The Sun.
London, England, 1864-11-08 00:00:00

to sea. It is clear that no effective opposition was
offered by any of the Brazilian men-of-war, or by
the harbour forte, though " Voyageur" adds that
the Wachusetts was fired on by the latter as she
stood out. Some two hours later the Brazilian
Admiral gave chase in a smaller steamer, his own
flagship being a sailing vessel, but the Florida had
by this time got her steam up, and pursuit was of
course useless. The indignation of the Brazilians
at this gross insult to their neutral hospitality is
described as intense. The exequatur of the United
States' Consul, who had opportunely gone to eea in
the Wachusetts, was at once withdrawn by the
Governor, and the arms of the Consulate itself were
torn down by the people. The great body of mer-
chants at Bahia at once signed a document, in which
they emphatically denounce the conduct of the cap.
tain commanding the Wachusetts as an open defi-
ance of international law, and charge the Consul
with a direct breach of faith. This remonstrance
was forwarded to the New York Chamber of Com-
merce, with an earnest request that they would
appoint a committee to investigate the matter before
adjudging to the captors the reward of 500.000 done,
for the sake of which this outrage is believed to
have been committed. We are bound to presume
not only that this request will meet with attention,
but that the Government and citizens of the United
States will hasten to repudiate the nefarious act
done in their name. Most aggressions on neutral
rights, such as the pursuit of a flying enemy within
the jurisdiction of a neutral State, have some kind
of excuse, whether in authority or usage, but we
cannot even conjecture what defence can be set up
for this. The United States have invariably claimed
the absolute inviolability of neutral territory, and
the American text books of international law are
full of the most dogmatical assertions of this prin-
ciple. One of the most recent of these, which bears
the name of Halleek on its title-page, recapitulates
the law on this subject with great force and clear-
ness. "The armed cruisers of belligerents, while
within the jurisdiction of a neutral State, are bound
to abstain from any acts of hostility towards the sub-
jects, vessels, or other property of their enemies;
they cannot increase their guns or military stores,
or augment their crews, not even by the enrolment
of their own countrymen; they can employ neither
force nor stratagem to recover prizes or to rescue
prisoners in the possession of the enemy ; nor can
they use a neutral port or waters within neutral
jurisdiction, either for the purpose of hindering the
approach of vessels of any nation whatever, or for
the purpose of attacking those which depart from
the ports or shores of neutral Powers. No proximate
acts of war, such as a ship stationing herself within
the neutral line, and sending out her boats on hos-
tile enterprises, can in any manner be allowed to
originate on neutral territory, nor can any measure
be taken that will lead to immediate violence." We
owe our readers some apology for re-entering upon
ground already familiar to most in connexion with
the Alexandra case, but this summary may at least
serve to remind them how far beyond the extreme
pale of international law the Wachusetts placed
herself by cutting an enemy's ship out of a neutral
port. Had the Florida, for instance, actually sailed
from Bahia, the Wachusetts could not have followed
her till after the lapse of 24 hours without infring-
ing the law of nations. To attack her by night in
the harbour, and that after a solemn pledge had been
given that neutral rights should be respected, was
neither more nor less illegal than it would have
been to kidnap Mr Mason in the streets of London.
The plea that was urged by Lord Ashburton and
admitted by Mr Webster in the very dissimilar case
of the Caroline— that of "a necessity of self-defence,
instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means,
and no moment for deliberation," was here conspi-
cuously wanting, and we cannot believe that the
Federal Government will condescend to make use of
it. It may possibly be alleged that the Consul was
carried off against his will by the captain of the
Wachusetts, who is likely enough to claim the
whole credit and responsibility of the exploit, and
it is to be feared that some of Mr Barnum's coun-
trymen may chuckle over its shameless audacity.
But the New York Chamber of Commerce has a
character to lose, and unless we are greatly deceived
will scruple to forfeit it by rewarding or justifying
a crime so utterly subversive of confidence bet ween
neutrals and belligerents.
