The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-01 00:00:00

/47 ../41'1'6{

~~

}.

riTENING SUN.
r end aittion% fit the Man tu4alk ffitAridt— 1.4
Pant violation of the laws of the Onion,
Such things, however, will not happen again,lattetruse-Orders •
ve been given which will prevent their recurretiee4 ,
. But there is au essential and fundamental difference heaven,'
?'-'arching a vessel and examining her papers to sip• whet hershe
is legally provided with documents. entitling her to the protec-
tion of 4tly, country, and especially of the country 'whose t!agshe
may have hoisted atilt! time. For though, by einanuat par-
lance, the nerd flag "is used to express the test of nationality,
and though, according to that acceptation of the word, he;
Majesty's Government admit tha, British cruisers are not en-
titled in time of peace to search merchant vessels sailing under
the American flag, yet her Majesty's Government do not mean
thereby to say that a merchantman can exempt.
.himself from
search by merely hoisting a piece of bunting with the Uni:ed
States emblems and colours upon it; that which her Majesty's
Government means is, that the rights of the United States
flag exempt a vessel from search, , when that vessel is provided
th papers entitling her to wear that fir, and proving her, to
be Unileel States property, anti navigatteraccording to law. -
But this tact cannot be ascertained unless an oaieer.
cruiser, whose fluty it is to ascertain this fact. shall board
of the merchantman shall bring
vessel, or unless the master
his papers on beard the truiser ; and this "examination lot
papers of merchantmen. suspected of being engaged in the
,lave trade, even though they may hoist a United States flag,
is a proceeding which it, is absolutely necessary that British
cruisers eineleyed in the, suppression of the slave trade should
continue to practise, and to•which her Majesty's Government
are fully persuaded that the United States Government can-
not, upcin consideration, object ; because, what would be the
consequence of a contrary practice?
What would be the consequence if a vessel, engaged in the
slave trade, could protect herself from search by merely hoist-
ing a United Slates flag? Why, it is plain tha' in such case
every slave trading pirate, whether Spanish, Portuguese, or
Ilraailian, or English or French, or of whatever na-
tion he might be, would immediately sail under the colours
of the United States ;. every criminal could do that, though
he could not procure genuine American 'papers; and thus
all the treaties concluded among the Christian Powers, for
the suppression of the slave trade, would be rendered a dead
letter. Even the laws of England might be set at defiance by
her own suWects, and the slave trade would be invested with
complete impunity. Her Majesty's Government are persuaded
that the United States' Government cannot maintain a doe-
trirw which would neeessardy,lead to such monstrous conse-
quences; but the undersigned is bound in duty frankly to de.
clare to Mr. Stevenson that to such a doctrine the British Go,
vernment never could or would subscribe.
The cruisers employed by her Majesty's Government for the
suppression or slave trade must ascertain by inspection of pa-
pers the nationality of vessels met with by them under circum-
stances which justify a suspicion that such vessels are engaged
in slave trade, in order that, if such vessels are found to belong
lo a country which has conceded to Great Britain the mutual
right of search, they may be searched accordingly ; and thatif
they be found to belong to a country which, like the United
States, has not conceded that mutual right, they may be allowed
to pass on, free and unexamined, to consummate their hatended
iniquity. Iler Majesty's Government feels convinced that the
United States Government will see the necessity of this course
of proceeding..

lint her Majesty's Goverrm►ent would fain hole that the day
is not far d►stant when the Government of the United States
will cease to ()unfound two thingt which are in their nature
entirely different ; will look to things, and not to words, and
perceiving the wide and entire distinction between that right
of search which has heretofore been a subject ,of discussion be-
tween the two countries, and that right of search which almost
all other Christian nations have mutually given each other for
the suppression of :he slave trade, will
,join the Christian league,
and will no longer permit the ships and subjects of the Unio■
to be engaged in undertakings which the law of the Union
punishes as piracy..

The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to
Mr. Stevenson the assurances of his distinguished consideration.
A. Steverson, Esq., &c. PALMERSTON.

