The Sun.
London, England, 1863-12-23 00:00:00

ALGERIAN ONYX MARBLE. Messrs.
HOWELL, JAMES, and CO., respectfully soli3it an
inspection of their Onyx Salon, which contains upwards of
1,003 objects, consisting of Clock Candelabra, Lamps,Vases,
Jardinieres, Inkstands, Pen-trays, and a variety of smaller
articles of taste, at moderate prices.
This beautlful marble is perfectly translucent, bears a very
fine polish, presents a diversity of pleasing tints, and can be
turned or chiselled into any form necessary for utility or
ornament.-5, 7,9, Regent-street, Pall-mall.

AT Christmas many suffer from INDIGESTION,
and require some little assistance. PARR'S LIFE
PILLS stimulate the digestive organs, and remove, without
the sligh, est pain, uneasy or nauseous sensations, so familiar
to thoseiwho have indulged a little too freely in good Christ-
mas f a -e. May be obtained of any medicine vendor, in boxes,
Is lid, 2s Od ; and in family packets, us each.

VAST AND WEST INDIA DOCK
COMPANY.
The COURT of DIRECTORS of the East and West India
Dock Company hereby give Notice, that a half-yearly Court
or General Meeting of the said Company will be held, pur-
suant to the directions by the Act Ist and 2d William IV.,
cap. 52, at the Dock House, No. 8, Jill iiter-square, on FRIDAY.
the Bth day of January, 1864, at which Meeting a Dividend
will be declared on the Capital Steck of the Company for the
Halt-year ending the 31st inst.
By order of the Court.
GEORGE COLLIN, Secretary.
East and West India Dock IroaEe,

--
8, Billiter-square.
21st December, 1863.
N.B.—The Chair will be taken at Two o'clock precisely.

PRESIDENT DAVIS'S MESSAGE.

This document, addressed to the Senate and House
of Representatives of the Confederate States, of
which we have already given a telegraphic sum-
mary, after mentioning the chief incidents of the
late campaign, says :
While therefore our success in driving the enemy
from our soil has not equalled the expectations con-
fidently entertained at the commencement of the
campaign, his further progress has been checked.
If we are forced to regret losses in Tennessee and
Arkansas, we are not without ground for congratu-
lation in Louisiana and Texas. On the sea coast
he is exhausted by vain efforts to capture our ports,
while on the northern frontier he has in turn felt the
pressure and dreads the renewal of invasion. The
indomitable courage and perseverance of the people
in the defence of their homes have been nobly at-
tested by the unanimity with which the Legislatures
of Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia have re-
cently given expression to the popular sentiment;
and like manifestations may be anticipated from all
the States. Whatever obstinacy may be displayed
by the enemy in his desperate sacrifices of money,
life, and liberty, in the hope of enslaving us, the
experience of mankind has too conclusively shown
the superior endurance of those who fight for home,
liberty; and independence, to permit any doubt of
the result.

Oa the state of the foreign relations with the
Confederacy, the Message proceeds :
I regret to inform you that there has been no
improvement in the state of our relations with fo-
reign countries since my Message in January last.
On the contrary, there has been a great divergence
in the conduct of the European nation© from that
practical impartiality which alone deserves the name
of neutrality, and their action in some cases has
assumed a character positively unfriendly.
You have heretofore been informed that, by com-
mon understanding, the initiative in all action
touching the contest on the continent had been left
by foreign Powers to the two great maritime nations
of Western Europe, and that the Governments of
these two nations had agreed to take no measures
without previous concert. The result of these ar-
rangements has, therefore, placed it in the power of
either France or England to obstruct at pleasure the
recognition to which the Confederacy is justly en-
titled, or even to prolong the continuance of hostili-
ties on this side of the Atlantic, if the policy of
either could be promoted by the postponement of
peace. Each, too, thus became possessed of great
influence in so shaping the general exercise of neu-
tral rights in Europe, as to render them subservient
to the purpose of aiding one of the belligerents to
the detriment of the other. I referred, at your last
session, to some of the leading points in the course
pursued by professed neutrals, which betrayed
a partisan leaning to the side of our enemies;
but events have since occurred which induce me
to renew the subject in greater detail than
was then deemed necessary. In caking to your
attention the action of these Governments, I shall
refer to the documents appended to President Lin-
coln's Messages, arid to their own correspondence,
as disclosing the true nature of their policy, and the
motives which guided it. To this course no excep-
tion can be taken, inasmuch as our attention has
been invited to those sources of information by their
official publication.
In May, 1861, the Government of her Britannic
Majesty informed our enemies that it had not
"allowed any other than an intermediate position
on the part of the Southern States," and assured
them " that the sympathies of this country (Great
Britain) were rather with the North than with the
South."
On the Ist day of June, 1861, the British Govern-
ment interdicted the use of its ports " to armed
ships and privateers both of the United States and
the so-called Confederate States," with their
prizes. The Secretary of State of the United
States fully appreciated the character and motive of
this interdiction,:when he observed to Lord Lyons,
ceoswith
who communicated it," that this message, and that
of the same character which had been adopted by
France, would probably prove a deathblow to
Southern privateering."
On June 12, 1861, the United States Minister in
viewedt by
equi a
e
London informed her Majesty's Secretary for
Foreign Affairs that the fact of his having held
inr f ,
thetahsi, r
hostileeCl great
relation
tm i dissatisfaction,"u mn Commissioners ieosunpledi
rr
spirit,
:o f
and and
to require
r that
thert his Govern-
ments
ptuetrr
Unitedva States
hadit interviews
givenn
some corresponding action accordingly." In re-
sponse to this intimation, her Majesty's Secretary
assured the Minister that " he had no expectation
of seeing them any more."
By proclamation, issued on the 10th and 27th
of April, 1861, President Lincoln proclaimed the
blockade of the entire coast of the Confederacy,
extending from the Potomac to the Rio Grande,
embracing, according to the returns of the United
States coast survey, a cast line of three thousand
five hundred and forty-nine statute miles, on which
the number of rivers, bays, harbours, inlets, sounds,
and passes is one hundred and eighty-nine. The navy
possessed by the United States for enforcing this
blockade was stated in the reports communicated by
President Lincoln to the COD gress of the United States
to consist of twenty-four vessels of all classes in come
mission, of which half were in distant teas. The abe
surdity of the pretension of finch a blockade, in the
face of the authoritative declaration of the maritime
rights of neutrals made at Paris in 1856 was so glare
log that the attempt was regarded as an experiment
on the forbearance of neutral Powers, which they
would promptly resist. This conclusion was justi-
fied by the fact that the Governments of France and
Great Britain determined that it was necessary for
their interests to obtain from both belligerents "se-
curities concerning the proper treatment of Len-
t-ale." In the insttuetions vhieh '; confided the ne-

