Without any congress or treaties such a precedent has been established. Such a precedent ought to be considered and understood in its true character. In undertaking to explain it, I shall speak for myself alone; bul I shall speak frankly, according to the wise freedom of public debate, and the plain teachings of history on the question involved, trusting sincerely that what I say may contribute something to elevate the honest patriotism of the country, and perhaps secure that tranquil judgment which will render this precedent the herald, if not the guardian, of international harmony. Two old men and two younger associates, recently taken from the British mail packet Trent on the high seas, by order of Captain Wilkes, of the United States Navy, and afterwards detained in custody at Fort Warren, have been liberated, and placed at the disposition of tho British government. This has been done at tho instance of that governueent, courteously conveyed, and founded on the assumption that the original capture of these men was an act of violence which was an affront to the British flag and a violation or international law This is a simple outline of the facts. But in order to appreciate the value of this precedent, there are other matters which must be brought into view. These two old men were citizens of the United Slates, and for many years Senators. One was the author of the Fugitive Slave bill, aud the other was the chief author of tho filibustering system, which has disgraced our national name aud disturbed our notional |>eacu. Occupying places of trust ami power in the service of their couutry, they conspired against it, and at last the secret traitors and conspirators became open rcbeia. The present rebellion, now surpassing in proportions and also in wickedness any rebellion in histoiy, was from the beginning quickened and promoted by their untiring energies. That country to which they owed love, honor and obedience, they betrayed and gave over to violence and outrage. ireason, conspiracy auu reoeiiiun, eacn IDsuccession, have acted through them. The incalculable expend I tures which now task our national resources, the untold derangement of alftitrs, not only at homo, but also abroad, ' the levy of armies almost without an example, the devastation of extended regions of territory, the plunder of peaceful ships cn the.ocean, and the slaughter of fellow citizens on the murderous battle Held?such are soma of the consequences proceeding directly from them. Ttt carry forward still further the gigantic crime of which they,were so large a part, these two old men, with their two younger associates, stole from Charleston on board a rebel steamer, and, under cover of darkness and storm, running the blockade, and avoiding the cruisois In that neighborhood, sum eeded in reaching the neutral island of Cuba, where, with o|ien display and the knowledge of the British Consul, thoy embarked on board the British mall !?cket, the Trent, bound for St Thomas, whence they were to embark for Hi g-and, in which kingdom one of tbein was to play the part of embassador of the rebellion, while the other wuh to |day the same part in France. The original treason, conspiracy and rebellion of whii h they were so heinously guilty ,_were all continued on this voyage, which became a prolongation of the original crime, destined to still further oaccss, through ibeir ambassadorial pretensions, which, it was hoped, would array two great nations against the United States, and oulist them openly In behalf of an accursed slaveholdlng rebellion. While on'tbelr way th.i embassadors were arrested by Captain Wi.kes,ot the L'nilod States steamer Ban Jacinto, an accomplished ofllccr, already well known by his sclentltic explorations, who, on this occasion, acted without instructions from his government. If, In this arrest, he forgot lor a moment the fixed policy of tho republic, which has been from the beginning like a frontlet bet ween the eyes, and transcended the law of nations, as the United Slates have always declared It, his apology mast be found in the patriotic impulse by which he was Inspired, and the British examples which he could not forget They were the enemies of his country, embodying in themselves the triple issence of worst enmity?tree sun, conspiracy and rebellion?and they were a pretended embassadorlal character, which, as he well knew, accnrdlnr to blah British nuthoriLv. rendered them llehle to be st?p|ied. If, in the ardor of an honest nature, Captain Wilkes erred, he might well any:? Who run he wine, amazed, Irroperale and furioua, Lo.val and neutral hi a moment! No man. The etpeultlon of my violent lore Outran the pawner reaaon. Who could refrain That had a heart to love, and in that heart Courage to make lila love kuownT If thin transaction be regan ed exclusively in the light of Briliah precedents: If we follow the accmlng authority 01 tlm British Admiralty, speaking by lu greatest voice: and eapociaily If wo accept the oft repeated example of British crulaore. upheld by tho British government against the oft ro| rated protrata of the United Slate*, wa shall not flnd it dilhcult to vindicate It. The act becomes questionable only when brought to tho touchatone of th.:ac liberal principle*, which, from the earliest time*, the American government has oponly avowed and sought to advance, and which other Eii roptati nations have accepted with regard to tho aea. Indeed, Croat Britain cannot/ complain except by now adopting thooc identical principles and should we undertake to vindicate tho act, It ran b- done only by repudiating tb< se identical prnlclplcs. Our two c use* will he reverted. In the struggle betweon Lacrtee and Hamlet, the two combalunta exchanged rapier*; so that Hamlet was armed with ih) rapier of tarries and Iaiortc.