The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1807-11-07 00:00:00

TO IR+' EDITOR.

St ii—As much illiberal language, and no surer
share of itereillive, have been recently vented on the
political conchs& of thi; country, on account of
Togo' kudos of The Leo of aN. 411Ohit, Ighl honors
wislatisas cf Noires! Priesres without the writers
seeming to comprehend the esaft meaning of either,
I shall beg leave to entreat your indulgence, in
giving place to two or three Liters. which may not
.sly throw a ray of light on those sobjells. but
evince to the world that Britain is not that cujpalde
Power which many would wish to make herreppear.
For such indulgence, I appeal so that palltteittem
don shewn to your Correspondents in general. as
well as to your evident desire of appeariog witty
impartial, even on subjects so highly interesting.
With your leave, then, Sir, I will now trouble you
with some remelts on The Law of Nations. Elm,
that the public May attain a competent knowledge
of the gems, they are trectn: on, I will present
them with a cursory survey of the premises ; before
I ;newt= to ague on the propriety or impropriety,
the policy or inipolicy, of adhering to, or dissenting
from, The Law of Nations, I will attempt to define
what The Law of Nations et should be.
The Law of Nations, Sir, is, or should be, a Code
of Regulations, written or implied, tending to the
safety and convenience of every Kingdom and State
in the civilised world; ordained by ell, and gua-
ranteed by nIl. It may be compared to a multipli-
city of .4,./a, concatenated into a regular, uniform,
circular c:daut, by the se.:l of the whole. Take one
link from the chain, and it is no longer universal :
it may still admit of a circular form, indeed, but it
then becomes a chain composed of the remaining
links, not et the whole. So it is of our Code of
Regulations ; let but one tingle state withdraw its
san!1:01:, a::ri it is no longer Law of Nations ;
(for, by Ihe Law of Nations, we are IS understand,
the law of all civilised Nations;) no, Sir. it is then
the law of those Nations which still think proper to
adhere to it. The chain, I grant, may again be-
come universal, by forcibly uniting the wiihdrawn
link. So may the Code again become The Law of
I•:atit,l3, by compelling the Power %%Lich receded,
again to yiuld its sanetion. 13ut each Power of our
grand political chain, is formed of a whole people;
of cools., the instant you attempt to coerce a whelp
people to re-,al,:tiort your Code. you place them in
It state of jeopardy, and aubjea them to a variety
of deprivations ; what then becomes of your Law
of Nations, tending equally to the safety and con-
venience of the whole ? Yen cannot say it tends to
she safety and convetdence of every State in the ci-
vilised werld„ when the people of one State wil-
lingly endure dangers and deprivation', rather than
again elation AC:ode, which, no doubt, for weighty
reasons, fluty withdrew their sandlots from. And
who so proper to judge what will tend to the safety
asd convenience of a particular State, as the people
of that Stater
Was there ever a Law of Nations, Mr. Editor,
tending equally to the safety and convenience of the
whole civilised world, ordained by ail, and gua-
ranteed by .11?
I. Sir, as far as my knowledge of natioisel pclicy
extends, do not hesitate to say—No. What, then,
is implied by the term, The Law ef Nations, as we
now read at it in authors who have treated of that
subject? There, Sir, I must beg leave to refer you
to the authors themselves, who, varying from each
other, in a Style mot, arerably cory alms, will leave you
lint as much to learn, after perusing them, as you
may have to acquire at present. But, in one respell,
they are tolerably uniform, I must confess ; for the
whets them attempt to define the mow+, by en-
4deavGn:ini.; to explain the colour, torm, Input. and
beauty, cat the h 0,,. .r that draw it ! I will, however.
make at .iurt to debut the term—The Law of Na.