Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-12-21

ton, ~hIch that nation had an acknpwl.dg.5 :. =
enact. How long IS Il since such an ,o,r,-
Of tie local laws was deemed in Great p,,.
sistent with the unchangcaJlc laws Of n.,.'
Are the principles Of the international co nl."s
ed BY the enactments OF particular States. y''
day, foreigner protected in his oct,o..I :
property in slaves IN the British IVES, lpd;.s
his property in slaves is denied. The law ~. :.
the same; but Great Britain has changed is coa.
the year 1875, when Spain possessed Flo,,da
Great Britain the Cnrollnas, the retention AMI I.
ton of slaves who fled from the British 10 ,ls ''
territory was complained of by the Govern, -
Carolina, acting The special comnlssaer oe,t |.
as ga breach Of National honor and fam" IN u.
of Spain, Notwithstanding in all snch cases ro,',
ton was promised By decree of the k,ng ~ :
to the owner of The property he had lost n NJ =
sent day Great Britain wress slaves from ,h.i, -, .
when driven into her ports by stress OF wealth.
MES all compensation, and declares tina, ~ y,
for slaves will be entertained, who cone md,
circumstances, into British territory Can H., =
iestys Government repose securely upon ! ~,
pc, which gives birth 10 such practical incon
and contradictions" We are very much FEM
make comments upon this new and sia,,l.
stance of the naughty injustice o! the British -,
but want of space !orblds il, and indeed c,,,
would be supeFiluous. Leaving It, therefore ws,
with our extract "The President is al 4 H.
prehcnd the distinction taken by Lord PaIm.r>,.,
tween the property and the persons OF a >l,no..'
vessel within the British territory. The f,st ga
ted to be beyond the control Of The local Ian. III
Of distress is thrown over the properly: il ! ~; "
the laws ofrevenue and coniscation However
in other vessels, articles prohibited under penalr,
iscaton of vessel and cargo, and line aud lmDr,s,
of all on board, are taken rs 4 sacred charrn ~,
keeping, as it were, Of the Government t,elf l,,,I
persons board held 10 be subject 10 local ,,,
the relations between them are 10 be a>cerianedl
ference to English rules alone, independent, 4, I
laws OF their own country, by which these f.Il,
were before their entrance into The British ,e,,,
driincd and regulated. THIS position Is conster.i
more extraordinary when il Is remembered. H.,
persons on board former vessel entering yo!ua.a,
commercial purposes or convenience INTO m H.
port not subject 10 the same extent 10 the n,al
as The property on board; and that when questions,
rs to previously existing obligations between such II
sons they are decided by the laws Of their own com
and not by the English code THIS position i !. !
clearly proved--but as II will readily be admitted y
omit the notwithstanding ourselves with ,a., 1;
the concluding sentence Of i, IN which il j. i.
"Would the laws of c. Britain deny 10 the master ~.
SION Of the apprentice cr sailor Tor the purpose ii ca
ng the inlhlment of the obligation 10 which h. NJ
hound: Would they deny the officer 81 Govern :
the eonscript or enlisted soldier |! there saorl Il
hesitation III answering these inquiries, the rrpy 4
be found III the history Of English jurisprudence
Inc eyIl consequences 81 the doctrines ~ i
British authorities exposed in n mastery man 4
One Of the evil consequences predicted have alr-.,
been realized in the of the Crc0e Ii pre
that the protection given 10 the slaves IN the
Enterprise, "would be the strongest mdncemcnt l.
flight or abduction of slases BY t,a@d or i'm, ,t
their masters" Was ever prediction more u'e. "A
fulfilled: In less than three years after the public III
Of the correspondence between our Government
Great Britain, in relation 10 the Of the Enter
- Zl.i.- A. a -
pose Of the British Government 10 afford then "a
teciIon and by forcc-By instruction and murtsf III
cause themselves 10 be taken into British ror. sl
claim the protection of the British authorities, 81
we have seen, was virtually promised them 0 \
vance. HI
The pretensions of the British Governmeu'
met by MIR. Stevenson IN very able aud spirited IA
ner, as they were made known, even beiy.se1
had received instructions from his Government, >,
be seen by his note Of the 18th OF January l-37 "a
sequenty under instructions from Washington he 4
the long and conclusive reply 10 which We have 4
referred. To this Lord Palmerston rrjoned under b
llth of December, 1897. On the I'D Of the II
month, Mr. Stevenson sub-rejolncd and IN 50 able h
satisfactory manner, that shall lay tie whole ~
before our readers III our next paper.
After it was found that, under the existing stag
things no redress would be extended 10 III the !
of the Enterprise, or in any similar case our Coz
ment proposed 10 enter INTO conventional ara
ment by which the recurrence Of similar comply
might be prevented in future. BIT The English
vernment refused Ia treat upon the subject -
quenly MIR. Stevenson had correspondence
Lord Palmerstcn, in relation 10 the terms upon
The caims admitted 10 be just in the cases Of Tie
and Encomium should be settled. Mr.. SieseGl
part Of the correspondence IS conducted with 4
great ability. But as the questions discussed nj
some extent are of legal character, which wor
undressing TO the general reader, we torbcar .
any comments or extracts
The case Of the Creoic Will renew the discuss
the delicate questions involved IN the correspo"c4
which we have been noticing. II is true, the q.
the Creole differs, and 10 that extent stronger
on our side, from either Of the other eases.
In the case Of the Creole, our Government wl.l
only demand the restitution OF the slaves, upoaS
ground that they are property illegally rcscu'c4
their owners; but they viii be demanded a m
felons. The Creole belonging 10 Virginia, a %,
she upon the high seas, she was within the
diction alone of this country, and oil crimes comn
on board were offences against our laws. All
negroes, therefore, who actually or construcye1
ticipated in the murder on board, are ieons untt1
law The right, however, of one nation 10 d.
and the reciprocal obligation OF another 10 surren
gitives from justice, an unsettled question Of o.
Law The best opinion, both III this country
Great Britain is, that III all offences OF an at
character, affecting the peace and good order q
", the right TO demand ana the reciprocal oul-ik
deliver exists independent OF any treaty s,lpG
In the case of Uashbura, Chancellor Kent
York, admitted the obligation to surrender, y
in which the British authorities Of Canada, y
demandants. In the treaty Of 49, there ga
pulation for the surrender, by both parties II 4
fugitves charged with murder or forgery
treaty has expired, and il is believed that a smt
vision is not TO BE- found in any subsequent one
will rest upon our Government to vIndicate or
and we, at least cannot regard il as fortunate r
stance, that the duty Of doing II val dero.''
Messrs. Daniel Webster and Edward Everett \
additional.
We subjoin from an article IN the Mobile
and Journal the following extracts:
"These negotiations are sill pending. W
that the late minister 10 England pressed ine,e
strongly upon the British Government, but al'-
concession of the rights reclaimed. II
ain view Of this case, there was IN The lasi III
an unanimous expression OF opinion N the Y. , vi
in the form OF resolutions, TO lie following Ell
"That vessels the high seas, are as en'3
under the jurisdiction Of the State 10 which u
belongs, as il part Of The domain. IA
"That if forced by stress Of weather or other n
able cause, into friendly port, they nre untr;
lection Of the law Of nations with all the rish' III
perty and persons, As established IN the State
she belongs
"And that The Enterprise came within the~
pies; and her seizure, and the SEIZURE OF Tie NJ 4
an act Of violation oil the law OF nations, al
furious TO our own citizens.
"Since that tune, another case has bcca aa'
Hermosa, from Richmond, Va, 10 New "