-t was armed with the rapier of Hsinlm. Ai d now c n this sec laitivo question a similar exchange has o cur red. (treat Britain is armed with Amorlcan prlncl pies, while to us is left only those British principles which, throughout our history, have been constantly, e'e berate ly. und solemnly rejected. Lord Russell. In his dospatrh to lord l.yons, communicated to Mr. (toward, contents himself by saying that" it appears that certain individuals have been forcibly taken from on buard u British vessel, the snip of a neutral Power, whit' surA turret uru nun inp a l* i fuf an t tmwonsf t*?.w?pr?sn act ol vlo'enco which w as an all. on I to the Hrtttaii ll.ig, anil a violation of International law." Ilere la a positive assertion that the 'bip.not rlntisly having on board the rebel emissaries,was pursuing a lawful and Innocent voyage; but thero Is no specification of the precise ground c n which the act In qeest on is regarded as a violation of Intematlunal law. Of coarse it is net an affront, for an accident can never ba an aflrcnl to an individual or to a nation. But Diihlic report, authenticated by the concurring testimony of various aiilhoril <v, Knglish and Continental,forbids us in continue Ignorniit of the prech-o ground on which this act is presented as ,1 violation of international law. It was admitted that a I jilted Mates man of war, meeting a British mail steamer beyond tho territorial limits of Brest Britain, might subject her to visitation and scotch; also that the I'nltrd Mates ship of.war might put a prtzo orew on hoard the British steamer, and carry her off to a port of the fatted States for syndication by a prize court there; hut that she would hare no right to remove tho emtsearles. who were not apparently officers In the military or naval service, and carry them off as prisoners, lesving the ship to pursue her voyage. Under th- circumstances. In the excerclse of a' belligerent 1 rlgnt, the British steamer, with all on board, might hnvo 1 been captured and carried off; hut according to the 1 British law officers, on whose professional opinion tho British fhblnet han acted, the whole proceeding was ' vitiated by tbo tnllure to take the packet Into port for condemnation. This failure haa been the occasion of 1 murh unprofessional objurgation; and It has been em pbatlcally repeated that It woe impossible to consent that theenstody of tho Individuals in question should he de- 1 lermlned by a navy officer on hi* quarter deck, so aa to ufersode the adjudication of a prise court. This haa I been confidently stated by an tagiteh writer, assuming ' to pot the case for his government, sa follows ? J It Is not to the right or search that we object, tmt rothr/ot- i touiny ?iff trithimi prntrnt of low. What We deny Is ihi I HffM of a niTol o/Urr to rtomi in piitrr of a frit rovrt, and ad- f RK H JANUARY 10, 1862. Indicate, iword In hand, with a M* volo tiejuhto on the very leek which la a part of our territory. Thug it appears that the present complaint of the British government ia not founded on the assumption by the American war steamer of the belligerent right of search; nor on the ground that this right wag exerciBed on beard a neutral vessel between two neutral porta; nor that it was exercised on board a mall steamer, sustained by a subvention from the Crown, and officered la part from the royal navy; nor that it was exercised In a case where the penalties of contraband could not attach; but it is foundecLgimply and precisely on the idea that persons other tflfcn apparent officers in the military or naval service, cannot be taken out of a neutral ship at the mere will of the officer who exercises the right of search, and without any form of trial. Therefore, the law or nations has been violated, and the conductor Captatain Wilkes must be disavowed, while men, who are traitors, conspirators, and rebels, all in one, are allowed to go free. Surely, that criminals, though dyed in guilt, should go free, is better than that tho law of nations should bo violated,especially in any rule by which war is restricted and the mood of peace is enlarged; for the law of nations cannot be violated without overturning the protection of the innocont as well as the guilty. On this general principle there can be no question. It is but an illustration of that important maxim, recorded in the Latin of Forteecue, -'Better that many guilty rhould escape than one innocent man Bhould sutler," with this difference, that in the present case a few guilty escape, while the innocent everywhere on the sea obtain new security. And this security becomes more valuable as a triumph of civilization, when it is considered that it was long refused,even at the cannon's mouth. Do not forget, sir , that the question involved in this controversy is itrictiy a querlum of law?precisely like a question of trespass between two neighbors. The British Cabinet began proceedings by taking the opinion of their law advisers, precisely as on individual begins processings in u ,auu av mw uy losing toe opinion 01 ins aiioruey. To make sucli a quasi Ion a case of war, or to suggest that war is a proper mode of deciding it, is simply to revive, in collossal prorations, tbo exploded ordeal by battle, and to imitate tbose darkages when such proe eding was openly declared to be tbe best and most honorable mode of deciding even an abstract point of luw. "It was a matter of doubt and dispute," says an early historian, "whether the BfBBOf a sou ought to be reckoned among the children of the family, and succeed equally with their uncles, if their father happened to die while tholr grandfather was alive. An assembly was called to deliberate on this point, and it was the general opiuion that it ought to be remitted to the examination ami do c is ion of Judges. But the Emperor, following a bitter course, and desirous of dealing honorably with his people and nobles, appointed the matter