gotiation on this matter" to the British Consul at
Charleston, he was informed that " the most perfect
accord on this question exists between her Majesty's
Government and the Government of the Emperor of
the French," and these instructions were accom-
panied by a copy of the despatch of the British Fo-
reign Office of the 18th May, 1861, stating that there
was no difference of opinion between Great Britain
and the United States as to the validity of the prin-
ciplea enunciated in the fourth article of the declara-
tion of Paris in reference to blockades. Your prede-
cessors of the Provisional Congress had, therefore,
no difficulty in proclaiming, nor I in approving, the
resolutions which abandoned in favour of Great
Britain and France our right to capture enemy's
property when covered with flags of those Powers.
The " securities" desired by those Governments
were understood by us to be required from both
belligerents. Neutrals were exposed on our
part to the exercise of the belligerent right of
capturing their vessels when conveying the property
of our enemies. They were exposed on the part of
the United States, to interruption in their unques-
tioned right of trading with us by the declaration of
the paper blockade above referred to. We had no
reason to doubt the good faith of the proposal made
to us, nor to suspect that we were to be the only
parties bound by its acceptance. It is true that the
instructions of the neutral Powers informed their
agents that it was "essential under the present cir-
cumstances that they should act with great caution
in order to avoid raising the question of the recog-
nition of the new Confederation," and that the un-
derstanding on the subject did not assume, for that
reason, the shape of a formal convention. rant it
was not deemed just by us to decline the arrange-
men on this ground, aslittle more than ninety days
had then elapsed since the arrival of our Commis-
sioners in Europe, and neutral nations were
fairly entitled to a reasonable delay in acting on
a subject of so much importance, and which, from
their point of view, presented difficulties that
we, perhaps, did not fully appreciate. Certain it is
that the action of this Government on the occasion,
and its faithful performance of its own engage.
ments, have been such as to entitle it to expect on
the part of those who sought in their own interests
a mutual understanding, the most scrupulous adhe-
rence to their own promises. I feel constrained to
inform you that in this expectation we have been
disappointed, and that not only have the Govern-
ments which entered into these arrangements
yielded to the prohibition against commerce with
us, which has been dictated by the United States,
in defiance of the law of nations, but that this con-
cession of their neutral rights to our detriment has
on more than one occasion been claimed in inter-
course with oar enemies, as an evidence of friendly
reeling towards them. A few extracts from the cor-
respondence of her Majesty's Chief Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs will suffice to show marked
encouragement to the United States to persevere in
its paper blockade, and unmistakable intimations
that her Majesty's Government would not contest
its validity.
On the 21st of May, 1861, Earl Russell pointed
out to the United States Minister in London that
" the blockade might no doubt be made effective,
considering the small number of harbours on the
Southern coast, even though the extent of 3,000
miles were comprehended in terms of the blockade."
On the 14th of January, 1862, her Majesty's Mi-
nister in Washington communicated to his Govern-
ment that in extenuation of the barbarous attempt
to destroy the port of Charleeton by sinking a stone
fleet in the harbour, Mr. Seward had explained
" that the Government of the United States had last
spring, with a navy very little prepared for so ex-
tensive an operation, undertaken to blockade up-
wards of 3,000 miles of coast. The Secretary of the
Navy had reported that he could stop up the large
holes' by means of his sh ps, but that he could not
stop up the 'small ones.' It has been found neces-
sary, therefore, to close some of the numerous small
inlets by sinking vessels in the channel."
On the 6th of May, 1862, so far from claiming
the right of British subjects as neutrals to trade
with us as belligerents, and to disregard the blockade
en the ground cf this explicit confession by our
enemy of his inability to render it effective, her
Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
claimed credit with the United States for friendly
action respecting it. His lordship stated that " the
United States Government, on the allegation of a
rebellion pervading from nine to eleven States of
the Union, have nos', for more than twelve months,
endeavoured to maintain a blockade of three thou-
sand miles of coast. This blockade, kept up irre-
gularly, but when enforced, enforced severely, has
seriously injured the trade and manufactures of
the United Kingdom. Thousands are now ob-
liged to resort to the poor rates for sub-
sistence owing to this blockade. Yet her Ma-
jesty's Government have never sought to take ad-
vantage of t heobvious imperfections of this blockade,
in order to declare it ineffective.
They have, tone loss
and detriment of the British nation, scrupulously
observed the duties of Great Britain towards a
friendly State."
Again, on the 22d September, 1862, the same
noble earl asserted that the United States were
" very far indeed" from being in " a condition to ask
other nations to assume that every port of the coasts
of the so-styled Confederate States is effectively
blockaded."
When in view of these facts, of the obligations of
the British nation to adhere to the pledge made by
their Government at Paris in 1856, and renewed to
this Confederacy in 1861, and of these repeated and
explicit avowals of the imperfection, irregularity,
and inefficiency of the pretended blockade of our
coast, I directed our Commissioner at London to
call upon the British Government to redeem its
promise, and to withold its moral aid and sanction
from the flagrant violation of public law
committed by our enemies, we were in-
formed esty's Government could
not thatregard h
the er3li
blockadeaj of the Southern ports as
having been otherwise than " practically effective,"
in February, 1862, and that " the manner in which
it has since been enforced gives to neutral Govern-
ments no excuse for ascertaining that the blockade
has not been effectually maintained." We were
further informed, when we insisted that by the
was to be considered
:on of Paris was in
effectivett eor
on tis o
ef a
unless
n t tt n
"sufficienth oe blockadeddeclaration
a arreaa
tIY to prevent access
truth directed against blockades not sustained by
any actual force, or sustained by a notoriously in-
adequate force, such as the Occasional appearance
of a man-of-war in the offing, or the like."
It was impossible that this mode of construing
an agreement, so as to make its terms mean almost
the reverse of what they plainly conveyed, could be
considered otherwise than as a notification of the
refusal to the British Government to remain
bound by its agreement, or longer to respect those
articles of the declaration of Paris, which had been
repeatedly denounced by British statesmen, and
had been characterised by Earl Russell as " very
imprudent" and " most nnsatistactory."
If any doubt remained of the motives by which
the British Ministry have been actuated in their
conduct it would be completely dissipated by the
distinct avowals and explanations contained in the
made by her Majesty's
published
Secretary
blsed
Affairs. In commenting on
the remonstrances of this Government against the
ih speechfer Foreig recentlyn
countenance given to an ineffective blockade, the
following language is used ;—" It is said we have,
contrary to the declarations of Paris, contrary to in•
ternational law, permitted the blockade of 3,000
miles of American coast. It is quite true we did so,
and the presuleable cause of complaint is quite true,
that although the blockade is kept up by a suffi-
cient number of ships, yet these ships were sent into
the United States 'levy itt a hurry, and are ill-fitted
for the purpose, and did not keep up so c?tupletely
and eeenteneely as was required an effective block-
ade."
This unequivocal confession of violation, both of

