The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-05-09

the treaties were concluded on this jaas.--
And yet. say these litera,i of Baltimore, this
rule was never dreamt of fiI the armed
neutrality in 1882.
Busch has published list of THRU fpc
commercial treaties, concluded between the
years 1872 and 1850, which are all favorable
to this principle, while OH the contrary, oniy
f7vo have been concluded in that interval, in
which the opposite one has been followed.
These are the treaties of Great Britain in
1901, with Denmark, and in 1870, with Swe-
den. Since 1880, up to the period at which
Schlegel wrote, there were IS treaties.
which acknowledged the proud preregative
OF tile neutral flag. This list is annexed to
his work. He cites only the treaty between
u. Britain and the U. States, as an instance
to the contrary. Our subsequent treaties
with Prussia and France, are also to be adj
ded. To which side then does the scale
Ipreponderate Which principle is the ge-
neral rnle, which the ercehion? Surely
IJndging from the prevalence and prepontle
rance OF customs, there can be no doubt on
the subject
Nay the English themselves. those mighty
lords OF the ocean, have been known to az
cede to this doctrine. Nav, gentlemen. do
not thus start and rub your ewes. We re-
peat the assertion-your favorite England
herself refutes your position. AS early as
the middle of the 18th century, they esta-
lblshcu, by formal treaty, the rights of the
neutral flag, as may be seen BY the treaties
| OF Edward III. with the commercial cities
OF Spain III 1851, AMI afterwards with Lisbon
ana Oporto towards the middle of the 18th
century Ofthe same description are seve
raj others concluded by England, such as
those with France in 1865, 1T, 1713. 40,
/ .ll fh,sl Dc tpF . ~,
those with the United Provinces in 1868 and
| "a, and lastly, the commercial treaties with
the Porte and the Barbary powers"
| But saws the Editor of the American CT
tlzen " not writer on the law of nations
acknowledges" H. Is it so? What then
becomes OF the writer's quoted by Schlegel !
| Where is liubncr, or de Steck, Gallant.
i-ampredi, Hennigs, Busch, or Martens /:
writer's of different countries, but who have
all united their voices in favour of this pr;n-
ciple?
| Such is the conventional law of nations
ana now stands the natural law If that
law De founded on reason and general uGkity
III to preserve nations from the ravages of
wars in which they are not engaged. if to
marrow the sphere of those ravages, and to
eA'end the limits of peace, be agreeable both
to reason, utility and philanthropy-th re-
lauons OF nentrals to belligerents ought to
be marked ont by this principle Nsa.fsis
VIII always be more or less subject to the
turmoils Of war, until their bottoms can be
saved from the harrassing prosecutions
which the contrary rule brings along with it
1t is their interest, therefore it is peculiarly
that OF the U. States, to establish this prin-
ciple in all practicable cases.
We do not say, that no treaty is to be m ade
either with France or Great Britain, which
does not recognize it. Judging from the pre-
sent state III maritime nations, il is not EASY
to expect its estabishmentin all sr i'm most ca
Ses-nOr should it stand in the way of a yer,
favorable adjustmentin other repects. But
wherever we can, let us not loose sight of it
The two great acknowledged restriction:
upon the liberty of neutraIs, as established
by the law OF nations, are those as to contra
oanG OF war and regular blockade. AS to G
nemy's goods being free or not in thei bot
toms. the practice has been more variable
but besides these restrictions, the British
assumed right of pressing seamen out of oln
vessels on the seas, is now, unauthorized
and ought to be resisted. 1t falls not unde,
either of these three restrictinns-In the
approaching negotiation with England. We
have no doubt that our government is suffici
emily impressed with the Importance of tbi.
point, to attempt to make some practical
provision for the safety of our scamen.-Thi.
is our creed. fthere are branches of trade
not connected with the natural direct trade
of this country, which are brought into dis
pute along withit let us modify any one q
these rather than abandon our brave and en-
terprising tars