to be decided by battle between two champions." In similar spirit has it been latterly proposed, amidst the amazement of the civilized world, to with draw tho point of law uow raised by Great Britain, from peaceful adjudication and submit it to trial by combat. But tbo irrational anachronism of such a proposition becomes more flagrant from the iuconsistoncy of tho iarty which mukes it; for it caunot be forgotten that in times past, on this identical point of law, Great Britain persistently held an opposite ground front that which she now takes. The British complaint seems to have been narrowed down to a single point; but it is nut to be disguised that there are yet other taunts on which, bad the ship been carried into port for adjudication, controversy must have arisen. Not to omit anything important, 1st me say that the three following points, among others, have been presented in the esse 1. That thoseizure of the rebelemtSKirie* without taking the ship into port, was wrong, inasmuch at a navuofiierr it not entitled to mbrtitule kimsdffor a judicial tribunal. 2. That bad the ship been carried into port, it would notbavebcen liable on account of tbe rebel emissaries, inasmuch as neutral ships are freo to carry all persons not upparoutly in the military or naval service of the enemy.

3. Are despatches contraband of war, so as to render tbe ship liable to seizure? These matters 1 shall consider in their order, givlug special attention to ths first, which is the pivot of tho British complaint. If in this discussion I > ball expose grievances which It were belter to forget, bo assured it is trom no willingness to awaken the s.mob-Ting animosities they once so justly aroused, but simply to exhibit tbe proud position on this question which the United states eurly and constantly maintained. A question of international law should not be presented on any mere aryumentumadkomimm. It would be of little value to show that Captain Wilkes was sustained by British authority and practice, if be were condemned by international law us interpreted Djr hie owu country. It belongs to us nowg-Lay, lot it bo our pride, at any cost of individual preiiossesskws or transitory prejudices, to uphold that law in all its force, as it was often declared by tho best men In our history, and Illustrated by national acts; and let us seize the present occasion to consecrate its positive and unequivocal recognition. In exchange for the priBouers set free, we receive from Great Britain a practical assent, too long deferred, to a principle early propounded by our country, and standing forth on every page of our ntslory. The same voice which oaks I'or their liberation, renounces in the samo breath an odious prctenain, for whole generations tbe scourge of peaceful comciMsee. Urea* Writs*throughout her municipal history has practically contributed to the KWUIKUUIC1J1 U, li ~lll ??"> ' There are at leant (even institution* or principles which he hai given tu civilization: tir.-t the ti iul by jury: s coolly, the writ of habeas corpus; thirdly, the freedom of toe press; fourthly, bills of rights: tll'tbly, tlto representative system: sixthly, the rules ami orders of debate, constituting parliamentary law; and seventhly, the principle, that the air la too pure for a slave to breathe? long ago declared and first made a reality by British In w. No other nation can show su> h peaceful triumphs. But while thus ontitlud to our gratitude for glorloi s con trlbiitioos to municipal law. wo turn with dissent uml sorrow from much which she has sought to fasten up n International law. In municipal quests ns Gre.il Britain drow maplrution from her own native common law. which ?al instinct with freedom: but especially in mariMne questloua arising under the law of nations this I'owor seems to have acted on that obnoxious principle of the Roman law, positively discarded In municipal questions, {fyuAprinrijii jAacuil tr&is ncorrm kalxJ, and too often, under tbia inspiration, to have uu(>osed upon weaker nu tlotia her own arbitrary will. The time lias been when she pretended to sovereignty over the sen* surrounding the llrltirh Isles, as far m tape Kimstlerre to the south, and Vansfniet , in Norway, to the north. But, driven from this pruteusun. other pretenstona, lose local, but hardly ie*g offensive, wore a*owed. The boost of "Rule, Britannia, rule the wave*,'' was practically adopted by I ritish courts of admiralty, and universal maritime rights were subjected to the special exigencies at British inu r sts. In the conscl >uam se of strength, and with a navy that e uld nut be opposed, this Power has put chums upon tiie sea. Hie commerce of the I'mted States, as it began to whiten the ocean, was cruelly docimulcd by those arbitrary pretension*. American ships and cargoes, while, iu the language of Wird Russell, "pursuing a law ful and Innocent voyage," sutlered from 11m Brltu-b admiralty courts more than from rcclt or tenqeat. 81) I pw reck was less frequent thsn cenUscation. and when It came, it wae easier to liear. Bui the lors of properly stung less than the oui rage of Impressment, by which foreigners, under the protection of the American flag, and also American citizens. without any form of trial, and at the mere mandate of a navy officer, who for thn moment acted aa a judicial tribunal, were drugged away from the deik which should have boen to tin m it sacred slur. This outrage, which was feebly vindicated by (ho municipal claim of Great Rritain to the seivices of her own subjects, was enforced arrogantly and perpetually on the high aean, where municipal law Is silent and International law alone prevails. Tbo nolligerrnt right of search,derlveo from international .aw, was employed lor this purpose, and the quarter-deck of cveiy British cruiser was mado a floating judgment seat. Tbo practice Ofgaij ?ri) , M1U wan