The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-03 00:00:00

PRIVATE PROPERTY AT SEA.

Mr. GREGORY rose to move that an humble address
be presented to her Majesty, praying that she will be gra-
ciously pleased to use her influence with foreign Powers
for the purpose of making the principle that private pro-
perty should be free from capture by sea a maxim of in-
ternational maritime law.

Sir F. GOLDSMID criticised the vagueness of the mo-
tion, which he opposed as tending to deprive England of
the advantages of her maritime supremacy. He quoted the
opinion of American statesmen against the proposal, and
denied that it was a necessary consequence of the Declara-
tion of Paris, which he showed to be rather in favour of the
stronger than the weaker Power. He asserted that no
such international obligation could bo devised which would
not be dissolved by a state of war, and pointed to General
Sherman's ravages as a proof that private property on land
was not spared if it suited a hostile commander to destroy
it. Ile condemned the proposal as calculated to rob war
of its terrors, and protract the conclusion of peace.
Mr. LIDDELL referred to the position of the privateer-
ing question as an argument in favour of the proposal, show-
ing that the United States, if we conceded it, were, on their
side, committed to the abolition of privateering. He quoted
commercial statistics to prove the immense interest Eng-
land had in establishing this maxim as a part of interna-
tional law, and, after some remarks on the futility of
blockades, contended, in opposition to Sir F. Goldsruid,
that it would render war less likely.
Mr. BAXTER argued that as by the Declaration of
Paris we had allowed any Power with which we might be
at war to carry on its trade in neutral bottoms, the adop-
tion of this principle was only a matter of time. He can-
vassed Sir F. Goldsmid's arguments, asserting that the
sparing of private property by land was an established
maxim of modern warfare, and that this humane proposal
was a necessary extension of it.
Mr. B. COCHRANE condemned the Declaration of
Paris, quoting the opinions of Lord Russell, Lord Palmer-
ston, and Lord Derby to the same effect. He expressed a
hope that it would be rescinded, and deprecated any fur-
ther progress in the same direction.
M'CULLAGH TORRENS argued against the in-
justice tice of throwing on the mercantile community the bur-
denand suffering of a war undertaken for imperial inte-
rests. He warned the house of the consequences of a war
while the privateering question was in its present position,
and he challenan instance
eigaed the opponents of the motion to mention
vrar being ended by the pillage of private
individuals. He defended the Declaration of Paris, and
described this
proposal
pointed as an inevitable consequence of it.
as ato the extensive commercial ope-
rations of this countryrdeason why we should be the
first t) support this rule, an
arg
dissolve ed that the present state
of things was a positive temptationwar,toH
e scouted
the idea that a state of war would
interna-
tional obligation of this character, and any
reducing war as far as possible to a duel argued ed in favour of
between Govern-
ments and armies.
The LORD ADVOCATE, in reply to the argument that
England as the greatest commercial nation was obi ,ft,
y
interested in this change, pointed out that the increase in
our vulnerability had been accompanied by an increase in
our power to defend ourselves, and lie objected to this
proposal
proposal as tending to cripple our strength for attack and
defence. Ho maintained that all war was of necessity a
violation of private property, and the rule of exemption—
which depended much on the discretion of the com-
manders, and did not spring from conventions—was that
the property of individuals should be spared when the
military advantage of its destruction was out of all pro-
portion to the individual loss.
Mr. LAING asserted that in the event of a war breaking
out in the present state of maritime law the 7,000,000 tons
in which British commerce was carried would be anni-
hilated, and that commerce would be transferred to the '
neutral flag.
Lord- CRANBORNE denied that there was any esta-
blished rule of warfare which exempted private property
onland from capture, and illustrated his argument by re-
ferencee prize-money vase, to the campaigns
e of Napoleon, the Banda and
Kirw
and Gen. t3herman'o march.

