The Sun.
London, England, 1863-08-22 00:00:00

THE StT LONDON, SATURDAY EVEN/NG, AUGUST 222 1863.

"4g hin Nassau.
their origin, or the manner of their r, freighted
traders becoming more bold, their vessels we.e -44tee in
here with cargoes suited to the wants of the b.. --na
rebellion against the Government, were cleared tr.
Nassau, and in some instances went directly to
Brazos, on the Rio Grande in Texas, or in another case
the British schooner Time, owaed by H. Adderley and
Co., of Nassau, as shown by the letter of our Consul at
that port, dated on the 6th of May last, discharged her
entire cargo into the rebel steamer Cecile, then lying in the
harbour of that port, awaiting a favourable opportunity to
run the blockade to Charleston. It is a very generally
acknowledged fact, and fully established by letters from
our Consul, as well as by the marine reports of the Nassau
papers, that the port of Nassau has been for the last year,
and still is, a rendezvous for both armed and unarmed ves-
sels sailing under the British flag from ports of England
laden with arms, ammunition, and assorted cargoes; their
destination, in many insta,n,
Hcesiß, aAs:hßolinNzbyy,thceollleetctteorrs.,a,nd
papers referred to above, being Charleston, or some other'
port in the so-called Confederate States.—l have, kc.
•
Then comes the following communication from
Mr. Stuart to Mr. Seward :

" September, 1862.
The undersigned has received instructions from her
Britannic Majesty's Principal Secretary of State to address
to the Secretary of State of the United States a further re-
presentation respecting the restrictions imposed by the
United States Government on trade between New York
and ports in the British West Indies. The undersigned is
instructed to say that her Majesty's Government consider
the question to be one of great importance, and that, how •
ever desirous they may be of making every allowance for
the difficulties of the position of the United States' Govern-
ment, it is impossible for them to acquiesce in the system
of interference with the legitimate trade of Great Britain
which is now practised by the United States authorities,
such interference being not only in contravention of the
existing treaties between Great Brftain and the United
States, but being also contrary to the established princi-
ples of international law. It appears that British vessels
lawfully trading between New York and the Bahamas are
in some instances refused clearances at New York, and in
others, after having been regularly cleared with full know-
ledge by the United States' authorities of the articles on
board, are detained and searched, and are required either to
re-land portions of their cargoes or to give bonds that no
part of the cargo shall at any indefinite time to be used by
the enemies of the United States, and these proceedings are
not claimed to be prescribed by any general law or regula-
tion of commerce, but are avowed to be wholly discretionary
with the Collector of Customs, to be enforced by him when-
soever he shall entertain the suspicion and belief that the
real destination of the cargo is mediately or immediately to
some port in the possession of the enemies of the United
States, or if he shall be satisfied that " there is imminent
danger that the goods, wares, and merchandise of whatso-
ever description laden on such vessels will fall into the pos-
session or under the control of the insurgents,' &c. The
Collector of Customs in his report of the 12th June states
that ' in the exercise of the discretion devolved upon him as
an officer of the Government of a Sovereign people, he had
prohibited the shipment of coals and dry goods and shoes,
and quinine and other drugs, and tin-ware and munitions of
war, and sundry other articles to Nassau and the West
Indies, and to other foreign ports, when he had reason to
suspect that they were intended by individual enterprise
or the special contracts of British subjects to contribute
directly to the welfare of the enemies of the United States.'
The undersigned is instructed to state that her Majesty's
Government cannot call to mind any principle of interna-
tional jurisprudence, nor any precedent approved by inter-
national law, to justify such interference with the trade of
neutrals. The undersigned would submit to the considera-
tion of the Cabinet of Washington that trade between Great
Britain and the United States—at least as to ports and
places in the undisturbed possession of the United States—
is not in any degree affected by the state of war in which
the United States are engaged; and moreover that trade
between Great Britain and an enemy of the United States
—the former preserving a strict neutrality or indifference
between the belligerent parties—can be affected only in the
manner and to the extent prescribed by the international
law of blockade. The United States Government will ad-
mit that shipments similar to those now subjected to inter-
ference, from New York to Nassau and other British ports,
if made in time of peace, could not be prohibited without
giving manifest cause of just complaint to Great Britain,
especially while such shipments remain open to other na-
tions not having with the United States treaties of a
more favourable nature. It follows that to prohibit such
shipments to British subjects while permitting them to
the subjects of other nations is to assume a state of
quasi hostility to Great Britain on account of geographical
or other circumstances supposed to mix her up with
the interests of the enemy of the United States, &c. • • •
The President cannot expect that Great Britain should al-
low British trade with her own colonies by way of the
United States, or the trade between her own colonies and
the United States, to be fettered by restrictions aad condi-
tions inconsistent with the treaties between the United
States and Great Britain, and repugnant to international
1..... Her Majesty Government p,rppet, therefore. that the
President, in the exercise of his discretion, will prohibit the
imposing of ail such restrictions and conditions as have been
complained of in the present note."
To this note Mr. Seward returns the following