v* IHIIUHU ?. vu-iai. i iv . iht uiu II discriminate among its victims. It in inoi.iionisj by Mr. Jefferson, and repeated by a British writer on Interna tlonal law, that two nephew * of Washington , on their way borne from Europe, were ravished from the protection of tlie American flag, without any judicial pro.: clings, i.nd placed an common seamen under the ordinary discipline of British ships of war. Tlic victim* were conn to I thousand*. I>>rd Castlereagh himself admitted, on the floor of Urn House or Commons, that an inquiry instituted by the British government l.ad discovered in the Brilian licet three thousand Ave hundred mm claim ing to bo improssed iMMfl At our jhfMMII of State aix thoi.aand tares were recorded, and It ?u estimated that at least as nnny more might have occurred, of which no inforr atton bad been received. Thus, according to tbl* official admission of the British Minister, there was reason to believe that the <1 uartor deck of a British man-of ?ar had licen made a floating Judgment sent three thot sand Ave hundred times, while, according to the records of our own State Department, It had been made a floating judgment seat sis thousand times and upwards, and each time an American ell iron had been taken from the protection of his liag without any form of trial kuowa to the law If a prefeti sion so Intrinsically lawless could be sanctioned by precedent, Ureal Britain woul I have succeeded In intci pointing It Inta tb? law of nations. Protest, argument, negotiation, correalondener, and war Itself?unhappily the last reason of republics asm kings? were ail employ ed to vain by the United States to procure a renunciation of this intolerable pretension. The ablest papers In our diplomatic history ggt devoted to this purpose, and tbo only serious war In wbieh we have been engaged, until summoned to encounter this reltelllon. wet to overcome by arms this very pretension which would not yield to reason. Peniunlng In the last 1 c; ' y, the correspondence is at last closed by the recetu le y of Mr. Steward to Ixird Lyons. Tito long continued .,, aslon of conflict Is now hai oilv removed. and Hie uri :on. nlon disappears forever?to take it* place among the curiosities of the pA?t. Hut I ilo not content myself with averting the pernUtent opposit.on of the American govei iiment. It ncloiigs to tho r. u . tu t li \i I tin u't M hlhlt this oppoeition end the precise ground en which It wse placso?being Identical with that tow adopted hy Greet Krllaiiv And here the teatlmoB" Is complete If jroti will kindly follow me, you ehall me It front the he ginning In the public lile of our country, end In th?> *ntbentic record* of our government. This llrttlah )>reten ion eiourec-.nd startled the administration of Washing loo, snd t- w" ot Mr. Jefferson, hie decretory of State, was enllstn . against It. In a letter to Thomas I'lnckney, Mir Minister at Ixindon,dated Ji.ne 11,17K, he said:? The simplest rule will lie lhat the ve*?cl l.elng American thall be evidence that the atarren on boa d her are such In another letter to the same Minister, doted Och ber 12,1782, he calls atlcntiou to a case of special outrage, nt follow*:? I enclose you s copy of a letter from Messrs. Blow and delhaddo, merchants of Virginia, mmplumlnn of thr laJ.-.nj ur?v oi IhHr irrilcrt on the enastof Africa hy thecommamler if a British armsd vessel. Ho mauy Imoarirea of this kind lar# h?ppen?d that It Is qnlte necessary lhat their governnent should stplain themselves on the subject, and be led to lisavow and piislob ttieh conduct ?tX.iU fuptrt, i of 3, |. #7f. ERA1 The game British pretension was put forth under the administration of John Adams,and was again encoun tered. Mr. Pickering, at that time Secretary of State, in a letter to Rufus King, our Minister at London, dated June 8,1760, after repeating the rule proposed by Mr. Jefferson, says:? Hut it will be an important point gained, if on thr Myh sr>i# ourjhu/ "an protect l/uitr of vhutnrr nation uno skull mil wrier it And for this humanity, aa well as interest, powerfully plead.?Slate I'apeis, vol. 8, p. 674. And ugain, at a later day, during the same administra tion, Mr. Marshall, afterwards the venerated Chief Jus tice of the I'nlted States, and at the time Secretary of Stato, in bis instructions to Rufus King, at London, dated September 20,1800, says:? The impressment of our seamen la an injury of very aerlOUS magnitude, which deeply affects the feelings and the honor of the nation. * Allen seamen, not British subjects, engaged in our merchant service, ought to be equally exempt with citizens. Britain has no pretext of right to their persons or to their se twice. To tear them from our pussrisiw I is at the same ftme an iiuult and an injur p. It is an act of Violence for w hich there exists no palliative.?State f ape re, rot. 2, p. 480. The same British pretension showed itself constantly under the administration of Mr. Jetterson. Throughout the eight years of bis Presidency the repeated outrages of British cruisers never for a moment allowed it to be forgotten. Mr. Mudtsou during this full period was Secretin y of State, and none of the varied productions or his pen are more masterly than those in which he exposed the tyranny of this pretension. In tho course of this discussion he showod tho special hardship found in the fact that the sailors wero taken from the ship at the more will of uu ofllcer, without any form of judicial proceedings, and thus early presented against the pretension of Great Britain the precise objection which is now adopted by her. Here are his emphatic words, in IPs celebrated instructions to Mr. Monroe, at that time our Minister at London, dated Januury 5,1S04:? Taking reason and justice for the tests of this practice, it ie peculiarly indefnunble, beeaute it deprive* the dcareet rir/ht* of perron* of a !rytihir