The Sun.
London, England, 1861-12-11 00:00:00

THIS DA.I'S SHIPPING.

LONDON, Dec. 11.—Wind this day at noon —South-
Westerly ; strong breeze and fine weather.
CARDIFF, Dec. 10.—Wind S.W.— Sailed—Transit, for
Callao.

QUEENSTOWN, Dec. 11.—Wind W.S.W.—Arrived—
Elna, steamer, from New York.
PENARTH, Dec. 10.—Wind W.—Arrived—Mountaineer,
from Miramichi.

CLYDE, :Dec. 9.—Wind Ni..S.W.—Arrivetl—Princess
Royal, from Quebec.

OFF DIRTMOUT 4, Dec, 9,—Arrived—Edmond, from
Bremen for New York.

PLYMOUTH, Dec. 10 --Wind S.W.—Arriv. cl—Meb
bourne, screw steamer, from Woolwich for North America
Her Majesty's ship Hero, from Portsmouth for Halifax,
Saited—ller Najeaty'a ship Orpheus, for Halifax,

THE TRENT AFFAIR.

TO THE EDITOR OF TAR SUN.

Sir,—Any one conversant with British history
and the principles maintained by the British Go-
vernment previous to the declaration of the Con-
gress of Plenipotentiaries at Paris on the 26th
of April, 1856, must be surprised to see the
overheated excitement and warlike preparation
which have pervaded England since the receipt of
the news of the arrest, on board of the Trent, by
the commander of the San Jacinto, of Messrs.
Slidell and Mason, the Commissioners named by the
revolutionary party in the United States to repre-
sent it in Great Britain and France; and the sur-
prise is not lessened by the knowledge that the act
complained of as an offence to the British flag was
the exercise of an acknowledged belligerent right,
and ono heretofore carried to the utmost extreme
by Great Britain.

Towards the close of the last and the begin-
ning of the present century, the British Govern-
ment acted with the most unscrupulous severity
towards neutrals, and, indeed, may be said not
to have paid any regard to their rights or to
the declarations and protests of neutral Powers.
Accumulated proofs may be found in works on in-
ternational law, and many cases may be cited to
show the inconsistency between the policy of the
British Cabinet at that time and the course it is
now pursuing towards the United States.
The present question may be reduced to two
points :

1. Was the commander of the San Jacinto justi-
fied in visiting the Trent on the high seas ?
2. Can the persons taken out of the Trent be
legitimately considered as contraband of war ?
In time of war every vessel met on the high
seas by a ship of war of a belligerent is
held to be an enemy, whatever may be the flag she
wears, until her real character is ascertained ; and
even after showing that she is neutral she must ex-
hibit proof that she is not engaged in any commerce
made illicit by the state of war. This is the founda-
tion of the right of search, and according to the
hest authorities it is not the exercise of any act of
jurisdiction over neutral vessels, but one of neces-
sary precaution, based upon the right of self-pre-
servation. With respect to this right no nation has
carried its pretension so far as Great Britain, for
during the wars growing out of the first French
Revolution the British Government went to the
extreme of insisting that even neutral vessels under
convoy of a man of war were not exempt from
search, and that resistance on the part of the con-
voying ship to the visit and examination of the
vessels under its escort would be regarded as a
hostile act. The enforcement of this pretension in

1799 gavo rise to serious questions between Great
Britain and Sweden and Denmark.

This police of the seas was not confined to a
search for articles evidently contraband of war, but
extended to impressing British subjects from on
board of neutral vessels, on the ground that his
Majesty's subjects were bound to serve him in time
of war. The American Government, after protest-
ing against the repeated encroachments made by
Great Britain upon its rights as a neutral, instructed
its Minister at London to opea a negotiation upon
the subject, and to propose that no person should
be taken out of a vessel belonging to either party
unless he should be in the military service of the
enemy. The British Government rejected this pro.
position, upon the ground that it would afford
facilities for the escape of traitors. Several modifi-
cations were proposed by the United States, all of
which were objected to by Great Britain, and the
persistence of the latter in her vexatious exactions
finally led to war between the two countries.
The right of search or visitation of neutrals by
a belligerent, under proper restrictions, is not dis-
puted by the United States, as may be seen in their
treaties with France, Spain, Prussia, Sto., where
the right is expressly admitted, the manner of
making the search regulated, the articles which
shall be deemed contraband defined, and the manner
of disposing of them stipulated.
The right in a belligerent to visit neutral vessels
to ascertain their character and the nature of their
cargo being recognised, it is clear that the com-
mander of the San Jacinto was fully justifiable in
bringing to the Trent for the purpose of visitation.
I shall now examine whether the persons taken
out of the Trent can be considered as contraband of
war.

The term "contraband of war" is generally under-
stood to mean arms, munitions of war, naval stores,
and other articles prepared and formed to make
war, by land or by sea. It also comprehends officers
or other persons in the service of the enemy, and
despatches, bills of exchange, &c., sent from or to
an enemy.

Respecting Messrs. Slidell and Mason, there was
no doubt of the purpose for which they embarked on
board of the Trent. The object of their mission to
Europe was well known; they were not coming out
in a private capacity, but were invested with as
much official character as could be given by a re-
volutionary party, and as such clearly contraband
in every proper acceptation of the term. They were
so according to the principles of international law,
and, as far as Great Britain is concerned, doubly
so under the Queen's Proclamation.