caboten theig
agreementllfi
de
n e
e wt
oi tthh ue soaanndd
iian
jt :rang: i
eonn
ta lolfa wm,ai is
kd de
nf edn.
These d e d
on grounds the validity of which we submit with
grounds are thus stated :—" Still looking
law of nations, it was a blockade we, as great
belligerent Power in former times, should have ac- 1
knowledged. We, ourselves, had a blockade of up-
wards of 2,000 miles, and it did seem to me that we
were bound in justice to the Federal States of Ame-
rica to acknowledge that blockade. But there was
another reason which weighed with me. Our
people were suffering severely for the want of
that material which was the main staff of
their industry ; and it was a question of self-interest
whether we should not break the blockade. But in
my opinion the men of England would have been for
ever infamous if, for the sake of their own interest
they had violated the law of nations and made war
in conjunction with those slaveholding States of
America against the Federal States."
In the second of these reasons our rights are tot
involved; although it may be permitted to observe
that the conduct of Governments has not hereto-
fore, to my knowledge, been guided by the prin-
ciple that it is infamous to used their rights
whenever the invasion of those rights creates severe
suffering among their people and injuriously affect
great interests. But the intimation that relations
with these States would be discreditable because
they are slaveholding, would probably have been
omitted if the official personege who has published
it to the world had remembered that these States
were, when colonies, made slaveholding by the
direct exercise of the power of Great Britain, whose
dependencies they were, and whose interests in the
slave trade were then supposed to require that her
colonies should be made slaveholding.
But the other ground stated is of a very grave
character. It asserts that a violation of the law of
nations by Great Britain in 1807, when that Govern-
ment declared a paper blockade of 2,000 miles of
coast (a violation then defended by law courts and
jurists on the sole ground that her action was reta-
liatory), affords a justification for a similar outrage
on neutral rights by the United States in 1861, for
which no palliation can be suggested; and that
Great Britain "is bound in justice to the Federal
States," to make return for the war waged against
her by the United States in resistance of her illegal
blockade of 1807, by an acquiescence in the Federal
illegal blockade of 1861. The most alarming fea-
ture in this statement is its admission of a just
claim on the part of the United States to require of
Great Britain, during this war, a disregard of the
recognised principles of modern public law and of
her own compacts, whenever any questionable con-
duct of Great Britain "in former times" can be
cited as a precedent. It is not inconsistent with re-
spect and admiration for the great people whose
Government have given us this warning, to suggest
that their history, like that of mankind in general,
offer exceptional instances of indefensible conduct
"in former times," and we may well deny the
morality of violating recent engagements through
deference
After
dtefo defending,
eviln g,
iprecedentsn
he
m ofan
manner
eheBre 5s Foreign
,;u past.just
leaveer Maoi doubt of the
h t
i Government to prevent
the course of the British Government on the sub-
ject
e p t
stated,reign
Secretary of
purpose
o s the
takes
blockade,
the
care
a rßeto
r British
tsh n h
our purchase of vessels in Great Britain, while sup-
plying our enemies with rifles and other munitions
t e
ut
e of
of war, and states the intentiop to apply to Parlia-
ment for the furtherance of this design. He gives
to the United States the assurance that he will do in
their favour not only "everything that the law of
nations requires, everything that the present Foreign
Enlistment Act requires," but that he will ask the
sanction'of Parliament'` to further measures that her
Majesty's Ministers may still add." This language
is so unmistakably an official exposition of the policy
adopted by the British Government in relation to
our affairs, that the duty imposed on me by the Con-
stitution of giving you from time to time, " informa-
tion of the state of the Confederacy," would not have
been performed if I had failed to place it distinctly
before your
I refer you for further details on this whole sub-
ject to the correspondence of the State Department,
which accompanies this message. The facts which
I have blialy narrated are, I trust, sufficient to
enable you to appreciate the true nature of the neu-
trality professed by this war. "It is not in my
power to apprise you to what extent the Government
of France shares the views so unreservedly avowed
by that of Great Britain, no published correspond-
