The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-01-05
EUROPE.
FROM BELLS LONDON WEEKLY MEsSEN-

1 ,,
iumns of our daily journals have identified with
discussions respecting the policy of the mea-
| sure, and the controversy has been carried on
with so much spirit and real talent, that it
would seem as il such as are more immediate
| iy concerned in the popularity of this act had
appeared to defend it. and that, under the
disguise of newspaper discussion, the official
| language Of both parties had been promulgat-
| ed.
1t is commended by some that the object of
the kings proclamation is direct disavowal
OF the right take British seamen BY violence
troIhEhe ships OF any neutral state; that it
issan impolitic restriction of our right of
search; submission of our honor a renun-
l'ClaIon OF the dominion of the seas.
Such as hold the contrary opinion justify
the proclamation upon the grounds of natural
Justice, and the usage and equity of national
law. 1t here that their opponents turn up
ON them. They demandin tone of triumph,
what is national law' They deny either it's
existence or its obligations.
being thus obstructed upon the threshold
| OF the inquiry, It is incumbent upon us to
meet this question in the teeth What me ans
the law of nationsa How can there be a law
between independent statese What are its
obllgatons! Where its sanctions' And
where the penalties of its violation?
Undoubtedly we have not in Europe, as was
formerly insGrecce, general Amphictyonic
council, the arbter of states, which is autho-
riSed to decide their mutual appeals and de-
nounce the torrcrs of an universe! confederacv
upon such states as dare to disobey them
Eut the answer to this apparently formidable
Objection is found in the reflection, that the
law OF nations is originally no more than the
law OF nature applied to nations. 1t has then
the sanction. the obligation, the immutability
the q n &c 10, oil
requisites, characteristics, and ccncomitants.
Generally speaking, the duties of states and
individuals are the same, notwithstanding the
diversity which takes place in the application
Oh the law OF nature to states and individuals,
has given rise to such different codes of du-
ties and rights that the iurists have rot
thought proper to blend them in the same
EtSeatises, or to apply to them similar max
That these rights and duties are occasion
| ally violated by the hand of power, is no ar
gument against their existence or obligation
Let the cbjeCtor recoilect, that he makes
practice the criterion CT right, or denies its
distinction from wrong. Is there then no diff
terence between right or wrong, between
truth and falsehood, justice and iniouity |?
such questions can never be seriously agitat-
ed. On the foundations of the obligation we
may differ; on its existence every heart will
unite.
In the last century, the disputes about mare
cLaN8H1n ct hberEm engrossed the attention of
all Europe. They were occasioned by the
claim OF the English to the dominion OF the
neighboring seas, even as far as the opposite
coasts; claim which could have been foun-
ded only in treaty, and if it rested merely on
use, was supported solely by power. The Ii
cence of Q. 3. it was pretended, was the sole
Key to the navigation OF those seas.-The
! claim was as eXtravagart as it was naughty.
| he sea, at least out of cannon shot, was com
mon to all--yet claim so preposterous was
supported by Selden, and it required, at that
time, combination from the pens OF Grotius and
BynkcrshoGk
1t should seem as if we were now agitating
the same claim, and having increased our ar
rogance with our power, are resolved to decide
according the maxim of the latter Let us
ask then, what's meant by the dominion of the
seas! IF it be meant that particular res
pect to the British flag, respect which the
particular treaties conccde, or which the con-
sent OF Europe grants to our undisputed SUI
periorlty in the four seas, this is species of
dominion which we do not mean toimpeach
sovereignty of this sort long NAV we pre-
serve. But if it be meant that we should APP
propriate to ourselves, one # the elements of
our common nature; that we should turn into
a particular possession what was given for n
Common use, if it be meant that seas were
poured forth, and oceans rolled for the advan-
tagc and sole benefit of small island In the
Atlantic which fills so inconsderable space
III the map Of the world--if the bounty of
providence, in bestowing this second element
OF his creation, Ire construed as intended sole
ly for the limited ENJOYMENT of G.. 3. to the
exclusion ofthe rest Of his creatures--if this,
we say, be meantby our dominion Of the seas,
! 1t is species of arrogance, 10 which the pride
OF Spain was stranger.
in the name of Heaven, arc VIC fallen 50 far
back into the days ofignorance and bigotry, as
to found our notions of property, upon claims
such as these The sea is meant as the high
road for the intercourse Of natious, as one Of
the elements Of our common nature, which
one has ds good right to enjoy as another
meant for all, and contributing to the perfec-
ton and growth Of all inexhaustible, and
| large enough for all, and therefore to be pos
sessed by all in word, we enjoy it bv title
Of a grayer kind from the immediate will Of the
creator himself, in which each, as tenant in
common, has at once his property in part, and
his right in an unseverablc whole.
Nothing Dy the laws ofnaturc can becsme
properly which IS not capable of occupancy OF
possession, or Of which the enjoyment, BY the
admission CT "a common right, would be utter.
| ly prcciuded or DESTROYED. A right OF fishe
ry IS allowed in particular seas to particular