The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-29 00:00:00

ENGLAND AND AMERICA.

La Patric says that " it has been informed, from
a private source, that Rear. Admiral Milne (Sir
Alexander Milne, K.C.8.), Commander-in-Chief on
the North American and West Indies Station, had,
on hearing of the outrage committed on the Trent,
sent three steam-frigates to the Island of Cuba to
escort, until new orders, the steamer which plies
between the Havannah and St. Thomas's."

" It appears," says La Patrie," that information
has been received at Washington by the American
Government that important personages of the
Southern States were continually taking that route,
and that the expedition of the San Jacinto would
be renewed. To prevent such a repetition Admiral
Milne sent the frigates in question.
La Patrie, commenting upon this affair, in an
article signed by M. Cucheval de Clarigny, says :

" The pretext that MM. Mason and Slidell were seized
as ' contraband of war' could only be admitted if the Envoys
of the South had wished to make use of the Trent to intro-
duce arms or ammunition into America; but they were, on
the contrary, leaving America for Europe, and there were
no arms on board the steamer. The emissaries or agents of
a Government have never been regarded as contrabrand
of war.' Consequently, there has been a manifest violation
of the English flag, and it is to be feared that it was ordered
by the Cabinet at Washington in its desire to seize, at all
risks, the despatches of which the Envoys of the South
were the bearers.

" Under any circumstances, the British Government can-
not dispense with exacting as a reparation the dismissal of
the officers of the San Jacinto, the liberation of the passen-
gers taken from the Trent, and an indemnity for them.
Will the Cabinet at Washington be able to make all these
concessions in face of the state of irritation in which the
press of the North keeps the population against England ?
It is, therefore, to be feared that complications of the most
serious nature may arise between England and the United
States, and we perfectly understand the impression the news
produced on the London Stock Exchange. Reinforcements
for Canada were already in formation, and they have been
ordered by the English Government to sail forthwith."
The Constitutionnel says :

" The arrest of au English mail steamer by an American
ves el of war is so serious a fact, that we may be justified
in believing that the officer who committed the act did so
upon his own responsibility, or that, if he was obeying in-
structions from the Cabinet of Washington, the latter had
not sufficiently weighed the consequences.
" In either case we hope that the American Government
will make a reparation and satisfy the claims of England.
We count upon it doing so in its own interests, which have
always served as a guide to its policy.
"In fact, it is impossible that the Americans should not
understand how irregular is the arrest of MM. Slidell and
Mason on board the Trent ; how contrary it is to the law of
nations ; and how prejudicial the consequences of this act
would be to themselves.
"It would be the consecration of the right of search,'
against which they have always protested, and which was
one of the chief causes of the war they themselves waged
with England in 18 L 2-8 right of search exercised not only
on commercial vessels but on ships of war, for the mail
steamers are Royal vessels, having on board a lieutenant of
the Royal Navy, and their officers wear tie uniform of the
British Navy. _ .

,4 By declaring contraband of war simple passengers with
or without a diplomatic mission tho Americans strike a
mortal blow against the privileges of neutral States, which
it is to their interest more than any one else to see re-
spected."
The Opinion Publique says :

"We perfectly understand the deep sensation this event
has caused in London ; for, if the French flag had received
such an insult, the whole country would have risen as one man
to demand striking satisfaction. We have, in fact, always
proclaimed respect for a neutral flag and the national
dignity would invincibly make us exact from others the
same respect we should pay to them. We must, however,
admit that the question is not quite so simple as regards
England, Great Britain has always been opposed to the
rights of neutrals ; and if in 1856 she made a concession
from her old principles, it was solely because she found an
ample compensation in the abolition of letters of marquo.
England, as regarls neutrals, is fully bound towards us
and all tho rowera that adhered to the convention of the

15th of April, 1856. But the United States were not of the
number. The Washington Cabinet refused to admit the
now maxims proclaimed by the Paris Congress, because the
Western Go vernments would not go the whole length in
the path of commercial liberty by decreeing the complete
emancipation of trading vessels in time of war.

" It results from this double situation that England and
the United States have remained, in their reciprocal rela-
tions, under the empire of the ancient maritime law."
The journal des Debats reserves its opinion until
it has studied the question more maturely.