re ply :
" After considering the arguments of Mr. Stuart in the
most careful manner, it is not apparent to the undersigned
that they invalidate the Act of Congress, the substance of
which has been recited. By the law of nations every State
's sovereign over its own citizens and strangers residing
within its limits, its own productions and fabrics, and its
own ports and waters and its highways, and generally
within all its proper territories. It has a right to maintain
that sovereignty against sedition and insurrection by civil
preventives and penalties and by armed force, and it has a
right to interdict and prohibit within its own borders ex-
portation of its productions and fabrics, and the supplying
of traitors in arms against itself with materials and muni-
tions, and any other form of aid and comfort. It has a right
within its own jurisdiction to employ all the means neces-
sary to make these prohibitions effective. It does not ap-
pear to the undersigned that the United States have Bur-

rendered this right by the convention between themselves
and Great Britain which has been recited. It is true
that by the first article of the convention of 1815 British
merchants have liberty fully and freely to come with their
ships and cargoes into ports, rivers, and places within
the territories of the United States, and to be protected
in their commerce there; but this right is expressly
restricted to the ports, rivers, and places only into which
other foreigners are permitted to enter, and in which
they are permitted to reside and trade ; and they are more-
over expressly declared, while entering, residing, and trading
in such ports, rivers, and places, to be subject to the laws
and statutes of the two countries. So, by the third article
of the convention of 1815, it is stipulated that prohibitions
shall not be imposed on the exportation or importation of
any articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of either
country; this stipulation, however, is not absolute, but only
a stipulation that any such prohibition shall extend equally
to all other nations as well as Great Britain. Tne law of
Congress seems to be free from the special objections which
are raised by Mr. Stuart. It does not confine its prohibi-
tions or its requirements to British vessels trading between
New York and the Bahamas, but applies them to all

vessels of all nations, including the United States, wherever
trading, whether with the Bahamas or any other part of

• -
the world. The prohibitions and requirements are not tin

certain as to the authority which prescribes then or the

I rm of the prescription, but they are declared and promul-
gated in solemn enactment by the Congress of the United
States. The conditions on which the prohibitions and re-

quirements are suspended are not left to caprices, suspicions,

or beliefs, but they are dependent on satisfactory evidence
of ascertainable facts. They involve no question of neutral
rights, because no neutral has or can have a right more
than any citizen of the United States to do an act within
their exclusive jurisdiction which is forbidden by the statutes
and laws of the country. The Act has nothing to do with
the blockade of the insurrectionary ports, because it con-
fines its prohibitions and requirements to transactions oc-

curling and to persons residing or being within the ports
actually yosseased by the United States and under their

unquestioned protection and control Fully
admitting the principle for which Mr. Stuart so earnestly
contends, that all proceedings and even regulations and
laws of the United States which affect foreign commerce
must not discriminate to the prejudice of Great Britain, the
undersigned finds no adequate grounds for supposing that
the principle is violated in the regulations. The instruc-
tions issued on the 14th of April and the 18th of May,
prohibiting the exportation of coals to ports within
geographical limits, which leaves freedom of export to more
than one-half of the world, may seem to furnish ground for
exception. But the prohibition applies to all American and
all foreign merchants, vessels, and cargoes, as well as to
those of Great Britain, and to all the States which are
situated within the assigned limits, as well as to British de-
pendencies situated therein. It is understood to be an ac-
cepted maxim that no law reaches in effect beyond the point
where the reason of the law fails, especially if the law so
extended should be productive of injuries without object

and without compensation or benefit. There is not the

slightest reason to suppose that the insurgents of the
United States could in any way derive a benefit from the

exportation f anthracite coal to Archangel, or to Shanghai,
or to Japan. Nor is it manifest that the British nation, its
merchants and vessels, do not, in common with other na-
tions, their merchants and vessels, derive benefits and ad-
vantages from the exports permitted to all ports, of what-
ever nation, beyond the limit assigned by the Secretary of
the Treasury. Nevertheless the President, desirous to re-
move all possible grounds for misconstruction, has directed
that these two instructions shall be rescinded, so that the

case will stand altogether upon the Act of Congress and the
general instruction of the Treasury which have been recited.
In regard to the special proceedings of the Collector of the
Customs at New York which are complained of, the infor-
mation presented to the undersigned is vague and uncertain,
there is no satisfactory evidence in the papers under consi-

. - .
deration that he has in anycase denied a clearance or exacted
a bond which involved any infringement of the law of Con-
gress and the regulations of the Treasury. This Govern-
. _

meat will cheerfully examine upon its merits any case of

infringement which maybe presented to it, and will promptly
render the redress which shall be due, if the complaint
should be sustained ; it will further cheerfully instruct all
its collectors that, in performing their duties, they will be
governed by not merely the letter, but the spirit of the re-
. ~tiOnS of the Treasury and of the Act of Congress, so as
gul“ no injurious or invidious discrimination to the
to make
rest Britain."
in his despatch to Lord Lyons of
the 17th ou replies seriatim to the argu-
ments advanced by Mr.
prejudice
BeWard, and winds up by
saying,—
t of
Earl
Rl:e De:Ce e r

