The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-15 00:00:00

Mr. FITZGERALD deserves the thanks of the pub

lie for his able endeavours to bring before the
attention of the House the subject of the capture
of four British vessels by the Americans. In con•
sequence of the manner in which the question was
taken up by the Government, the hon. member
was obliged to withdraw his motion for the pro-
duction of the papers which related to these
cases, including the decisions of the American
Prize Courts. It is, however, very requisite that
these matters should be fully discussed, and the
public put in possession of the circumstances so
far as they have been ascertained to have taken
I place. The most glaring instance of wrong-doing
and violation of international laws is in the case of

the Saxon, in which the mate, a British subject,
was shot by a Federal officer when unarmed and

unresisting. Mr. FITZGERALD very properly com-
mented strongly on this fact, and expatiated
on the great injury and injustice committed. lie
said he could not " allude to this case without
feelings of pain, amounting to indignation, be-
cause thn result had been the murder of a British
subject, under the British flag, and in British
waters." All that has transpired relating to the
notice taken by her MAJESTY'S Government of
this disgraceful affair has been that they have in-

timated to the Federal Government that if such a
thing really has happened they consider the Ame-
rican officer referred to ought to be put upon his
trial for murder. The general feeling of the House
was with Mr. FITZGERALD, when he declared
that such a representation was not sufficient, and
unworthy of the British Government. Well
might he assert that their language ought to be to
this effect—" We send to you the facts as they
have been proved in evidence, and if they
are correct we demand :it as a right
that the officer shall be put upon his
trial, and receive the punishment due for his
offence." To this decisive language and straight-

forward exposition of policy, of cmirse the ans ever
given by Ministers was lame and impotent as usual.
Nothing definite was stated at all, and the Attorney-
General remarked, that if the information, in respect

to the Saxon is correct a most barbarous murder
was committed, but that he bad no doubt that the
United States Government will hasten to make re-
paration for the injury. Is this the manner in
which a flagrant case of this kind should be treated ?
Lord PALMERSTON, in his boastful remarks, referred
to the case of the Trent as proof that the Americans

were always ready to pay attention to our just
demands, and atone for injuries inflicted. But the
noble lord contrives very conveniently to forget
that the tone of our policy has materially altered of

late, and that if the English Government had con-
tented themselves with total inactivity of words and
actions, Messrs. MASON and SLIDELL would never
have been given up by their captors. The noble
lord showed his usual acuteness in putting forward
as a predecent the only instance i❑ which his
Cabinet have shown any spirit of resistance, or dis-
played any effort at promptitude. That circum-
stance of the Trent took place at the outset of
this protracted and disastrous contest in America ;
and during all the complicated events that have
since occurred, and the many important points
for decision which have been brought before the
Government, no similar instance of energy has been
evinced to maintain our rights, protect our interests,
or vindicate our honour. In the face of all the
communications made by Mr. FITZGERALD, most
of which have already been patent to the public,

it is insulting to common sense, and a direct
abnegation of their position as defenders of
Brttish interests, for the Attorney-General to de-

Clare, and for the Pi hue Minister to ratify his asser-
tion, that there is no reason to mistrust the equity
and independence of the tribunals of the United
States. Then the noble lord attempts to read a lec-
ture to those who had been presumptuous enough
to debate this subject at all by giving it as his
opinion that it is prejudicial to the good understand-
ing of the two Governments, which are on good
terms, to suggest doubts as to the perfect fairness
which characterises their proceedings. No one dis-
putes the datum laid down of the mutual under-
standing that exists between Governments, they
are too good terms for the honour of the English
name and the welfare of the English subject.
Things must have come to a pretty pass, and the
most exigent friendship can hardly wish for more
than that murder should be hushed up, supposed