Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-06-11
RICHMOND, JUNE II, 1924.
BRITISH CONVENTION.

With Great Britain the slave trade. There are other
facts to be cleaned from preceding
which are necessary to cast further light upon II.
The Resolution of the H. Of which this nego,a-
,on opened passed the oath of Feb is23-and
n is in the following words:
Resolved, That the President of The United States
be requested TO enter upon, and prosecute, from
10 time, such negotiations with the several maritime
powcrs OF Europe aud America, as he may deem ex-
II reden for the e6,ctual abolition of the African
slave trade, and its Ultimate denunca,ion as piracy,
uader the law OF nations, by the Of the civ-
i zeJ world
The letter Of instruction from Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush. di-
rec,ing him to form the Conventions and accompanying
of it, bears date 2ih June is2s-his at
is the only letter PubishedIt assigns other reasons
for carrying on the negotiation, than the following:
Its objects. yOn will distinctly understand,
" are two-fold: Ia carry INTO effect the ResOu-
/" ton of the House of Representatives; and
" TO meet, explicitly and fully, the call so ear,
nesty urged by the British government.
that, in declining the proposals pressed by
" them upon us, of conceding mutual and
qualified right of search, we -hould offer a
" substitute for their consideration
the day. wiz. Oath June s2s Mr. Adams address
letter to Mr. Canning British minister at Washington
from which understand that the March propo
sal lad been made Qhrough Mr. CD to be submitted the
British government, that the prncipe assumed in
OF the Congress of the u. s. OF 18th May 1920
hoP"shng Tue African slave trade piracy should be
adopted the basis of stipulation by treaty between the
Une States and Great Britain urged
upon the adoption Of France and upon maritime
nations of Europe, in the conducive TO its Ill
maie success II was observed that this offer present
cd as Substitute for that OF cencedng mutual right OF
search, and trial by mixed commits TO which the IT,
could not be reconciled, whch would be rendered
useless Nv it, Er A. thea C's reply of the
sih o' Ap removes some of The objections that bad beer
urged by our In
trial OF The captured vessels by re commissions in plac.
OF which the British proposed substitute trial OF the
slave trader by The tribunals OF his country. Mr. A.
adds ih"t tue objections 10 the right Of search as
Incident to the right OF detention capture are also 10
very eonsid rable degree removed lay the of
the principle that neither should be exercised In,
under The responsibility of the capior tribunals
captured party, in damages and costs.n
AIR A. proceeds lin this letter of June 81 1881 n,
folIovs
+" Ia the objections heretofore disclosed to
the concession desired, of the mutual and
qualified right of search, the principal stress
was laid upon the repugnance which such /.
concession would meet i'm the public feeling
ofihis country, and Of those To whom its nte-
rests are entrusted in the department of its Go
vornment, the sanction of which is required
Tor The ratification of treaties. The irri,ating
tendency of the practice of search, and the in
eqnalities ofits probable operation, were slight
ly noticed, and have been contested i'm areu
men or met by propositions of possible pal
llatses, or remedies for anticipated abuses.
Iny"ur letter. But the source and foundation
oil all these objections, III our former cor
rrsp0Ddence. scarcely mentioned and never
discussed. They consist in The nature Of the
right "f search, ~ sea- which, as recognized
or tolerated 10y the usage of natiOns is a RICH,
exclusively OF Udr, never exercised, hut by
an outrage upon the rights of pedce. Ii is AN
act analogous to that ri searching the dwell
ing-houses OF individuals on the land. The
vessel oi the navigator is his dwelling house :
and ike that, IN the sentiment of every PEG
pie that cherishes the blessings of personal Ii
berty and security ought 10 be- a sanctuary,
inviolabie Ia the hand of power, unless upon
the most unequivorai public necessity, and I'm
der the most rigorous personal responsibility
OF me Intruder. Search ut sea. AS Recognized
10y all Y,ariIIme nations, is confined tn the
single object Of finding and taking contraband
OF war. by the law of nature, when two ma
lions conflict together in war, third, remain.
ing neutral retains all its rights of peace and
friendly intercourse with both. Each beIbg-
erent. indeed, acquires, by war, the right OF
preventing a third party from administering to
MS enemy The direct and immediate materia IS
OF war and, az Incidental 10 this right, that
at searching the merchant vessels of the neu-
lie W
limited it is an act Of power, which nothing
hut necessity can lustify, inasmuch as il can
not be exercised, hut by carrying the evils of
war into the abUdes of peace ; and by visit
ing the innocent with some OF the penalties
al guilt. Among the modern maritime ma
ions, an usage has ciept in, not founded up
on The law of nature, never universally admit
Ted, often successfully resisted. and against
which, all have occasionally borne testimony.
ny renouncing il in treaties. of extending this
Practice of search and seizure, TO oil the pro-
perty OF the enemy in the vessel of the friend,
Lbs pfactice Was, IN ITS origin, evidently an
abusive and wrongful extension of the search
for contraband; effected by the belIigerent.
because he was armed submitted to by I'm.
neutral, because he was defenceess and ac-
guessed in by his sovereign, for the sake of
preserving renlnani of peace, rather than
become himself party To the war. Having
thus, occasionally, been practised by all, as
oel'igerenis, and submitted to 10y all as neu-
trails, IL has acquired the force Of an usage,
which, at the occurrence Of. every war, the
belggerent may enforce or felinquish and
which the neutral may suffer or resist, at their
respective options
Such being the view taken Of the right of
Search as recog nizrd by The law Of nations,
and exercised by beIlIgerent powers. il is due
10 candour to state, that my government has
an nsuperabe objection TO its extension by
treaty, ia any manner whatever, les, il might
lead tn consequences still more ipinrious tn
the United States, and especially in the cir
camstance alluded to. That the PROMISED
extension will operate in time Of peace. and
derive IT'S sanction from compact, present no
inducements TO its adoption. On the contra
Fy, they form strong objections TO it. Every
extension Of the right of search on the prin-