Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1840-04-16
NO. H..
SPEECH OF MR.. CALHOUN.
or SOUTH CAROLINA.

March 13, the following resolutions, sub:
mitted by Mr.. Calhoun on the 4th Of the
same month were taken up: -.
Resol,ed, That ship or vessel on tho
high seas, in time ofpeace, engaged in u
lawful voyage, is, according TO the laws Of
nations, under tho exclusive Jurisdiction
of the State to which her flag belongs, as
ifconstiu,ing part of its own domain. :.
RESOLVED, That if suck ship or vessel
should be forced. by stress of weather or
other unavoidable cause, into the port of a
friendly power, she would, under the same
laws, lose none Of the rights appertaining
to her on the high seas, but, on the con-:
trary, she and her cargo; and persons on
board, with their personal relations, AK
established by the laws Of the State to
which they belong, would be under the
protection which the laws Of nations exi
tended 10 the unfortunate under such CIR
cumstances.
Resolred, That the brig Enterprise,
which was forced unavoidably by stress Of
weather into Port Hamilton, Bermuda
Island, while on lawful voyage on tho
high seas from one part OF the Union to-
another comes within The priciples embraJ
ced in the foregoing resolutions; and thar
the seizure and detention of the negroes
on board by the local authorities Of the
island was an act in violation Of the laws.
of nations, and highly unjust 10 our citi-
zens to whom they belong. ..'j.,a
The resolutions having been read,
Mr.. CALHOUN said: The case refer
rcd to in these resolutions is one of the
three which has been for so long a poriod
a subject Of negotiation between our Cow
ernment and that of Grea, Britain, wilhour.
however. receiving the attention which; in.
my opinion, is due to the importance Of
the principle involved. The other two
were these of the Comet and Encomium:.
In order 10 have a clear understanding Of
the bearing of these resolutions, and tho
principles they embrace, it will be neces.'
sary 10 givea brief narrative of each of
these cases. - ,. 80
The Comet is the first in order of time.
She sailed from this District in the latter
part Of the year 1880, destined for New
Orleans, having, among other things, 4.
number of negroes on board. Her papers.
were regular, and the voyage in all re-
spee.sl~sUfui.- She was stranded on oIit,.
Of the false keys Of the Bahama island, on
posite 10 the coast of Florida, and almost
in sight Of our own shores. The persons
on board, including the degrees, were taken
by The wreckers, against the remonsiraee
of the captain and owners, into Nassaui
New Providence, where the negroes were
forcibly seized and detained by the local
authorities.
The owners Of the negroes, after apply
ing in vain 10 the local authorities for their
surrender, made application TO the Gov
ernment for redress Of finjury; aud the re-
suit, after ten years negotiation, is, tha.
the British Government has agreed to COM
pensate the owners of the Comet and En-
comium, on the ground that these cases
occurred before the act for the abolition Of
in her colonies had gone into operation,
and refused compensation in the case of
the Enterprise because it occurred after
wards.
Such are the material facts drawn from
the correspondence ITSELF and admitted in
the course of the negotiation. What
propose, in the first place, is to show that
the principle, on which compensation was
allowed in the cases Of the Comet and.
Encomium, embraces also that ofthe En-
lerprise; that no discrimination whatever
eau be made between them; and thar in
attempting 10 make discrimination, tho
British Minister has assumed tho verv
point in controversy, or, to express it in
more familiar language, has hegged tho
question. shall rest my argument excfu-
sively on the admissions necessarily invol-
we'd in the two cases, without looking 10
any other authority. They will be found,
i'll do not greatly mistake, ample of them
selves for my purpose.
What, then, is The principle necessarily
involved. in showing compensation in those
cases! 1t will not be necessary 10 show
that the allowance was not mere act Of
gratuity 10 our citizens. No one will sus-s
pect that. 1t was, on the contrary, reluc-
lanlly yielded, after years of negotiation,
only on the conviction that the rights Of
our citizens in the negroes could no longer
be disputed, and, Of course, the Injustice Of
their seizure and detention. This brings
me to question of vital importance in
this discussion, to which [ must ask tho.
Senate 10 give me its fixed attention; and
that is, On what did this right of our citi-,
zens to the negroes rest? Not certainly
on the British laws, either expressed or
implied. So far otherwise, they expressly
prohibited, in the broadest and most uu-
qualified terms, persons from being brought
in, or retained as slaves, under heavy PEN
atty and forfeiture of property; declared
the persons offending 10 be felons and sub
jec,ed them to be transported beyond sea,
or to be confined and kept at hard labor for
a term ofyears.s But one answer can be
given to the question; that it rested on the
laws of their own country. 1t was onJv
by them they could possibly have right
to the negroes. And here we meet the
vital queslion--how is it ,ha. a igb, rest-
inr on our laws should be valid and