MR. STEVENSON TO LORD ABERDEEN.
.39, Upper Grosvenor-street. Sept. 10, 16.11.
The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Mai.
potentiary from the United States, has the honour to acquaint
the Earl of Aberdeen, her Majesty's Principal Secretary of
State for ;Foreign Affairs, that he has had the honour to
receive the two communications addressed to him by Lord Vis.
count Palmerston, her Majesty's late Principal Secretary of
State fur Foreign Affairs, tinder date of the 27th ultimo, upon
the subject of the improper and harassing conduct. of British
cruisers toward the vessels and flag of the United States in the
African seas. In communicating the decision of her Majesty's
Government upon the claims submitted to its consideration,
it would have given the undersigned great satisfaction to have
represented that decision as one calculated to do justice to the
individual claimants, and in accordance with the just rights
and interests of his country. lie had indulged a confident
hope that the complaints which had been made upon the sub-
ject would have been followed not only by suitable atonement
and reparation, but by an immediate abandonment of the
system of wron', and violence to which the vessels and com-
merce of the United States had been so long exposed, through
the misconduct of British cruisers in the African seas.
This course he had expected; not less from the justice of
her Majesty's Government than the friendly relations subsi,t-
Mg between the two countries.

It is, therefore, with painful surprise and regret that the un-
dersigned now learns from Lord Palmerston's communications,
that these proceedings of her Majesty's el uisers have not only
been approved and justified, and the injuries which ensued to
remain unredressed, but that a right is now asserted by her
Majesty's Government over the vessels and Sig of the United
States, involving high questions of national honour and inte-
rest, of public law, and individual rights.
Having heretofore, iu his correspondence with Lord Palmer-
ston, discussed the merits of these claims and the principles in.
volved in them, and presented the views and expectations of
his Government upon the subject, the undersigned does not
feel it incumbent. upon him, at this time, to ilium again the
general diseustion, or-recapitulate the particular circumstances
by which these cases might justly claim to be distinguished.
Referring Lord Aberdeen to the previous correspondence
which has, taken place, the undersigned will refrain front fur-
ther discussion of the individual cases, and content himself
with a brief examination of those parts of Lord Pahnerston's
notes in ,which a power is, for the first time, distinctly asserted
by her Majesty's Government ever the vessels and flag of the
United States is time of peace, on the high seas. In order to
ascertain the precise nature and character of this new and ex-
traurdinary power, it may be proper to quote those parts of his
Lordship's communicatiou in which it is asserted. They are in
the following words :
" The undersigned begs leave to state to Mr. Stevenson, in
reply to the remarks contained in his last note, that her Ma-
jesty's Government do not pretend that her Majesty's naval
officers have tiny right, to search American merchantmen met
with in 'time of peaee at sea; but there is an essential and
fundamental difference betteeen searching a vessel and exa-
mining her papers to see whether she is legally provided with
documents entitling her to the protection of any country, and
especially of the country whose flag she may have hoisted at the
time. For though, by common parlance the word ' flag' is
used to express the test of nationality, and though, according to
that acceptation of the word, her Majesty's Government ad-
Ida that. British cruisers are not entitled, in time of peace, to
search merchant vessels sailing under the American flag,
yet her Majesty's Government .do not mean thereby to
say that a merchantman can exempt himself from search
by merely hoisting a piece of bunting with the
United States emblems and colours upon .it ; that
which her Majesty's Government mean is, that the
rights of the United States' flag exempt a vessel from
search when that vessel is provided with papers en-
titling her to wear that flag, and proving her to be United
States property, and navigated according to law." And again :
" The cruisers employed by her Majesty's Government for the
suppression of the slave trade, must ascertain, by the inspec-
tion of the papers, the nationality of vessels met with by them
under circumstances which justify a suspicion that such vessels
are engaged in the slave trade, in order that, if such vessels
are found to belong to a country which has conceded to Great
Britain the mutual right of search, they may be searched ac-
cordingly. ; and that, if they be found to belong to a country
which, like the United States, has not conceded that mutual
right, they may be-allowed to 'pass on free and unexamined, to
consummate their intended iniquity."
Here is a direct assertion of a right, on the part of British
cruisers, to board and detain all vessels sailing under the
flag of the United States, whether American or not, for the
purpose of ascertaining, by an examination of their papers,
their national character, and deciding whether they ate en-
titled to tile protection of the flag of the country under which
they sail. Now, it is proper to remark that the attempt
which his leirdship makes to distinguish between the i ight of
search (a right, however, which he disclaims) and that which
he asserts, is wholly fictitious. They are essentially the same
for all the purposes of the present discussion. Indeed, the
right to board, detain, and decide upon the national character
01 vessels navigating the ocean in time of, peace, may justly
be regarded as more odious and insulting, anti giving place to
wider and more important injuries than the right of search,
which is put tily a belligerent right, and cannot be enforced in
time of peace. But if the distinction was admitted to be a
sound one, yet nothing would be gained in support of the
right which Lord Palmerston claims for her Majesty's Govern-
ment. The inquiry must ;till arise, whether a power even of
visitation or detention can be rightfully and lawfully exercised
by one 11:u ion over the ships of another in time of race upon
the high seas. That it eannet the undersigned wt 1 now pro-
ceed briefly to show.
And first, as to the principles of public law and the usage
of nations. By these it is expressly declared that the ves-
els of ail nations, in time of peace, navigating the ocean
hall be exempt from every species and purpose of interrup-
tion, and detention, unless engaged in some traffic contrary
to the law of nations, or expressly provided for by treaty
and compact. Now, although piracy is admitted to be an
offecce against the public law, and therefore punishable in
every country and by every nation, no matter where com-
mitted, it must yet be borne in mind that all piracies are not
offences against the law of nations Piracy, therefore, by
international law, and that which may be made so by the
municipal law of particular States, are essentially of a dif-
ferent character, and to be treated accordingly. Hence it is
that offences declared to be piracy ky the municipal laws of
any State can only Le tried and punished by the country
within whtee jurisdiction, or on board of whose ships on
the ocean, the offence may have been committed. Now,
slave trade is not. cognizable under the law of nations. Al-
though prohibited by most nations, and declared to be
piracy by their laws, and especially by the statutes of Great
Britain and the United States, it is yet not an °llene.
against the public law, and its interdiction cannot be en-
forced by the ordinary right of visitation, detention, or search,
in the manner that it might be if it was piracy by the law of
oations. That this is the acknowledged doctrine of interna-
tional law cannot, it is presumed, be doubted. It is so ex •
pressly declared by all writers upon the law of nations, and has
been acknowledged by the British Government, through its
highest judicial tribunals. Her annals are full of instruction
on the subject. The following is the language held by one of
her most distiuguished jurists