ence of the French Government on the subject hav-
ing been reeeived." No public protest nor opposi-
tion, however, has been made by his Imperial
Majesty against the prohibition to trade with us,
imposed on French citizens by the paper blockade
of the United States, "although I have reason to
believe that an unsuccessful attempt was made on
his part to secure the assent of the British Govern-
ment to a course of action more consonant with the
dictates of public law and with the demands of jus-
tice towards us."
The partiality of her Mejesty's Government in favour of
our enemies has been furtherevinced in the marked difference
of its conduct on the subject of the purchase of supplies by
the two belligerents. This difference has been conspicuous
since the very commencement of the war. As early as the
Ist of May, 1862, the British Minister in Washington was in-
formed by the Secretary of State of the United States that
he had sent agents to England, and that others would go to
France, to purchase arms, and this fact was communicated
to the British Foreign .silica, which interposed no objection.
Yet in October of the same year Earl Russell entertained
the complaint of the United States Minister in London, that
the Confederate States were importing contraband of war
from the island of Nassau, directed inquiry into the matter,
and obtained a report from the authorities of the island
denying the allegations, which report was enclosed to Mr.
Adams, and received by him as satisfactory evidence to dis-
sipate "the suspicion naturally thrown upon the authorities
of Nassau by that unwarrantable act." So, too, when the
Confederate Government purchased in Great Britain, as a
neutral country (and with strict observance both of the law
of nations and the municipal law of Great Britain), vessels
which were subsequently armed and commissioned as vessels
of war, after they had been far removed from English waters,
the British Government, in violation of its own laws and in
deference to the importunate demands of the United States,
made au ineffectual attempt to seize one vessel, and did ac-
tually seize and detain another which touched at the island
of Nassau, on her way to a Confederate port, and subjected
her to an unfounded prosecution at the very time when car-
goes of munitions of war were being openly shipped from
British ports to New York, to be used in warfare against us.
Even now the public journals bring intelligence that the Bri-
tish Government has ordered the seizure, in a British port,
of two vessels, on the suspicion that they may have been sold
to this Government, and that they may be hereafter armed
and equipped in our service, while British subjects aro en-
gaged in Ireland by tens of thousands to proceed to the
United States for warfare against the Confederacy, in defiance
both of the law of nations and of the express terms of the
British statutes, and are transported inßritish ships,without
an effort at concealment, to the ports of the United State!,
there to be armed with rifles imported ft= Great Brits;
and to be employed against our people in a war for confzne
No royal prerogative is invoked, no executive in!e.r
ae.
and
is interposed against this flagrant breach of un P 1
Whiletcstrained
international law, on the part of our enemies,
new enact-
constructions are placed on existing statutes,
devised,
for
ments proposed, and questionable
expedientsb this Government
precluding the possibility of purchase , y
t purposes, unless
of vessels that aro useless for be
lii•gerl the neutral
hereafter armed and equipped outside o
juris-
diction of Great Britain.
Government has exercised
For nearly three years
this
wally millions of willing and
unquestioned jurisdiction over
d defeated vast armies of ire_
united people. It his met an
ht its subversion. Su
vadere, who have in vain song
of its citizens, the Cppo.rted
by the confidence and affection of
ui,tin
uio __
,e
.e.
racy has lacked no element which , go,
_l•es
anunitncide.
pendent nation, according to the principles et public law.
Its legislative, executive, and judicial departments, each in
its *here, have formed their appropriate Junctions with a
regularity as undisturbed as in a time of profound peace,
and the whole energies of the people have been developed
in the organisation of vast armies, while their rights and
liberties have rested secure under the protection of the
courts of justice. This Confederacy is either independent
or it is a dependency of the United States, for no other
earthly power claims the right to govern it. without one
historic fact, on which the pretension can rest, without one
line or word of treaty or covenant, which can give colour
to title, the United States having asserted, and the British
Government has chosen to concede, that these sovereign