POST.—The treaty which marks the termination
of the Dann-German war, and which formally ratifies
the dismemberment of the Danish monarchy, has at
length been signed. The Canference at Vienna has
ended its labours, and the fruits of its negotiations
has received the official stamp of the several repre-
sentatives of which it was composed. Denmark has
been stripped of no inconsiderable portion of her
dominions. The Duchies have been finally separated
front the kingdom, and that most intricate of all
diplomatic puzzles, the Schleswig-Holstein ques-
tion, has been disposed cf for ever. The suit has
been tried out, judgment recorded, and execution
enforced, and nothing remains but for the defeated
litigant to reconcile himself with what grace he may
to the loss which he has sustained. Considered in its
details, the treaty, which we publish in our columns
to-day, furnishes nothing which calls for special
comment. It differs in no material respect from the
programme submitted by the German Powers as the
basis of negotiation when an armistice was agreed
upon some months since. Austria and Prussia at
that time frankly told Denmark what it was that
they required, and the latter had no choice but to
assent. The Gorman Powers had conquered the
Duchies—they therefore demanded that their right
to retain them should be formally recognised by
their previous possessor. Tee inferiority of
aggressors at sea had enabled the Danish cruesere
to capture several German merchant vessels, and
accordingly the' restoration of these captures, or
compensation for the property destroyed or
alienated, was demanded by the Powers which con-
sidered themselves aggrieved. This was the pith
of the requisitions made by Austria and Prussia,
and the treaty proves that they have not been
made in vain. Everything that the Germans have
taken they are permitted to keep, everything that
they have lost will be restored to them. The cir-
cumstances which mark the close of the war are
in every respect on a footing with those which
distinguished its commencement. It is now, as it
was then, for Germany to demand and for Den-
mark to comply. The ostensible reasons for the
invasion of the Duchies were shifted with each
succeeding day to meet the constantly varying
relations in which the belligerents stood to each
other, and now the formal instrument which gives
peace to Denmark expressly recognises in her Sove-
reign rights, the disallowance of which was neces-
sary to furnish even the shadow of a pretext for the
invasion of his dominions. The troops of the Cons.
federation entered Holstein, and those of Austria
and Prussia entered Schleswig, because the as•
sumption of the sovereignty in those Duchies by
Christian IX. was deemed an act of usurpation.
Now, however, that the usurper has been ejected,
his rights are unreservedly admitted by his aggres-
sors for the purpose of giving to them by treaty a
good title to those very dominions whose invasion
could never have been justified except on the
assumption that they did net belong to him. The
events of the Dano German war succeeded each
other with such rapidity; and the phases of the
quarrel were so various, that many persons have
entirely forgotten the attitude assumed towards
Denmark by the German Powersonly twelve months
since, and have lost sight of the multiplied assur-
ances given to Europe that an attack on the integrity
of the Danish kingdom was not dreamt of. In the
columns of this journal we unhesitatingly declared
from tha first that, however they might cloak their
designs, Austria and Prussia had reeolved upon
wresting the Duchies from Denmark, and that the
Treat; of London was virtually cancelled. When,
just a year since, Frederick VII. died, and the pre-
sent Sovereign succeeded to the throne, the Diet
proceeded without delay to sequestrate the Duchy
of Holstein. The measure had been threatened
during the closing days of the reign of the late
Sovereign ; but on the demise of the Crown addi-
tional seasons were supplied to the German Powers
for enforcing the oft-repeated threat of Federal
execution. The Federal execution, however, ads
mitted of necessity the title of the Sovereign, and
Denmark was counselled to offer no resistance to
a measure which indirectly confirmed rights which
were the subject of dispute. What the Federa-
tion in its collective capacity did in Holstein,
its two leading members proceeded to repeat
in Schleswig. Bat the same mockery which
was enacted in the one by pretending that an act of
war was simply one of domestic discipline, was suc-
cessfully imitated in the other by alleging that an
invasion with a powerful army was only a taking
in pledge. Prussia and Austria admitted, whilst
they deplored, the necessity of employing an im-
mense army for the purpose of carrying into effect
their peaceful project of sequestration; but they
nevertheless avowed most solemnly their intention
of supporting the Treaty of 1852, and of restoring
Schleswig to Denmark as soon as those obligations
on the part of the latter Power which formed the
consideration of that treaty had been unequivocally
acknowledged. The pledge has been taken, but the
recent treaty declares to all the world that it will
never be returned. The German Powers have been
thoroughly successful, but we do not believe that
the European Powers were at any time blinded as
to their real designs. Great Britain knew that
Federal execution in Holstein and sequestration in
Schleswig, in truth, meant conquest, and she did all
that lay in her power to prevent the consummation
of a great politicel crime. She failed, but it was
because she could not command the co-operation of
other Powers no less deeply interested than herself
in preserving the independence of Denmark, and,
being unable alone to prevent them carrying their
designs into execution, she was forced, however une
willingly, to let matters take their course. When,