Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1826-04-04

lnaion over its own vessels. As the thea
IRE oil general and common jurisdiction, the YES
sells OF one nation and their commanders have no
right to exercise ever those of another any auho-
rity whatever. This is universally admitted in
time oil peace. War gives the belligerent right
70 pursue his enemy within the jurisdiction com
mon 10 both; but not into the special Jurisdiction
OF the neutral party. II the belgerent has right
70 take the property of his enemy on the seas, the
neutral has a right to carry and protect
inc property OF his friend on the same Gle
inent. WAR gives the belligerert no natural
right to take the property of his enemy from the
vessel OF his friend. But, as the belligerent is
armed, and the neutral, such, is defenceless,
mas grown into usage that the belligerent should
TAKE the property OF his enemy, paying the neutr al
MS freight and submitting the question OF facts
the tribunals OF the belligerent party. 1t is evil
dent, however, that this usage has no foundation
IN natural right, but has arisen merely from force,
used by the belligerent, and which the neutral in
the origin did not resist, because he had not the
power. But 1t is usage, harsh and cruel in its
operation, and unjust in its nature: and il never
iaiis In time OF maritime 10 produce irritation
and animosty between the bellgerent and the neu-
trail So universally has this been found TO be
It's consequence, that all the maritime nations of
modern Europe have shown their sense of it, by
sipuiang III treaties the contrary principle, name
w. mat the property OF an enemy shall be protec-
Tea In the vessel OF friend. Great Britain her
sell, the most unwilling TO admit this principle,
because the most enabled 10 use the force, upon
winch the usage is founded, has recognized the
superior justice and expectancy of the other prin-
ciple, by STIMULATING it distant intervals OF ime
IN two treaties with France; the treaty of Utrecht
anu the treaty OF Commerce, of 1876 In the
ven years war, the King of Prussia resisted the
capture by British vessels of the property of their
enemies, in the vessels oil his subjects then neu-
trais' and made reprisals upon British property
tor such captures. The question was then uti-
mately settled by compromise, under which the
British Government paid large sum of money for
indemnity to the Prussian subjects who had suffer
ed by those captures. The armed neutrality of the
American war is a memorable example OF the tes-
timony by all the civilized nations of the world
to the principle that the protection of all property
excepting contraband of war, on board OF neutral
vessels by neutral force, is OF natural right and
OF this principle there can be no question. If
however, beligerent power, founded upon The
usage which has superseded the natural right
practices the seizure and condemnation of enemy 5
property found in the vessel of friend, il remains
tor the neutral TO decide, whether he will acqu-
e,ce IN the usage, or whether he will maintain his
natural right by force. No neutral nation is bound
submit to the usage: for it has of the proper
ties which can give 10 any usage the sanction oil
obligatory law. II is not reasonable II is not
comfortable TO the law OF nature. II is moi I'm
interrupted. But reduced 10 the option Of main
tanning its right by force, of acquescing in the
disturbance oil il which has been usual the neutral
nation may yield at time 10 The usage, with
out sacrificing her right TO yindicate by force the
security of her flag at another. And the bellige-
rent nation, although disposed TO admit the right
of neuirals to protect the property of her enemy
upon the seas, may yet justly refuse the benefit of
tins principle, unless admitted also by the enemy
for the protection of her property, by the same
neutral flag. Thus stands the state of this ques-
ton upon the foundations Of natural voluntarg,
and customary, law.
How stands ii between US and the Republic of
, Colombia, on the ground of conventional law
BY treaty between the Uuited States and Spain,
!, concluded at time when Colombia was a part
OF the Spanish dominions, and far as the SDa9,-
ash laws would admit, enjoyed the benefit of its
stiPulaiions,he principle that free ships make
tree goods, was expressly recognized and es,ab-
hshed Is 1t asserted, that, by her declaration of
independence, Colombia has been entirely released
from all the obligations, by which, as part OF
the Spanish nation, she bound to other ma
tons This principle is not tenable To all the
engagements oi Spain with other nations, affect
Ing their right and Interests Colombia so far as she
was affected by them, remains bound in honor ant
In justice. The stipulation now referred to i. Of
that character and the United States besides the
natural right of protecting by force in their vessel.
on the seas, the property Of their friends though
enemies OF the Republic of Colombia have the adj.
ditional claim to the benefit OF the principle BIZ an
express compact with Spain, made when Colombis
was Spanish country. Again, by the late treat '
OF 22d February, 1915, between the United States
and Span it is agreed that the 18th article Of the
treaty OF 1895, IN which il is stipulated that tn,
flag shall cover the property, shall be so Under
stood with respect TO those powers who recognize
the principle but, if either of the two CONTRACTING
parties shall be at war with a third party, and tn,
other neutral, the flag Of the neutral shall cover thu
!, property of enemies whose governments acknow
ledge the principle, and not of Others.
5 This treaty having been concluded after the Ter
rltories now composing the Republic of Colon
bia had ceased 10 acknowledge the authority o
spain, they are not parties TO it,, but their rights
and duties In relation to the subiect-matter rensit
as they had existed before it was made Nor viii
she be affected by 1t at all, If she continues 10 &C.
knowledge in her national character, and will
reference TO the United States the principle thai
free ships make free goods, which was the Con
ventionsl law between them, while Colombia wa
part ofSpsin.
You will urge all these considerations upon tb
: Colombian Minister of Foreign Affairs, 10 obair
restitution of the cargo Of the Caravan, or indem
nifty Tor It, The claim rests upon foundations .,
solid, that 1t 10 earnestly hoped your represents
tons IN its favor will be successful and in th
negotiation OF tho treaty you will press in likt
manner tor the insertion of an article Of the sam,
purport as that OF our last treaty with Spain abov,
recited. This principle can with safety be roeoe-
nzed only to that extent and to that extent the
United States would willingly assent TO it will
: every other nation. 1t is principle favorabl,
TO the rights of peace, and Of pacific spirit ant
tendency. II is recommended by every humane
aad liberal consideration, as rule Of uniyersa
application. But the nation which would enjoy
fho han aEf ~ e Il -