trial, to which the most Inconsiderable article of property captured on the high sea* is entitled, and leare* the dr-tiuy to the will of an otlicer, sometimes cruel oftecr ignorant, and generally interested, by want of manners. In hi own decisions, whenever property found in a neutral vessel is supposed to be liable, on any ground, to capture and condemnation, the rule In all cases is, that the qurstion shall not lie decided by the captor, hut be carried I efore u legal tilbunal, where a regular trial may be had, and w here the captor htmsr f is l afl- to damages for an abuse of his power. Can it be reasonable, then, or Just, that a belligerent commander who is thus rest icted, and thua responsible |n anise of mere property of trlv ial amount, should lie permitted, without recurTtwj to any tribunal uhatecer, to examine the new of a neutral rmeel, to decide, the imjiortant tiueetion of their rrtpertive illle-jian-e?, and to carry that decision into execution by forcing every Individual he inity choose into a sendee abhorrent to his leeliugs, cutting him off from his most tender connections, exposing his mind and his person to the most humiliating dtscip ine, and his life itself to the greatest danger? Keason, justice and humanity unlle in protesting against so extravagant a proceeding.?State Paper*, vol. 3, v. 84. KcgotbitinnH, on this principle, thus distinctly declared, were intrusted at Lnndou to James Monroe, afterwards President of the I'nitod States, and to William Pinckuey, tho most accomplished master of prize law which our country has produced, ltut they wero unsuccessful. Great Britain persisted. In a Joint lotter dated at London, September 11,1806, the plenipotentiaries say:? That It was impossible that we should acknowledge in favor of any foreign Power the eluim to *urh jurimUctum on board our vessels found upon the main ocean, at thi* *ort of improvement implied?a claim as plainly inadmissible in lla principle, and derogating troin the unquestionable rights of our sovereignty, as It was rexatious in its practical consequences?State Paper*, vol. 3, p. 134. lu another joint letter dated at London, November 11, 1906, tho sauio plenipotentiaries ray:? The right was denied by the British commissioners, who a* erteet that of their pmrrnmrnt to eeine the luhiert* on retard tiutitd mtrihaid reevlum the hiph tear, and who also urged that the relinquishment of it at this time would go far to the overthrow of their naval power, on which the safety of the fctate essentially depended.?Mote Paper*, vol. 3. p. 123. In still another lotter, dated at LondoD, April 22,1807, Mnrsrs. Monroe and Piukney say of tho British commissioners:? They stated that the prejudice of (he navy and of the country generally was so strongly in favor ej their pretention that the ministry could not eneounier It In a direct form; and that in trutn the support of Parliament could not I ave bet n relied on in such s case.?Suite Puprrr, vol. :t. p. 160. The British commiesiouers wero two excellent per sous?Itord Holland and Lord Auckland; but though trlemlly to tho United states in their declarations, and liberals in politics, tliey were powerless. At ht.me, in the United Stater, the question continued to be discussed by able writers. Among those wuose opinions were of the highest authority, was tho late President, John Adams, who, from bis retirement at Qttinry. sent rorth a pamphlet dated Januury W, 1800, in which the British pretension was touched to the quick; and again tho precise objection was presented which is now urged by Great Britain. Depicting the scene when one of our ships Is encountered by a British cruiser, he says:? The lieutenant is to lie the judge, the mldihlpmsn ii to be rle. k, nml the boalswuln si ertll or marshal. It is imiameible to bgure to ourselves. In imagination, this solemn tribunal and Venerable Judge without Mulling, tilt Ibe liumUiallou "f our country conwe luto our thought- and Interrupts the sense of ridicule by the tears of grief or i,ri?,J. vol. II. n. 329. At last all rodrcss through negotiation wag found to bo Impossible; and Ibis pretension, aggravated into miilliludpioug tyranny, was openly announced to bo one of tl.ejirincii at reasons for the declaration ?f war against Groat Britain til 1812. In hut mo.-Migo to Oingnes, dated Juuo 1, of that year, Mr. Mad is' n, who was uow 1'resident, thus ox|xi.-ed the ofTengive cliaracter of tin; prolciabou. and bis words, directed against a persistent practice, are now ccliocd by Ureal Britain, in the single instance which baa accidentally occurred:? Could the seisnrrnf British subjects In soch rases be regarded as within ll.o escnlee ol a belligerent right, the acknowledged laws of war, which turbo! ua article ?t captured pro|a-rly to I e mljudged w ithout a regular tnvestigatl n In fore a . omjietert ti ih .n d, "uuH imjierioitrly ilnmiiul the fttitrrl truit u hrj e fAe etirroi riohte of person# irei e tit issue. in jitnre nj nt'h a hint, them rii/httare enl-jertrtl to the trill of ot rcrry I/""// rommiintler.?itUiit'enitm'e Mauvui, vol. 1, p. IBM. While the agar wag waging the giibject was still discussed. Mr. Grimily, In the llcuso of Representatives, in a report from tbe Committee on foreign Affairs, said:? A subsltcruor any other Officer of the Hrtttali Navy ought not to lie limner in such n case The liberties and Inn s of American cltl/i ns ought not to d.eiiend on the will of such a party.?htate Papers, vol. 3, p. <106. Such was tliu American ground. The British pretension was unhesitatingly proclaimed hi the declaration of the Prince Regent, alterwn: ds George IV., ghen at the palace cT Westrati ater, .lam ary 8, 1813:? Tlie President of the Ulithd States baa, it Is true, since propnsi d to Gn .it Hrlta n an armistice; not, bowevi r. on Ihe admission lhal the eniiMi or war nitherto relied on was retooled; but ou i omlllion that Great Hrtia.n, as a preliminary step, should do away a cause of war how brought forward us eii t for the brat time?namely, that ?A* rh oil i nhouoUen the rjrn-iee nj h'l L'sDouaTl.n KlulJT "/ seai rA t>> hiltr from Amerinia MT'A'iat irtrrir Ihifi'h A'(Hum, the nulunil lirrtt et/'yrft* of hie Mnifty. Ills toyal Hlgbnesa ran never admit that. In the exercise of the u.anoi stkii "iid ' il/i-i " umJi'iiotril ' "j/if of .