The Sun.
London, England, 1864-04-27 00:00:00

which such a claim could be founded. It could not be said
that we were entitled to seize vessels in that position on the
ground that they had violated our neutrality. S.ah a claim
would have been untenable if it had been put f ' . But the
ground on which the seizure of the Tuscaloosa was justified

—that it was proper to restore her to the or g nal owners—
was still more untenable. It could not )0 concealed that
the policy we were pursuing, although oa- of neutrality,
told very unequally upon the Confederates and upon the
Federals; and when complaints were made that the Confe-
derates did not subject their prizes to adjudication, he had
only to repeat what he had already said, that no adjudica-
tion was required between belligerents, and that, according
to Lord Stowell, if a belligerent captain could not carry his
prize into a port, it was his duty to destroy it. It was a
clear violation of the law of nations to seize a vessel under
the circumstances of the Tuscaloosa, on the ground that she
had not been condemned by a prize court. .

The LORD CHANCELLOR contended, on the autho-
rity of Lord Stowell, that, although a belligerent captor was
justified in destroying his prize in case of necessity, yet as a
rule he was bound by the law of nations to bring it into
port for adjudication, in order that it might be seen whether
it was enemy's property, and that mistakes might not be
committed by the captors in the eager pursuit of gain. Lord
Mansfield had also laid down the same principle. In one
case Lord Stowell had expressly held that the sentence of
condemnation was at present deemed by the law of nations
to be necessary to transfer the property in a priza, for the
purpose of putting some limitation on the acts of the captors.
In the case of the Endymion the same learned judge decided
that an English captain was only justified in destroying a
prize on account of the peculiar nature of the servioe in
which he was engaged, which did not allow him to take her
into port for adjudication, There was no doubt that the
question of what should be done with a vessel in the situa-
tion of the Tuscaloosa when she entered a British port was
well worthy of consideration. That consideration had been
given to it, and the result would be made known in the
shape of instructions, which would be issued to her Majes-
ty's officers and the governors of the different colonies.
After some observations from the Earl of HA.RDWICKE,
Lord CHELMSFORD briefly replied, and the subject
then dropped.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.---Last Evening,

The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PETITIONS.

The Sheriffs of the City of London appeared at the bar
and presented a petition from the Corporation of the City,
praying the house to adopt steps in reference to the utili-
sation of the sewage of the metropolis, _ _

The Lord Mayor of Dublin, attired in his official robes,
also appeared at the bar, and presented three petitions from
the Corporation of Dublin, praying that the inhabitants of
that city might be relieved from payment towards the sup-
port of the police, and that the sum contributed for that pur-
pose should be applied to the lighting and watering of
the streets, and other local objects ; also that Govern-
ment should introduce a bill for the amendment
of the Landed Estates Court Act ; and for the introduction
of a bill providing compensation tor unexhausted improve-
ments in land in Ireland, and praying the house to take
into consideration the alarming conditien of the agricultural
population in that country.

PRIVATE BUSINESS,
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Chesterfield and Hernstone Lane Head Road, Llanolly
Harbour Improvement, and Stockton and Middlesborough
Water.