After discussing some of the questions of maritime law
which had arisen during the American civil war, he in-
sisted that it was impossible to establish a law of this kind,
as in the case of war no one would be interested in en-
forcing it but the belligerents, whose strength would be
already tasked to the utmost.
The O'CONOR DON made some remarks in favour of
the motion, as tending towards an amicable settlement of
the difficulties which have arisen out of the Alabama case.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL argued that the rule
exempting private property on land depended, not upon
any positive law, but upon public opinion, and was, there-
fore, of a flexible and indeterminate character, whereas
this rule was inflexible and introduced an entirely new
' principle into naval warfare. He pointed out some mis-
takes into which Mr. Laing had fallen, and, laying down
' the principle that the capture of private property was a
systematic belligerent operation to weaken the public re-
sources of the enemy, he showed, by an examination of
the character of trade by land and by sea, that the inci-
dence of the loss by captures at sea was more upon the
general commercial community than on the individual. He
referred to the blockade of the Southern States as a proof
that this was a most powerful instillment of warfare, and
maintained that the right of blockade, which it was not
proposed to weaken, was as great an interference with pri-
vate property as the right of capture. Pointing also to the
experience of the American war to show that powerfully-
built mercantile vessels might easily be turned to warlike
purposes, he urged that this was an additional reason why
an enemy should not be permitted to enjoy undisturbed the
advantages of a large mercantile navy. He mentioned a
variety of cases in which if the rule were adopted merchant-
men would be seized, and asserted that so much suspicion
would be excited, so many practical difficulties would
arise, that it would ultimately be swept away by
both belligerents. He denied that this change was
a corollary of the Declaration of Paris, or that we had by
that Declaration sacrificed a powerful instrument of war-
fare. It was a balance, he said, of disadvantage whether
we would cripple our naval power in time of war, or would
submit to a temporary interference with our commercial
operations, and he energetically repudiated the insinuation
that the United States would take the opportunity of our
being involved in a war to revenge themselves for the
Alabama as an unmerited imputation on that Government.
After giving some further explanation as to the overture
which had been made to the American Government for the
revision of the neutrality laws, he went on to urge that
this danger to commerce was a strong security for peace,
and concluded by expressing his conviction that even if
this change were not made war would be met as it had
been met before, and would leave untouched the sources
of our power and prosperity.
After a few remarks from Mr. Oliphant, who maintained
that the change would incacase our maritime power by
relieving the navy from the necessity of defending our
wide-spread commerce,
The motion was withdrawn.

The Princess Helena's Annuity Bill passed through
committee.

The Qualification for Offices Abolition Bill passed
through committee.

The other business was disposed of, and tho houso
adjourned at 25 minutes past 12 o'clock.

Railway and other Companies.
REI7TER'S TELEGRAM COMPANY.

A special general meeting of the shareholders of
this company was held yesterday at noon, at the
London Tavern—Mr. D. Dent in the chair—for the
purpose of considering the steps taken by the direc-
tors to utilise a valuable concession obtained by Mr.
Reuter from the Hanoverian Government for lay-
ing a telegraph cable between the English and Ha-
noverian coasts.