-anAmy ?en! nil ski 'hunt irreeir in time eg' sar, tht iiofimmrnt of Urilieh seas .en, when lound Ihendo, nn heJetuotJ atig rt'o/uMuw of a nmtrni ]htg. Nebhrr can he admit that the taking of such aeararn from On laiurd such vessels run he matMrrnl /<y '1/11/ to utroi Stutr tie a hoetile mmrore or a jnetijiahlt more of insr. The war was cloyed by tbe treaty at Ghent; but perveisoly the Brltlah pretension was net renounced. Other negotiations in 1818. under President Monroe; in 1823, a so umJer Monroe: and again in 1827. under .li bn Qumcy Adams, exprcsaiy to procure Its reniuiciation, ware all unavailing. At last, In 1842, at tbe treaty of Washington, Ifr Wnhtiar mlm r iiiidp till iilnu uf furthi r nn eotlatiou on this pretension, and without even proposing an)- stipulation with regard to it, deliberately announced the principle Irrevocably adopted tiy our government. It was the principle early announced at Uie beginning o( the republic by Mr. .lenerson. 'Ibis deapatrh Is one of the nn at m rui r;il>l'-;ti ovr history, and it l? ara directly on the existing eontroveraoy when, in cxpoa.ug tho Uritiah pretension, It aayi:? But the lieutenant of a^iian-of-war, having necessity for mi'B, i'n/l to U <i imJjyr, and hla decision* will tie quite aa significant of hla own wanta and hla own pon i-r aa of the truth and justice of the caae.?Wrbater a Works, vol. g, p. SZt. At a later day Mill, en the very eve of recent eventa, wo And lienor al Okas, a* ."Secretary of Stale, in bis elaborate main rtloia In our Mmlatera In Kurope, dated 27th Juno, lhM, declaring nrlncii lea which may propei ly control the present quest ion. lie aa) sill la obvious, front the tempi r of the age, that the present la no sale nine 10 nsaei t and eniorer pmensii-n on ttie pail ol beillitcrcnl I'owera alt-ding 'lie mortal of nntlona at peace, aafeit aar/i / ttfamo-ae ore cion/g Juttijini t.-y On for ?i awfi'ins, s a a a The stopping o[ neu ral veeaela upon the high sens, their forcible entrance, un-l ih oierha liny and lamination ot their rar?oe?, the aelrurn of their freight. ot f*e will <>/ n forrign ojfln, the fre Iueni Interruption ot Ilielr \ oyages by compelling them 10 I nance llii'lr destination, In Older to aeek reureaa; an I, nfcwe ad, ntebawaa eAM on wyweib mMMMf t*w -aerrTa,iiniimitfl power, where responsibility la remote; tlieae are, Indeed, srr.oiia olisli oell uia, luile likely to lie aiihiinileil : > in the present eta'r of the world without a formidable rUort to prevent ihrm. Such Is nn authentic history o." thin British pretension, and of the tnunm r In tvl.ich U liaa l-een met by our goveminent An ' now 111 special argument formerly directed by us against Una p n-n la directed bv Ureal Itritain agnr.si ibe prctsidit n of Captain \\ ilkcg to take two rcbid enneaai i>a from a British packet ship. If Captain Wilkes is right In this prcte s-on. than tl ruughout all these Intern o mm I debates, ft lending over at least two general.one. wo lia.c hern wrong itut It haa been sometime* snid tl e "team parket having on board tho relMl emissaries wason Ibis ncount liahls to rupture, and Ihercforo the error of Chplain Wlikes in taking tho missai i#* was strap-y an error of form and not ot substance. I do not stop to consider whether an oxerclse of a immary t ow r ugalost which our government lias no couatantl) prol-ated can l>* under any clrcum tnticiyan i" ior merely of lotm, for tho policy of <-iir goverr m<-ut, mutt poaitively declared in It* diplomacy, and a'fo attertcl in mtmeroua t rentier, leavoa tio ru >m to doubt that a neutral ahlp with belligerent paaaongerr?not in tho tnlliiary or naval aervlce? la uot liahlo to capture, and tberelnro the whole proceeding wee wrong, not inly becauac the patacngcra were taken from the ship, hut alao becauac the rhlp, how soever guilty morally, wu* h ' guilty legally n rec iroig such paseengci* on board. If thU qneelioo were argued on Kngiiali uiithorltiea it might be other wao; hut, according to Amrnrun principles. the ahlp waa locally Innocent. Of comae. I nay nothing of ihe morel g :lit forever mdellhie in th.it ahlp. In the middle of the laet century, the Swiaa professor, Vattol, d. ? lared that no the breaking nut of war we reaee to be under any obligation of leaving the enemy to the fri o eutcynicnt ot bla right* . and this principle ha applied h-early to the trenail of ambaeaador* (Vatiei, book 4. rap. T, aec Pf.) Hlr William Jtooit, quoting tlil* authority, at tie beginning of the prerect century, let fall these w,n d* .? The belligerent may atop the ambaeaador of the enemy on hi* pieaege ? tht Jhil-tnta, (I RcMaeoe W., p. 440 ,D. PRICE TWO CENTS. And this curt prapnsition, though in some reap eta indefinite, has been often repealed since by writers on the law ol nations. On its fare it leaves the question unsettled, whether the emissaries of an unrecognised government can be stopped. But there is another case in wMch the same British Judge, who has done so much to ill is tralc international law, has used language which seems to embrace not only authentic embassadors, but also pretenders to tliis character, anil all others who are public agents of the enemy. Says this eminent magistrate:? It appears to me on principle to be but reasonable that whenever it is of sufficient importance to the enemy that turhpertnnt thuuld be mi out on the public tertict unrtcf li.e publte rj-retire. It should afford equal ground of