States are dependencies of the Government vrhich is ad-
ministered at Washington. Great Britain has .accordingly
entertained with that Government the closest and most
intimate relations, while refusing on its demand ordinary
amicable intercourse with us, and has, under arrange-
ments made with the other nations of Europe, not only
denied our just claim of admission into the fa mily of
nations, but interposed a passive though effectualb it to the
acknowledgment of our rights by other Powers. So soon
as it had become apparent, by the declarations of the British
Ministers, in the debates of the British Parliament in July
last, that her Majesty's Government were dete erained to
persist indefinitely in a course of policy which, under pro-
fessions of neutrality, had become subservient to the de-
signs of our enemy, I felt it my duty to recall the co:lnnis-
sioners formerly accredited to that Court, and the co rres-
pondence on the subject is submitted to you.
It is due to you and to our country that this full stateme.lt
should be made of the just grounds which exist for dissatise
faction with the conduct of the British Government. lam
well aware that we are unfortunately without adequate
remedy for the injustice under which we have ,uttered at the
hands of a powerful nation, ate juncture when our entire re-
sources are absorbed in the defence of our lives, liberties,
and
independence, against an enemy possessed of greatly
superior numbers and material resources. Claiming no
favour, desiring no aid, conscious of our own ability to de-
fend our own rights, against the utmost efforts of an infu-
riate foe, we had thought it not extravagant to expect that
assistance would be withheld from our enemies, and that
the conduct of foreign nations would be marked by a
genuine impartiality between the belligerents. It was not
supposed that a professed neutrality would be so conducted
as to justify the Foreign Secretary of the British nation in
explaining, in correspondence with our enemies, how " the
impartial observance of neutral obligations by her Ma-
-1 jesty's Government has thus been exceedingly advantageous
to the cause of the more powerful of the two contending
parties." The British Government may deem this war a
favourable [occasion for establishing, by the temporary
sacrifice of their neutral rights, a PI-model:a venial shalt
justify the future exercise of those extreme belligerent
pretensions that their naval power renders so formid-
able. The opportunity for obtaining the tacit assent
of European Governments to a line of conduct which
ignores the obligations of the declaration of Paris, and
treats that instrument rather as a theoretical exposi-
tion of principles than a binding agreement, may be consi-
dered by the British Ministry as justifying them in seeking
a great advantage for their own country at the expense. of
ours. Bat we cannot permit, without protest, the assertion
that international law or morals regard as " impartial
neutrality" conduct avowed to be " exceedingly advan-
tageous to one of the belligerents."
I have stated that we are without adequate remedy against
the injustice under which we suffer. There are but two
measures that seem applicable to the present condition of
our relations with neutral Powers. One is, to imitate the
wrong of which we complain, to retaliate by the declaration
of a paper blockade of the coast of the United States, and to
capture all neutral vessels trading with their ports that our
cruisers can intercept on the high seas. This measure I
cannot recommend. It is true that, in so doing, we should
but follow the precedents set by Great Britain and France
in the Berlin and Milan decrees, and the British Orders in
Council at the beginning of the present century. But it
must be remembered that we ourselves protested against
those very measures as signal violations of the law of na-
tions, and declared the attempts to excuse them on the
ground of their being retaliatory, utterly insignificant.
Those blockades are now quoted by writers on public law as
a standing reproach on the good name of the nations who
were betrayed by temporary exasperation into wrong doing,
and ought to be regarded rather as errors to be avoided than
as examples to be followed.
The other measure is not open to this objection. The
second article of the declaration of Paris, which provides
" that the neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the ex-
ception of contrabind of war," was a new concession by bel-
ligerents in favour of neutrals, and not simply the enuncia-
tion of an acknowledged pre-existing rule, like the fourth
article, which referred to blockades. To this concession we
bound ourselves by the convention with Great Britain and
France, which took the shape of the resolution adopted by
your predecessors on the 13th August, 1561. The consi-
deration tendered us for that concession has been withheld.
We have, therefore, the undeniable right to refuse longer
to remain bound by a compact which the other party refuses
to fulfil. But we should not forget that war is but tempo•
rary, and that we desire that peace shall be permanent
The future policy of the Confederacy must ever be to uphold
neutral rights to their full extent. The principles of the
declaration of Paris commend themselves to our judgment
as more just, more humane, and more consonant with
modern civilisation than those belligerent pretensions which
great naval Powers have heretofore sought to introduce
into the maritime code. To forego our undeniable right to
the exercise of those pretensions is a policy higher, worthier