.. .
“ We are disposed to go as far in discountenancing this odious
traffic as the law of nations and the principles recognised by
English titbunals will allow us in doing; but. Le3ond these
principles we do not feel at liberty to travel. Formal decla-
ratiuns have been made and laws enacted in reprobation of this
practice, and plans, ably and zealously conducted; have been
taken to induce other countries to follow our example, but at
present with insufficient effect. ; for there are nations which ad-
here to the practice, under all the encouragement which their
own laws give. What is, ;hen, the doctrine of our own
Courts, of the laws of nations? AVhy, that this practice is to
be respected ; the slaves, if taken, to be restored to their
owners ; and, if not taken under innocent mistake, to be re-
stored with costs and damages." Again : "It would be,
indeed, a most uxtravagant assumption, in any
Court
ofthe
law of nations, to pronounce that. this practice, the tolerated,
the approved, the encouraged object of law, ever since man
became subject to law, was legally criminal."
?to
(contendntlie a
e i.
thetm
leak,'
vt
theDstl'ae:eht(iradiCi aiiseestt,ln'tsrarGyot'.o.
forbidden it, and, consequently, no right g
lorvriamtieo:
iven to any one
, is not the trade lawful to all Governments. who have not
nation over the slave ships of another in time of peace, inde-
pendent of express treaty kt ipulal 1.„„, by which the extent of
the power io be exercised must be
regulated. The right,
then, which Lord Palmerston asserts derives no support from
the principles of the public law, but is left to stand upon the
grounds of expediency and necessity as the means of executing
the existit ',,, treaties for the suppression of the slave trade, and
without which his Lordship asserts they would become a dead
letter. Whether this be so or not the undersigned has no