forfeiture against the vessel that may be let out for a purpose so intimately connected with hostile operations.?The OroeeuiUi, 1Ho/rintun H., p. 434. Admit that the emissaries of an unrecognized government cannot be recognized as embassadors with the liabilities as well as immunities of this character, yet, in the face of these words it is difficult to see how a government bowing habitually to the authority of Mir William Scott, and regarding our rebels as --belligerents," can assert that a steam packet, oonveyingemissaries from these belligerents, "sunt out on the public service and at the public expense," was, according to the language of Lord Russell, '-pursuing s lawful and innocsnt voyage." At least, in this assertion, this government seems to turn its back ugain upon its own history; or it sets aside tbo facts so openly boasted with regard to the public cbaracter of these fugitives. On this question British po'lry may change with circumstanci s, and British prece ents may be uncurtain, but the original American policy hue changeable, and the American precedents which illustrate it are solemn treaties. The words of Vattel, and the Judgments of Sir William Scott, wore well known to the statesmen of the United Slates; and yet, in the face of these authorities,, winch have entered so largely into this debste, the American government at an oarly day deliborately adopted & contrary policy, to which, for half a century, it has Htuadily adhered. It was plainly declared that only toldiert or trfficert cuuld be Aipptd, thus positively excluding tho idea of Htopplng embassadors, or emissaries of any kind, not in the military or naval nervine. Mr. Madison, who more than any other person shaped our national policy on mantimo rights, has stated it on thia question. In his remarkablo despatch to Mr. Monroe, at London, dated January 5,1804, he says:? The arti'de renounces the claim to take from the veuels of the neutral party, on the high sea*, any person whatever not in thr military arrricr of an enemy, an exception which we admit to come within the law of nations, on the subje I of contraband of war. ItVA fAi's exception, tee etmriiler a neutral flay on thr hiyh neat at a ea/tyuard to thote tailniy under it.? Mute Paperi, vol. 3, p. 83. Then again, iD the same despatch, Mr. Madison says:? Great Britain, then, must produce sn exception in the law of nations In favor of the right she contends tor. In what written and received authority will site lind it? In what usage except her own will it tie t iundt * * Hut nowhere will abe And an exception to this freedom of the seas and of neutral Hags, which justifies the taking away of any person , nor un enemy in military terrier, found on board a neutral vessel.?Jhid., p. 84. And then, again, in the same despatch, he says:? Whenever a belligerent claim against persona on board a neutral vessel la referred to In treaties enemies in military sendee alone are excepted from the general Immunity of persons in that situation; and (At* exception mujirutt the immunity of thote teAo are not included in it.?Ibid., p. 84. It was in pursuance of this principle, thus dearly announced and repeated, that Mr. Madison instructed Mr. Monroe to pro pose a convent ion between the United States und Great Britain, containing the following stipulation ? No person whatever shall, upon the high seas and without the jurisdiction of either party, be demanded or taken out of any ship or vessel belonging to ntUena or subjects of one of the parlies, by the pubile or private armed ahtps belonging to or lu the service of the other, unlet eurh per ton lie at the time in thr military terrier of an enemy of turn other party.? Ibid., p. 82. Mr. Monroe pri surd this stipulation most earnestly upon the British government; but though trailed courteously, ho eou'd get no satlsl'sction will) regard to It. Lord Harrowby, the Foreign secretary. in one or his conversations, ' cxptesscrt a concern to find the United States opposed to Great Britain on certain great neutral questions in favor of the doctrines of the modern law, which he termed noveltiet." (Slate I'upcrs, vol. 3, p. 99 ) Ami Lird Mulgruvc, who succeeded tins accomplished nobleman, persevered in the same dissent. Mr. Monroe writes, under date of 18th of October. 1805:? On s review of the conduct of this government towards the Culled Slates I am Inclined to punk that the delay which has Is-en so studiously sought is part of a system, sad tbsltlis intended, aa cirvurastunoes lav or, to subject our toinmt r. e at present and hereafter to every restraint iu their power.? Mate Papert, vol. S, p. 1U7. Afterwards Mr. Monroe was joined by Mr. Piukuey in the mission to louden, and the two united lu presuming this sanio proposition again to the British government. (State Papers, vol. 3, p. 137.) It was rqecled. although tho ministry of Mr. box, who was then in power, seems to havo afforded at one time the expectation of an agreement. While tbese distinguished plenipotentiaries were pressing this principle at L ndon, Mr. Madison was maintaining it at home, in an unpublished comm..nication to Mr. Merry, the British Minister at Washington, Un.ring date 9th April, 1805, which I extract from the Hire of the fclaie Department, he declured:? The United States cannot accede to the claim of any nation to lake from their vessels on the high teas any ihriiption of pi leant, except nub tier t lu the actual service of the enemy. In a reply, hearing date 12th April, 1805, this principle was positively repudiated by the tlrlliso Minister?so that the two governments wore ranged unequivocally oo #?tuu.aitgi ui is?o 1 h? tPnatiPB of !_h?