The secretary read the report, an abstract of
which appea:•ed in our impression of yesterday.
The CHAIRMAN moved the following resolution :
—" That the directors be at liberty to borrow any
sum of money not exceeding £lOO,OOO, with such
powers or securities as are authorised by-clause 74
of the articles of association of the company." He
said the project of the directors had been contem-
plated for many months, but the state of the money
market and the bringing out of companies which
involved the issue of shares of every kind, had been
so unfavourable to the accomplishment of their
purpose, that they had deferred it to the present
time. It was now necessary that they should proceed
with:the scheme, because the partieg who had granted
the concession would not allow it to be held in
abeyance longer. As so many companies had been
brought out within the last eighteen months—good,
bad, and indifferent—the public were rather chary
in investing their funds in undertakings with
nary recommendations. It required something of
a tempting character to attract proper investment,
and the directors of their company were firm in the
conviction that they had an undertaking of the very
first class, and in placing it before the public they
had not only endeavoured to give them the guar-
antees of their names as vouchers for the fact, but
they had placed the whole of their papers in the
hands of Messrs. Quilter and Ball, the well-known
accountants, whose integrity and social status pre-
vented the possibility of anything like dictation
from the board in the preparation of the report
which they bad since issued. With regard to the
concession given by the King of Hanover to Mr.
Reuter, he begged to say that it extended to a
period of thirty years, and that its acquisition was
entirely owing to the powerful personal interest
which Mr. Reuter possessed with the King of
Hanover and with many other influential person-
ages on the Continent. It might be asked had any
money been given for this concession ? His reply
was—not a shilling. It was the offspring of Mr.
Reuter's own imagination, and he had been success-
ful because he was a man of the most unimpeachable
integrity. Mr. Reuter might have sold his infor-
mation on several occasions for untold sums, but he
had never travelled from the path of uprightness,
and he had obtained a reputation which he (the
chairman) had not the slightest doubt would enable
them in this case to float the shares successfully.
The term of the concession was longer than had
ever been previously given. They had also obtained
a concession for laying land lines. He need not
say that their telegraphic communication with.
the Hanoverian coast was of the greatest import-
ance to their business, inasmuch as it connected
them with Hanover, Bremen, and all the towns of
note in the north of Germany ; and the proposed
expenditure was rendered doubly justifiable by the
fact that messages which bad hitherto often occupied
four and twenty hours in their transit, from the
crowded state of the wires, would, after the laying
of the cable, reach their respective destinations in a
few minutes, totally unattended with mishapsof any
kind. They had given a part of the concession to
the Electric and International Telegraph Company
in return for a handsome sum which that company
promised them. The treaty extended to five years,
and it might be asked—where was the money for
that period? He might say that the Electric and
International Telegraph was one of the most thriv-
ing and important companies in Englandor Europe,
and besides having its shares at the large premium
of 40 per cent., they had a reserve fund of £70,000.
An offer had been made by the directors of Reuter's
Company to take the concession for a longer period
than five years, but they were so convinced that the
profits would augment before the expiration of the
existing contract that they refused to give their
compliance. The Telegraph Construction and
Maintenance Company had obtained the contract
for the construction of the cable, one-fourth of the
value of which they agreed to take in paid-up shares.
The specifications for the cable had been prepared
by Mr. Jenkin, one of an eminent firm of engineers,
and they had been suhmitted for ccmpetition before
they were given into the hands of the present
contractors.

Sir J. HAY seconded the motion as to the adoption
of the report, and it was unanimously agreed to.

Mr. REUTER said that the new scheme was of the
greatest importance to the company. Being anxious
to improve the property of the shareholders, he had
endeavoured to add additional income to their revenue,
and unless he was disappointed in his expectations,
tehxeisirtisnlgiares would be as lucrative as those of any
company. After the laying of the cable
they would be able to send messages direct without
loss of time, and mistakes would be avoided. A re-
duction in favour of their company had been made
by the King of llanover in the transit of the
messages, and they would henceforward be 10d. in-
stead of 14d., which was a reduction of 33 per cent.
Mr. JENKIN (engineer) said that he had been
asked for the specification of a cable without refer-
ence to cost, and he informed the chairman that the
highest priced cable would be cheapest in the end.
The cable under contract at present for the com-
pany would be covered with a coating to prevent
the existence of rust on the outer wires, and it was
fiimilar in every respect to the one laid in the Persian

Gulf. Be had no doubt that it would last as long
as the cable between Dover and Calais, which was
15 years old.
The Rev. Mr. LANGDON' proposed a resolution to
the effect that the proposed extension of the busi-
ness of the company would be highly profitable and
advantageous to the shareholders, and they pledged
themselves to support the scheme by every means
in their power.
Mr. W. ITANcocK seconded the resolution, which
was carried nein. con.

A vote o thanks to the chairman concluded
the business..

GREAT WESTERN.

The half-yearly meeting was held yesterday at
the Paddington Station—Mr. D. Gooch, M.P., in
the chair. The report was unanimously adopted ;
dividends at the rate of £2 per cent. per annum
were declared on the Great Western Consolidated
Stock, of 18s. 6s. per cent. per annum on the West
Midland (Oxford Stock) ; of 17s. 6d. per cent. per
annum on the West Midland (Newport Stock), and
£3 ss. per cent. per annum on the South Wales Con-
solidated Stock. The new chairman, Mr. D. Gooch,
was unanimously elected a director of the company,
and the retiring directors were re-elected.