of us and our cause than to revoke our sanction to princi-
ples that we approve. Let our hope for redress rest rather
on a returning sense of justice, which cannot fail to awaken
a great people to the consciousness that the war in which
we are engaged ought rather to be made a reason for for-
bearance of advantage than an occasion for the unfriendly
conduct of which we make just complaint.
The events of the last year have produced important
changes in the condition of our Southern neighbour, The
occupation of the capital of Mexico by the French army, and
the establishment of a Provisional Government followed by
a radical change in the constitution of the country, have ex-
cited lively interest. Although preferring our own govern-
ment and institutions to those of other countries, we can
have no disposition to contest the exercise by them of the
same right of self-government which we assert for ourselves.
If the Mexican people prefer a monarchy to a republic, it is
our plain duty cheerfully to acquiesce in their decision, and
to evince a sincere and friendly interest in their prosperity.
If, however, the Mexicans prefer maintaining their former
institutions, we have no reason to apprehend any obstacle to
the free exercise of their choice. The Emperor of the French
has solemnly disclaimed any purpose to impose on Mexico
a form of government not acceptable to the nation ; and the
eminent personage to whom the throne has been tendered
declines its acceptance, unless the offer be sanctioned by the
suffrages of the people. In either event, therefore, we may
confidently expect the continuance of those peaceful rela-
tions which have been maintained on the frontier, and even
a large development of the commerce already existing to the
mutual advantage of the two countries.
It has been found necessary since your adjournment to
take action on the subject of certain foreign consuls within
the Confederacy. The nature of this action, and the reasons
on which it was based, are so fully exhibited in the corre-
spondence of the State department, which is transmitted to
you, that no additional comment is required.
In connection with this subject of our relations with
foreign countries, it is deemed opportune to communicate
my views in reference to the treaties made by the Govern-
ment of the United States at a date anterior ton ur sepaureas-
tion, and which were consequently binding on as
on foreign Powers when the separation took effect.rael:r a
3°
partly with a view to enterieg, into such arrsansagrey,
that we
the change in our government bad made neced,
for the pur-
felt it our duty to send commissioners
pose of entering into the negotiations pasr°P'lto those treaties.
abrerato fix the rela-
tive rights and obligations of theas foreign
As this tender on our part hoe
beteto the treaties to which
nations have refused us the behave ceased to be binding on
panrt'dcclined,
we were parties, they cortainls.rations
with European nations
us, and, in my opinion, ourrat
exclusively by the general
are therefore now controlledlt is proper to add that these
rules of the law of nations•
remarks are intended to apply solely to treaty obligations
Governments, and have no reference to
towards foreign
right of individuals.
The remainder of the Message relates to internal
affairs, and concludes
Tho hope last year ent
:Tained of an early termination of
:
The nes notl beene
realised.ener Could carnage have satisfied
the war
the appetite of our enemy for the destruction of human life,
or grief have appeased their wanton desire to inflict human
suffering, there has been bloodshed enough on both sides,
and two lands have been sufficiently darkened by the weeds
of DlOUraing to induce a disposition for peace.
If unanimity in a people could dispel delusion, it has
been displayed too uumietalseably not to have silenced the
pretence that the Southern States were merely disturbed by
a factious insurrection—and it must long since have been
admitted that they we
re but exercising their reserved right
to modify their own Government in such a manner as
would best secure their own happiness. But these consi-
derations have been powerless to allay the un-Christian
hate of those who, long accustomed to draw large prelits
from a union with as, cannot control the rage exacted by
the
conviction that they have, by their own folly, destroyveednto
richest sources of their prosperity. Th.ebylor6b•feutsweeeon
listen to proposals for the only peach
a peace which, recognising. the imP
arately to recover
vides us, may leave the two peenissb
asPsseille gulf which di
from the injuries inflicted on both
g begun the war in direct
ePthe causeless war
now waged against us•
violet ion of their constitulitieoan:
Con hardened by crime, until
inwhich forbade rho attempt
to ceezee a State, they
they longer 101,01131: hors
ovvoil their purpoFe to destroy the
and indepeuthsuee)
inetiiutions au 1 sul.ec itastnhiteieleeelv'etrleliagt":ll:e only reliable hope
of these Stat's‘, the vigour of our resistanca, as the cessation
for peace is int': 07ely to be expected from the pressure
of their hostility
• of the people has proved equal to every
of their neeseiii
The patriotism
dby their country's need. 'We have been
acs
never were united under like circ nan
sacrifice &m;
propor-
ustnauiteeedsBsbefaor;.eo-Geod has blessed us with success
••ate to our means, and, under His divine favour, our
italobnours must at last be crowned with the reward due to
well who have given all they possessed to the riginenws
defence of their in ilienable rights, their homes erel their
altare.
Richmond, Dee, 7, 1563.

