The Sun.
London, England, 1862-06-30 00:00:00

(unless I receive orders to the contrary) in 4 batte-
ries of Austrian rifled field artillery; 32 guns suit-
able for gun cotton, as well as powder—which guns
I have already secured—and 20,000 rifles now in
the Vienna Arsenal. Unless I should be able to
purchase a large number, like 10,000 to 20,000,
I should not, without special orders, depart from
the Enfield bore—not that the Austrian bore is too
small, but because of the great importance of uni-
formity of bore. It has given me great concern
that I have not been able to make better arrange-
ments for running in the several cargoes that have
been forwarded.

" It is impossible, as I have stated in my previous
letter, to obtain vessels with capacity for cargo and
coal for so long a voyage, and have at the same
time the requisite speed for attempting the blockade.
I have endeavoured to purchase a very fast steamer
to run from Nassau to the coast, but I have no
money now for any purpose. I should not hesitate
to appropriate money to this object, even without
orders, seeing how long the Gladiator was detained
at Nassau, and considering the great importance of
these goods being safely landed.
" The Economist, Lieut. Fauntleroy, was at Ber-
muda on the 6th March, expecting to sail next
morning. As we have dates from New York to
the 20th of March, with no account of the Econo-
mist, I have strong hopes that she has arrived at a
Confederate port. The steamer Minna sailed while
I was in Hamburg. It was intended that she
should take 500 barrels of gunpowder. I found
on my return to London, however, that the powder
had all been shut out, on account of the vessel being
full.. Had I been in London I should have sent
powder in preference to anything else.
66 On board the Minna, consigned to I. Adderley
and Co., are the following articles for the Confede-
rate Government : 5,900 knapsacks and boards, &c.,
5,690 sets of accoutrements, 1,840 gun slings, 992
sabre belts, 4,500 gas cloth (light blue), 1,850
sabres, 5,700 rifles, 300 pairs shoes, and 16 sets
saddlery.
" Correct invoices have been sent by the Minna
to Nassau.
" The Melita will sail from London with a very
valuable cargo in about 15 days. I have requested
Lieut. North of the Navy to take charge of her,
but have not yet received his reply. Should it be
in the 'negative, I shall endeavour to obtain an
officer from the Sumter, still lying at Gibraltar.
" The Melita is, for a screw steamer, quite fast,
and with an enterprising commander on board,
could, lam confident, be run in. There will be
several field-howitzers so placed that, without dis-
turbing the general cargo, they can be taken to the
deck and then mounted, and with these quite a
goad defence could be made against wooden gun.
boats.—l have the honour to be your obedient ser.
vant,

" CALEB HUSE, Captain of Artillery."

THE EMILY ST. PIERRE.

OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE.
The papers respecting the above vessel were pub •
lished on Saturday morning. On the 24th of April
Mr. Adams wrote to Earl Russell upon the sub-
ject, and transmitted certain depositions relating to
the seizure of the vessel. Mr. Adams contended
that the act committed by Capt. Wilson, the master
of the neutral vessel, entailed her confiscation and
that of the cargo, and asked that directions might
be given for their restoration. On the 7th of May
Earl Russell replied that having taken the opinion
of the law officers, the Government were unable to
comply, inasmuch as acts of forcible resistance to
the rights of belligerents on the high seas were not
cognisable by the municipal law of England, how-
ever punishable as offences against international
law in the prize courts of the captor administer-
ing such law. Mr. Adams replied by quoting
the language of Lord Stowell, by which he con-
sidered the restoration of the vessel is called
for; and by
_pointing to the language of her
Majesty's proclamation, which, he thinks, was in-
tended to apply to precisely such cases as this. The
Foreign Minister rejoined that Lord Stowell's lan-
guage was limited to the action of a prize court of
the captor, and does not extend to the municipal
law of a neutral country. Chancellor Kent is
quoted at some length by the noble lord, who con-
cludes by saying that the meaning of the proclama-
tion was that any breach of the statute would be
punished under the statute by the same national
authority by which the statute was enacted. In a
despatch which occupies three pages and a half of
the printed return, Mr. Adams reviews the argu-
ments of the noble lord, and what he considers the
recognised doctrines of international law, coming
to the conclusion that the claim for the restoration
of the ship rests on the soundest principles of equity
and law. The restitution, he says, of Messrs. Mason
and Slidell was not required by any portion of the
municipal law of the United States, and the United
States Government restored them simply because
the seizure seemed to have been wrongful, as con-
strued by the law of nations. If the Royal Ao-
clamation is to be made so null and void foreign
nations must, he says, adopt more stringent mea-
sures of repression "in order to bring down with
real effeet upon her subjects their just consequences
of her Majesty's displeasure for the violation of her
will." The Government and people of the United
States had expected some mark of indignation on
the part of her Majesty's Government. " The deci-
sion has been otherwise. Made wiser by the result,
they will take the necessary precautions in like
cases that may happen hereafter to protect them-
selves."

Writing on the 12th inst., the Foreign Minister
endeavours to convince Mr. Adams that it is a gene-
ral principle that each nation deals only with
offences committed against it own laws, and is not
called upon to carry into effect, or to aid in carry-
ing into effect, the laws of foreign nations against
persons who may have violated them, and who may
be found within its territory. "Not only in the case
of neutrals in war, but in all cases falling within the
same general principle, the nation to whom the
parties complained of belong leaves to other
nations who may suffer by the acts of such parties
the penalty. It may happen that the nation re-
ceiving the injury may have an opportunity of re-
senting it should it perchance catch the offenders
within its jurisdiction. Had the Emily St. Pierre
fallen a second time into the hands of a United
States cruiser a prize court of the United States
would in all probability have condemned the ship
and cargo. Nor would her Majesty's Government
have complained of a condemnation judicially pro-
nounced in accordance with the law of-nations. Her
Majesty's Government, adhering to this line of con-
duct, are therefore acting in accordance with reason,
policy, and the common and universal usage of na-
tions in like cases. You speak of the rescue of the
Emily St. Pierre as being a fraud by the law of na-
tions. But whether the act of rescue be viewed as
one of fraud or of force, or as partaking of both
characters, the act was done only against the rights
accruing to a belligerent under the laW of nations
relating to war, and in violation of the law of war,
which, whilst it permits the belligerent to exercise
and enforce such rights against neutrals by the pe-
culiar and exceptional right of capture, at the sable
time leaves to the belligerent alone the duty, and
confers upon him the power, of vindicating such
right and of enforcing such law. The same law not
only does not require, but does not even permit,
neutral nations to carry out belligerent rights. You
allude to the conduct of the United States Govern-
ment in the case of the Trent; but the flagrant
wrong done in that case was done by a naval officer
in the service of the United States ; the prisoners,
whose release was demanded, were in the direct
custody and keeping of the Executive Government;
and the Government of the United States had actu-
ally the power to deliver them up, and did deliver
them up to the British Government. But the Emily
St. Pierre is not in the power of the Executive Go-
vernment of this country, and the laws of England,
as well as the law of nations, forbid the Executive
Government from taking away that ship from its
legal owners."
Mr. Adams's reply on the following day
is a simple
acknowledgement of the above note, with the re-
mark—
"As I do sot perceive that its contents
materially change the nature of the issue that had
beep, alreaciy made up, I shall content myself with
the transmission of a copy, to complete the eorres
pondence on the subject, to the Government of the
United States."