The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-12 00:00:00

DANISH CLAIMS AND COMMON

HONESTY.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
d lover of honesty and fair play can have read
Dan the
Lehe (if it may be called such) of yesterday, on the Dash
e,iat tile, without feelings of disgust. It really seems as if the
n Z'Y object of the existence of Government-in this country
""e to obstruct the course of justice and the cl aims of the
%43131 e for protection. It is deeply to be regretted that Mr.
eritew.4ls stood alone, resting on the obvious Justice and merits
r,„"' "Is case only, while the Government, by an active whip,
o—ntrived, not by argument, but by mechanical votes, to defeat
t;ilee ntore the settlement of a case on the merits of which
tivelionse of Commons has five times decided in the affirma-
to"' The speeches of the two Government mouthpieces
elltained not one argument, and were solely made up of
what Sir Thomas Wilde recently well described as " officiai
ciu.."2,,5-') Permit me, having no personal interest in the
80„7"on, but that of a love of justice, and who has taken
b,_.•l Pains to examine the facts of the case, to make a few
"I„cotrunents on the two Government speeches.
e4Zr; Grealbum adopted quite a new line of argument,
it i quite an amusing one : he must have meant
gentle satire of the votes retained for the occasion. He
professed, forsooth, great consideration for the pockets of the
people;i Now., sir, I have always heard that England is es-
te-4'lY a commercial nation—that her merchants are bet
htength. In my school days I learned she was an island,
eil,t,Ling divers seaports, whence myriads of merchant ships.
aii.;,"ing in the protection of their native Government against
aeeuion, departed to all parts of the world, to bring back
teltmt sources of wealth to their native shores. But all this is no-
.,it'Og to ber.Goulburn. To him she is some Hungary or Poland,
iie"Leh, devoid of seaports, unencumbered by merchant fleets.
an2W for such matter no consideration but contempt and
Aby
rrs• It is in this case t merch
the ants of E ngl and who
suffered for the allegedhe good of whole count. To
tilVever the events cost at the time these merchants con-
penuted their full share, and to any public cost now to com-
th sate their losses they will also contribute. And why are
eijeja n addition to suffer these tremendous losses, this con-
-14.4°11 of their property, in order to put money in the
cud ets of the King and Government? The pretence is as
L, I°w as it is hypocritical. For forty years they have had
4:flitted and just compensation withheld, while Government
ti 3 it that time been in possession of its immense ill-gotten
ittirlder, obtained by the same act which ruined these
eueftrellants, an net which morals have not language dark
ageuall to characterise. It was England which made t
Bbardeession against a nation in profound peace with here
ade in defiance of every law of nations and of honour,
English Ministers have the effrontery to talk of
warstrobberies as " captures made in the ordinary course of
faet__.' is not material new to show wha is, however,
that that at first it was expressly alleged byt Government
the latilese seizures were contrary to the usages of war and
aggre7." nations. England having made such unprovoked
Justifiea3l"' it
, is not to be wondered at that Denmark felt
e 1,,z,i n
and s • in her only self-deter in herself violating those laws
Were
g English ships on a neutral sea, for these ships
not t:" seized on the high seas. This is a line of argument
th,,, ucbed by mr. Hawes, but very important, as also is
th._. othei, also not touched by him, but in itself conclusive.
re," England, in her confiscation of Danish property, was
t. 41 Ity of a breach of positive English law; as a consequence
;.:1 tfliieh it was that English property was confiscated. That
'WY settles the question.
It is is curious that every lawyer consulted in this cy.p
.L(4 given his opinion in favour of the claimants, bowevc,
eOlivenient it might be, when in office, to desert that opinion.
No such sophistry as Mr. Cardwell used can alter or afFec,
the fact, that th e present Solicitor-General gave hie opinion
that the ordinance of 16th August, 1807 (which no man ever
yet read and honestly supposed it to be a declaration of war),
was NOT a declaration of war. Every act and order in Coun-
cil of the English and of the Danish Governments confirms
this opinion. Had I time, I could cite more than twenty
t'clitl documents in proof of it; and the first I would cite
;would be that very ordinance of the 9th September . which„ou_
la such a Jesuitical, but truly "official" way, Messrs. Ce 1
burn and Cardwell quoted, omitting carefully to state its whole
Objects and contents, which are to recite that very ordinance
of 16th August, not as a declaration of war, but as an ordi-
tance for EMBARGO; and to proceed i'self, not to confiscate
result
property, but to provide for its safe custody till the
of events was known. Would space allow, I could strengthen this ground by numberless facts and authorities.
I will only add that Lord Ellenborough and Sir Wm. Grant,
neither of them idle spectators of events, both had the events
of those days brought under their judicial notice,
and both decided that no war existed between England
111(1 Denmark at that time or much later; and Lord Ellen-
borough
•
expressly held that there did not exist such a
state
of things as should lead any man of ordinary prudence
3uPpose war would arise. And he was right. Unless
England was guilty of a systematic course of deception and
baudman en her own people, as well as on Denmark, no honest
"ull.l could suppose that war would arise.
el I,t is to be observed that towards every part of these
claims the same ungracious and dishonourable olistruction
° j justice has taken place. Two classes, against whose
claims a fair colour of objection might have been raised,
have, however, been paid—through some favour and influ-
ence, it must be presumed. The present class stand
an Point of law, equity, and honesty on a much be•ter foot-
ing, and, at present, remains unpaid. It is most falsely al-
leged. that they were silent for twenty years. Why, Sir,
there are at this moment in the Treasury numberless peti-
tions, lodged there in 1808 and succeeding years. This is a
tflOst barefaced. and daring ~ official
denial." One of these
original petitions has been . recelly tlreprinted, aid an ex•
cellent one it is. Little di earn'n. g that it would be nega-
tively it assumes that it will not be, as it has
„ptroophe, u
proved e
e , the wish,' and determination, ' of his Majestd's
Government to obtain in this manner,' and keep ' a pecuniary
gain' to the Cro.ei at the individual expense of its own subjects."
h. Itc
Well might Goulburn talk of a " new principle." A
"new principle," indeed, it is ; and one to be universally exe-
crated, for a Grovernment thus to enrich themselves, and to
persist in retaining the Plunder,n merchants. got by wholesale spoliation,
at the direct cost of their osr
Three Chancellors of the Exchequer have promised pay-
raent—three tin.'es have
the Lords of the Treasury expressly
referred it to ParliamentP to determine to whom payment is
Parliament adjudged it to the present
due-five times hag
...
in defiance of common honesty,
claimants; yet do M 2nisters,
to their Queen, and in contempt
in dereliction of their duty
of their duty to the nation of whom they are the hired ser-
ment of that tribunal to which
they themselves appealed.
vents, refuse to obey the judgment
If there is no way of compelling
their obedience, defective
indeed must be our system of ad-
ministration of justice. I not believe there is none. The
Proposition is full oic.
f n to our liberties.
I trust the claimants wide a ger
ll not be disheartened, but that
they will rather redouble their " energies, and arm their ad-
s facts, as yet wholly untouched, which
bear upon the case—
Yocates with the numerodu,
if there is any right, if there is
all
any justice to be had in England—if Parliament has any
r or of its own privileges and
sense of consistency or honour or
office and its frictions, and deserts not its
; co
independence—
they must yet succeed in revering that compensation
Which has been so long fraudulently
withheld—l am, Sir, &c
OBSERVER.
10th June, 1846.