The carrying of military or civil officers of the
enemy is much more dangerous than the transport of
merchandise contraband of war, as the latter may, ii
some sort, be considered as a commercial transaction,
and the vessel engaged in carrying such officers
loses her neutral character, and the other belligerent
has the perfect right to treat her as an enemy. So
also with regard to spemies' despatches carried by
a neutral, according to Sir William Scott, who said
that by the transmission of a single despatch the
entire plan of a campaign might be revealed and
all the plans of the other belligerents counteracted.
If, in practice, the contraband articles transported
must be in large quantities in order to constitute
an offence, the same rule will not apply to des-
patches. "It is impossible to limit a letter to so
small a size as not to be capable of producing the
most important consequences." The transmission
of despatches is a service which, in whatever degree
it exists, can only be considered in one character, as
an act of the most injurious and hostile nature. The
ship which carries them should be confiscated.

{Case of the " Atlantic," Robinson's Reports.]
Tho fact of carrying the despatches of an enemy
by a neutral vessel being an offence of such gravity
as to involve her confiscation, it follows that the

transport of the bearers of them is one of greater
magnitude, and the injurious nature of the act is
enhanced where the object of them is to invest their
bearers with a representative character, to enable
them to labour for the destruction of the Govern-
ment and even the political existence of the other
belligerent.
Messrs. Slidell and Mason were therefore contra-
band, and their character of emissaries of the re-
volted States could not be invoked to entitle them
to the protection of the law of nations ; for, accord-
ing to Sir Wm. Scott (Lord Stowell), in the case of
the " Caroline," and other authorities of note, a
belligerent may " stop the ambassador of his enemy
on his passage."
The right to arrest them is not to be denied by
the legal advisers of the Crown (if their opinion in
the matter has been correctly reported by the
press), since their objections are based principally
on the fact, that the commander of the San Jacinto
took Messrs. Slidell and Mason immediately out of
the Trent, instead of sending her to the nearest
convenient port for adjudication. This objection
might have been valid had the contraband con-
sisted of arms, &c., in such large quantity or bulk
as not to have admitted of being conveniently
transferred to the visiting vessel. Such, at least,
is the principle laid down in the treaties between
the United States and other nations; wherein it is
stipulated that " no neutral vessel shall be detained
on the high seas on account of her having on board
articles of contraband, whenever the master, cap-
tain, or supercargo will deliver the articles of
contraband to the captor, unless, indeed, the quan-
tity of such articles be so great or of so large bulk
that they cannot be received on board the capturing
vessel without great inconvenience ; but in this case
and all others of just detention the vessel detained
shall be sent to the nearest and safe port for trial
and judgment, according to law."
The inference to be drawn from the words in the

above and other clauses relating to the visitation of
neutral vessels and contraband, in time of war, in.
the treaties concluded by the United States is, that
the object of the contracting parties was to pre-
vent inconvenience or the detention of the visited
ship, and the stipulation just cited is intended to
apply to articles of bulk, such r,as arms, &c,, rather
than to officers or persons in the actual service of
the enemy. Where, then, the latter are found on
board of a neutral vessel, by a ship of war of a belli-
gerent, there can be no question of bulk; and the
captain of the Trent should have delivered up
such persons without demur. As he did not do so
Captain Wilkes would have been justified in tak-
ing the Trent to the United States for trial but
he, no doubt, preferred removing them and permit-
ting the vessel to continue her voyage in the inte-
rest of the public, as the detention of the mails
would have caused great inconvenience to the com-
mercial community in Great Britain and elsewhere.
The justice of regarding this act of forbearance
and good will on the part of the American com-
mander as an encroachment on the neutral right of
Great Britain, or of making it the ground of a
formal reclamation against the United States, may
very well be doubted. It would seem, indeed, that
the real wrong was in the captain of the merchant
steamer receiving on board persons notoriously in
the employment of the revolted States, thereby
committing a flagrant breach of neutrality, and
acting in direct contravention of the injunctions of
his Sovereign. Surely if the captain of a British
steamer chose to receive such passengers on board
neither his owners nor his Government can reason-
ably complain of their extradition by a national
vessel of the United States.

It is novel to see the British Government appear
as the staunch advocate of neutral rights after so
many years of neutral policy; and it will be
equally inionsistent, after so many years of cruising
and so great an amount of treasure being spent in
the suppression of the slave trade, to see the stan-
dard of St. George wave side by side with the Pal-
metto flag for the protection and encouragement of
the demoralising institution."
I have the honour to he,
Your obedient servant,
J. RANDOLPH CLAY,
Formerly Charge d'Affairs of the United
States at St. Petersburg and Vienna,
and Envoy, &c.., to Peru.
Cheltenham, Dec. 6.

ELECTION INTELLIGENCE.

BIRKENHEAD.

The polling of voters for Birkenhead commenced
yesterday morning, and was carried on with great
spirit during the early part of the day. Almost
from the first the voting was strongly in favour of
Mr. Laird, and up to midday his majority continued
steadily on the increase. Between 1 and 3 o'clock
a pause in the increase took place, and the majority
was comparatively reduced, but not to an extent
which could justify any reasonable expectation of
the return of Mr. Brassey. At 3 o'clock the num-
bers stood—for Mr. Laird, 1,612 ; for Mr. Brassey,
1,309, giving a majority of 303 for Mr. Laird. At
4 o'clock, when the poll closed, the numbers stood,
Laird, 1,661 ; Brassey, 1,338, giving a clear majority
of 323 for the former. Throughout the day business
of almost every kind was at a stand. The streets,
particularly near the polling stations, were crowded
with persons of all ranks, evidently much interested
in the result of the election. In Liverpool great in-
terest was also experienced in connection with the
Birkenhead proceedings, and all through the day a
great crowd was collected in front of the Liverpool
Albion office, where hourly returns of the state of th::
poll were exhibited. In Birkenhead, up to the close
of the voting, everything was conducted in an or-
derly and creditable way, although it cannot be
denied that the 'public-houses in the leading tho-
roughfares continued to drive a brisk trade during
the day.