JLrritso D M Is,

Mr. Beard said that, as far as
was concerned, it was
not his intention to fight any more and
that he thought
the ends of justice would be fully satisfied
if
il
over to keep the peace. The other defensdiannteswweeruelbdoualnsdu
adjacent
enter into similar recognisances, and a
,county of Kent it had been considered sufficient to adopt
r
such a c-airse, he hoped the bench would ususider that
would be sufficient.
Hearn, u also assured the magistrates that, with Sayers
and Macc;onald, he would enter into any sureties considered
necessary, and that, for his own part, he did not intend' etod
fight again.
The Chairman observed that the object was not so much
to punish as to deter others from doing the same thing, and
said that the Bench felt they must go on with the case.
The following evidence was then taken :
Mr. George Campion Conrthope, a County magistrate,
said on the morning of the 10th of December, hearing the
fight was about to take place, he went to the IVadhurst
railway station, where he saw a great number of people in
a field. He went to the spot and found the space encloscd
with ropes and stakes, and two men fighting within the
ring. Ho knew the defendant King to be one of them, and
believed Heenan to be the other. He &so SSW Tom Sayers,
who acted as one of the seconds to Heenan. He thought ho
saw .ome other r lints, but he could not rpei,
positively to them. Ho endeavoured to get into the ring,
and said he was a magistrate. Some person said, " There are
two magistrates here; will you kindly act as referee, for wo
are in some difficulty about one," bathe declined. (Laughl'er,)
There were several persons present who were apparel:6y
gentlemen. He did not speak to either of the defendants to
request them to desist, because he could not get near enough
to them.

Mr. Christopher Ellis, an exciseman, stationed at Wad-
hurst, said he went to the fight, and saw Heenan and King
fighting in the ring. Boa Taylor was in King's corner. lie
also saw Noon and Mace. Macdonald and Sayers were in
Heenan's corner assisting him. He went there in discharge
o
r!
or
sold. lifeehnisse. duty,ne to
did se spirits
ether spirits were sold without a
Wm. Price, toil-coffeebeing told there was a rat Viradhurst gate, said that on
fightclose by he went to see it. Ho
saw the two principals--
Kin and Heenan—fighting.
Mr. Beard—l suppose you g
4 n
to-morrow if there wast merely from curiosity ?
Witness—Yes, and I would 7
another. Who wouldn't
Hill, one of the Sussex constabulary Na. 56, said that
and
nearer or
found 1,20 0
having heard of the fight he went there, g
1,300 people assembled. He could not
than the outer rope. He saw King, Heenan, andthe ring
Un
trying to get near the ring, two gentlemen Syers'
handed witness
back "very politely." (Laughter.)
John A. Thompson, deputy chief constable of the Susses
constabulary, deposed that he arrived at the ring just as
fight had apparently terminated. He saw Heenan on thet
he
ground. King was standing up. Witness could not iden-
tify any of the other defendants as being present, but 13.0
noticed those two particularly.
John Campany, another police-officer, who accompanied
iho last witness, identified King as being present, Witness
saw Sayers and others assisting Heenan into a chair end
dressing him. The defendant Tyler was there with King,
helping to dress him. Noon, Macdonald, and Bob Travers
I were there.
The witness saw King go rcnnd with his cap collecting
money, and Mace went with him.
Cross-examined by Mr. Beard—Witness saw nothing
done by Mace except going round in the field with King to
collect money.
Superintendent Bennett, of the Sussex police, proved the
service of the informations upon the eeveral defendants.
Inspector Silverton confirmed the evidence of the last wit-
ness with reference to the service of the summons on King,
and remarked that Preston said at the time that king would
not have won the fight if they had not poured water on his
head.