* Pititi'il Mulph wiili foreign nations are in harmony with tins piinctpla no energetically proposed and uphold t>y Mr. Madison. In the treaty of coutmerc" with Fiance, in 1778, it is expressljfprov ided that:? , Enemies to IkiiU or either party are not h? be ttken out of the oafd *i>P', utjrx* itiry no ?di*r? .iwi m mttmii mrtict of the tnemita.?Statutes at Large, vol. 8, p. 26. In the treaty with the Xotherland*. in 1862, the exeeptiou 1* confined to "military men actually In tboeervica ol an enemy," (Ibid., p. 38:) and thissameexception will also he found in the treaty w.ih Sweden. In 1782, (Ibid., p. 64;) with Prussia, In 1786, (Ibkl., p. 90.) with Spain, in 1796, (Ibid., p. 146:) with France, in 1800, (ibid., p. 184;) with Columbia, in 1824, (Ibid., p. 312;) w ith Central America, in 1826. (Ibid., p. 328 ) with Bratil, in 1828, (Ibid., p. 393.) with ki-xlco, in 1*31, (Ibid., p. 416;) with Chile. In 1832, (Ibid., p. 436.) w ilt. Vent- , zuela, in 1836, (Ibid., p. 472.) with Peru IMivia, in 18.16, (Ibid.,p. 400;) with kciador, in 18:19, (Ibid., p. 640:) with New Uranadu, in 1846, (Statutes. vol. 9, p. 888 ) with tiualemala, In 1849. (m acuta-*, vol. 110, p. 880 ) with Sau Salvador, in ISfai. (Ibid., p. 894;) and in iho treaty with Peru, tu 1861, (Ibid., p. 936.) Such Is the unbroken testimony, in the nuit solemn form, to the I ml icy of our government. In some of the treaties the exception is iimpiy "soldiers," in olbois it Is a'oiticers or soldiers." It 1m true that among these treaties there is * none with Ureat Britain; but it .a also true, lh.it this is sunply because this Power refused its asreut when this principle was presented hy our ((overrun, nl as an undoubted part of interna I loual law which It desired to cooltrm by treaty. Clearly and bsyoudail question, according to American principles and practice, tho ship was not liable to capture on account of the presence of emissaries, "not aoldh-ra or oillcers," nor could such emissaries be legally taken from the ah:p. Hut the completeness of this authority Is increased by the concurring testimony of the Continent of Kurnpe. Since the peaou of Ctrocht, in 1713, the policy of the continental Stales has refused to sanctiou the removal of enemies front a neutral ship, unless militaty men la active servlc-. J ol now, since this debate baa commenced, we ha v< the positive testimony of the French reference to the present cw. M. Tli uvcnel, the Minuter of the Kni| eror lor IVrelgn Affair*, In a recent letter to Mr. Heward. published with the papers now before the Senate, earnestly Insists that the rebel ciutanrleii, not being military i<ereona actually In the service of the enemy, were not subject to seizure on board a neutral ship. I leave this part of the suhtect with the remark that It Is Great Britain alone whore position on this qucsitnu can be brought Into doubt. (tut still another quests n occurs. Heyoud all question, (here were "despatches" from I he rebel belligerents on iMiard the fhlp?such "despatches'' as rebels can write. Public report. the statemeut of iwrsons on board the ship, and the b uutful dedication of Jelftreon Davis in a public document, that these emissaries were proceeding under an apiauntnieni fiotn him?which appointment would bs a '-despatch" of the highest character? seem to plucn this fact lieyouu denial. A?summg this tact, the ship was liable to capture an.l to he curried o(T for adjudication, according to British authorities; unless the pueitlvs judgment of Sir William Hcott In the case of the AUIanta, (0 Robinson R., p 440),and also the Quoen's proclamation al the comtnen < mont of tills rebellion, where "despatches" are enumerated among contraband a tlclcs, are treuteil as nullities, or so far modified In their upplicnlion as l<> be words, and nothing more. Hut however binding ruid lercmptory theso authorities may bo In Great Rritaln, they cannot be accepted to reverse the standing pdlcyof tlie l nited States, wnlch horc again leaves no ro<>m for doubt. In order to give precision to the rights which it claimed and at the same lime accorded on the ocean. our ( . Miuiotil bus sought to explain In treaties what It mean 1 contraband, as early as 1T96, / In tha treaty with S, .in, after specifying contraband /j articles, without Inriudiig despatches, it Is declared II that:? / ' Free goods are all other merchandise and rAi'afa which are I not roniprvlii ruled and particularly mentioned in the foregoing enumeration of contraband goods ? Shitulr* al hirjr, vol. M, pi. 140 In other treaties, subsequent to the Judgment of Sir William Scott, recognising despatches as contraband, and therefore practically discarding it, after enumerating contraband articles, without specifying "despatches,'' the following provision Is introduced:? All other merchandises and Ihimpt not comprehended In the articles of ( iur?l)?n.l explicit.!* enume rsien aim rmxineo aa stove, nliAll be held Ut conwdered si free.?/but, f>. 31 J, Trmty tilth (MamHaaml hitrr trnHin pm im. Thus we have not only positive w. rds of enumeration, without mentioning " despatches," lint also positive wnrda of exclusion, an that despatches cannot he coo. stJered aa contraband. Thet-e treaties constitute the conclusive record of our government on thla Question. And here let me remark iliat, a bile decieiona of British Admiralty < ourts oo ail there matters an freely died, no decision." of our fluprcm Court are cited. Of tour e, IT any existed. they would be of the highest value. but there are none, and the reason is obvious. These matter" could not arise before our Supreme Court, because under our government they are so clearly settled by treaties and diplomacy aa to ba beyond question. Clearly, then, and beyond all question, according to American principles and practice, the ship waa not liable to capture on account of despatch* a on hoard. And here again we have the concurring tc tlmonyof continental Hi.rope,*n<1 especially of the Wench government, in the recent letter of M. Thou(CO.VTBfCFD ON DQtrni PAOt.J

Other newspapers of the same day