The conclusion come to by her Majesty's Government
upon the whole matter is, that there has been a serious vio-
lation of Article 1 of the Treaty of 1816, which it is ad-
mitted, is now to be read as extending to the British West
Indies. It has been attempted to disguise that violation of
treaty under pretence of the right of domestic legislation.
Her Majesty's Government, however, contend that the case
is not really one of domestic legistation at all ; but is one in
which the forms of domestic legislation have been made sub-
servient to an endeavour to control a particular branch of
neutral trade as carried on, not within the territory of the
United States, but in the proper territory of the neutral
Power; that it is, in fact, as to such British goods as have
been stopped in transitu from Great Britain to the Baha-
mas, an embargo, for causes not justified by international
law ; and,as to innocent and lawful exports from the United
States, a denial of the commercial intercourse guaranteed
by treaty, except on terms to which no independent foreign
nation could consent without compromising the rights of
neutrality and her own sovereignty within her own do-
minions. In the concluding paragraph of his letter, Mr.
Seward seems to draw a distinction between the actual pro-
ceedings of which her Majesty's Government have com-
plained, and the abstract terms of the Act of Congress and
Orders of the United States' Treasury, with which her
Majesty's Government have no concern, except so far as
they may be made the pretext for any violation of the treaty
rights of this country; confining himself to the defence of
the latter,and professing to be, as to the former, as yet but
imperfectly informed. Her Majesty's Government do not
conceive that any real doubt or obscurity can rest upon the
tafaicntsed; especially
B
iallyaarftneeryt,hee
lbertotadera.anird
hgeenedriaaltinaovtoiowna,ls con-how-
ever, now drawn by Mr. Seward may justify the hope
that although the proceedings of the New York
Custom-house towards the Bahamas trade have not been
hitherte disavowed or condemned by the United
States' Government, the remonstrances of her Ma-
jesty's Government may, nevertheless, have the practical
effect of preventing the continuance or repetition of similar
proceedings in any future case in which British trade may
be concerned."

Mr. Seward comments on this despatch at con-
siderable length, and says he, must again declare
that he is unable to find in the papers which the
discussion has produced any evidence whatever that
the Act of Congress had been administered so as
to apply invidiously or even discriminatingly against
Great Britain.

Subsequent to this despatch, there is one from
Lord Lyons, enclosing a copy of a letter addressed
to Consul Archibald, by the firm of Tootal, Broad-
hurst, and Lee, British merchants, Manchester,
carrying on business at New York, complaining of
the difficulties thrown in the way of the shipment
of goods hence to Nassau, and the correspondence
concludes with the following despatch from Earl
Russell :

"Foreign-office, July 18, 1863.
"My Lord,—You will have learnt from my despatch of
the 10th ult., that as her Majesty's Government saw reason
to hope that their representations respecting the interference
exercised by the United States Government with the trade
carried on between New York and the Bahamas would not
remain without effect, they had not considered it necessary
to continue the controversy with t hat Government. In
this expectation, however her Majesty's Government are
disappointed ; for it would, appear from. the representation
of Messrs. Tootal, Broadhurst, and Co., which accompanies
your despatch of the 22d ult., that the interference of the
.United States authorities with this trade is still persisted
in, and I have accordingly to instruct you to address a fresh
remonstrance on this subject to the United States Govern-
ment.—l am, &c., RUSSELL,"

horrible one. It appeared that the young woman, the pci-
slner at the bar, lived at a poor lodging at Eccles with her
infant child. On Monday night, the 15th June last, she
left her lodgings, taking her child with her, and she was
seen with it near the river at half-past 11 o'clock that
night. She did not return home till 8 o'clock next morning,
when she had not the child with her. On being asked what
had become of the child she said she had given it to a
woman whom she did not know to bring up for her. This
account not being deemed satisfactory she was taken into
custody by the police, and she then made a statement to
them that she had tied a stone round her child's neck and
thrown it into the river, at a spot which she afterwards
pointed out to the police, and that she had done so at the
instigation of a man whose name she mentioned. The river
was dragged, and at the spot pointed out by the prisoner
the body of her child, with a stone tied to its neck, was
found, as described. It was elicited from one of the wit-
nesses that the prisoner had complained that her father
had repeatedly forced her to 'gave incestuous connexion
with him, and had at last turned her and her baby out of
doors to starve.

The defence urged was that the treatment the prisoner
had received from her own father and her wretched condi-
tion and prospects had had such an effect on her mind that
in a fit of wretched despondency she had done what she
had done scarcely conscious what she was about,
The learned judge having summed up,
The jury found the prisoner guilty of wilful murder, but
with a strong recommendation to mercy.
His Lordship said he would send this recommendation to
the proper quarter, and then, deeply affected, passed upon
the prisoner the awful eontence of death in the usual form.
This makes the fifth prisoner sentenced to be hung at
these assizes, another prisoner having anticipated his fate
by hanging himself in his cell before his trial.