--- -
This being the case for the prosecution, Mr, Beard sub-
mitted that there was no case against Richardson and
Preston.
The Bench assented, and the two defendants Preston anti
Richardson were discharged.
Mr. Beard then made a powerful appeal on behal: of the
defendants he represented. Tle again urged that the emle of
justice would be fully satisfied it they were hound over, as
he had taken leave to suggest, at the opening of the case.
Whatever the feelings of the Sussex magistrates might be
in the matter, it was quite clear that great favour and coun-
tenance were given in certain high quarters to men in the
position of the defendants, and some allowance ought there-
fore to be made for persons who belonged to a humble and
obscure position in life. • No one could fail to see that per-
sons of rank and position attended such fights, and that was
a reason which should induce the Bench to deal lightly
with those who had been selected for punishment. Re was
not there to say they were right in breaking the law, but
when the Bench considered the case of t he men before them
he felt bound to say that reliance might fairly be placed
upon their promises that they would not further transgress
the law. He then reviewed the evidence as bearing upon
the individual cases, and urged that there was not sufficient
proof of the defendants' presence to justify the Bench in
sending them fei trial. He pointed out that the whole of
England had been interested in the contest between King.
and Heenan, and an equal interest in it had been manifested
in America. All the defendants had so conducted them-
selves in their vocation as to find friends to become sureties
for their future good behaviour.
T
ileen "toide—ntAs
ththeSaryineg grsain, ana and it Id myself, I
am nothe defendant
ina state
of health
Country.
—1
of some of the d
srotaminelycosulasonnualdtinoont, fight again in this
wasA fitecre
•. e h
the have considered
this case carefully, not onlyevidence, but also the ob-
servationsainiramd aenb ofy
.lit: ire. B
Beardnch
behalfOsnaid
fondants, as well as the cases of those who are notrepre-
sentedo-
by a solicitor. We feel that
TheCh
ill this
should all be bound over to answer
preferred
pre against them at the Quarter Sessions. We do
not say that in what they did there WES anything particu-
larly reprehensible, but persons cannot
with impunity. These persons will
bet commit
summonedillegabl acts
some tribunal which will deal with them
according to the
evidence which will bo adduced. The defendants must
each enter into their own £5O, f o
sureties
and find bail to
the extent of £7O, to
appear at the next Quarter Sessions to
answer any indictment
for misdemeanour that may be pre-
ferred against theta,
The required In.
bail was then entered into, and the defend-
ants were liberated. •

H7nitnan's Tea is choice and strong, moderate
in
price, and wholesome to use. These advantages have
Bemired for this Tea a general preference. It is sold in
Packets by 2,280 Agents.
The Civil Tribunal of the Seine has just given
judgment in an action brought by Count de Jouf-
froy against Count de gontraort and his brother-in-law,
Prince Galitzin, to recover a sum of 30,000 f., the price of
dBO partially paid-up shares in the Baths of Nanheim,
It appeared that the statement of the
•
p(Eialiencttioff%
licoessunes)el that his client sold the shares to the de-
*he gave bills for the amount. When the
fbeillildsanfeltfil diulieliBn6liugust, 1862, the defendants refused to pay
ground that the whole affair was a gaming
were
thew, on ello
ttansaction, as the great part of the funds of the Nauheirn
ware employed in the gaming-house attached to
tCheTrP:srtYablishment. The counsel proved that the esta-
blishment of liauheim was duly auth:nised by the Govern-
went of Besse, also that the shares of the company
negotiated in all the principal German money markets, a
he insisted that the laws of France against gaining' "N'til -
altogether inapplicable. The tribunal took that - 'c'lli
New et the
case, and condemned the defendants to pay the amount
claimed, with interest and costs of suit,
The book-stalls around the Theatre or the
Odeon have been for some time
plundered of works exposed for sale.
,_l,)"t ireti.'"ltlY
fell upon a well-dreesA yorrui; tiv, , 'lll,Ml4l,il'''' 'C'
1;'1° 111
was the day before 5 e,terdar C. ti'
''P''l
--re'tit '' a'''''''''
cloak the second volume offi'''''lLl',.:2l historic °lie :;11A;i'll r;
'•:13
search being lull
d
ted he admitted that he 1
rature Frailpise" while ~ 1141.‘ '-- " —s*°l-`) " " l'st'(--
a l_hing arrested anti intci roga-
front one of the dealers. tur,rehasing collie 1 rifling al Ceti)
tamkeandethaet bhoisekletdogcinomg complete
volume,Th e 3,rtng whichiiian ish ho }lad
work, and on a
had previously stolen, was found.
torei:;;lier, and having pay,ed his cxa-
I;
ri
cl 1 :
,: !'
il
.1 1 c
ia :
~, . (looter 'of nteiiieirie, laid corue to Peris to i;,t-
I i ain his profession.

letter front Napic's of thy' 14 t filYs :—•
c,
~..:,ni, It's has hccome covered with snow, and tiom
presents the appearanc3 of a sugar loaf. It is a vast ei-ale
quite white from the summit to the base. We hav,3 also a
wind SO cold that it nips the face, and anyone might fancy
himself at the foot of Mount Viso, in the midst of the snows
of the Alps."
No Tient complete without a WiLcox AND G iliis'
SEWING -M ACHIN r.. tiimple, compact, efficient, durable, :ilia
noiseless. Warranted to fulfil ail the reptiremcmtq of a
perfect fanilly machine. rroP"t's f"e ‘-',l appiie4'i,ioll at
No, 135, Regent-street, yir,_[AnvT.l