The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1836-1851, 1842-05-04
From The Washington Globe.
THE RIGHT OF SEARCH ABANDONED
BY GREAT BRITAIN.

the right CT search, in reply to Mr.. Sievenson's
lost rommunication previous to his departure
from ENGLAND After d!sclaimlng, on the part
of the present ministry, any responsibility for
the grounds assumed by Viscount Famerston,
and requesting ";hat his doctrine; upon this sub
iect, and those of the Government OF which he is
The orqan, may lie Judged of exclusively from his
own declarations" his lcrlship says: "fhe
undersigned aIain rcnounces, rs he has already
done in The most explicit terms, any right, Oh the
part of the British Government, to search Ame-
rican vessels in time Of peace. Tie right OF
search, except when spccia!iy conceded by trca-
tv, is purely beligerent rgh', and can have no
existence on the high seas during peace" The
only right his ords!ip claims is "the right to sat-
isfy the party who has aicgitimatc right i'll know
inr the truth, that the vessel actually is what
her colors anrouncc'' ".rhc British cruisers
are not instructed to dctain Amcr'cGa vessels
under ann circumstances arisaprer; on the con-
tra~v, they are ordered to abstain from all inter-
ference with them, be they slar or o.hcrwIsc.
"It is undoubtedly true" his Lordship adds,
sthat this right may be abused, like every other
which is delegated to many and different Lands.
1t is possible that it may be exercised wantonIy
and vexatiously; and should this be the case, it
would not only call for remonstrance but would
yustifu resentment. This however, is the highest
degree improbable; and if, in spite OF the utmost
caution, an error ShOud he c0mmdled ana an
American vessel should suffer loss or iGjury, it
would be followed by prompt and ample repara-
ton. The undersigned begs leave TO repeat
that with American ressels, whatever be their
destination, British cruisers have no prelenslon
in any manner to interfere"
Now, as we understand these words, (and it
is possible we may misunderstood them,) here
:.s.x~ nf riobf 70 oh or
to visit an American vessel. under any circum-
stances whatever The claim is to visit and
search British vessels, or the vessels OF nations
who, by treaty, have authorized the act, whether
hearing the American flag or not; and il, i'll eXcr-
cising this unquestionable right, san error as
cOmmiited,'' by installing an American for Brit
ish or other vessel, over which the right exists,
it is an aggression, however unlntcntlonal, Tor
which reparation is due; and in order that the
British Government light be able to understand
the reparation which will be due, Lord Aberdeen
details the orders which have been given to the
British cruisers as to the course of conduct tie
officer shall pursue if he should board an Ameri-
can vessel: "IIe 1.-THE boarding oilicer] will I'M
medately quit her, offering, with the consent OF !
her commander, to note OF her papers the cause
of suspecting her nationality, and the number of
minutes she was detained Gf detained al alD for
the object in question And all The particulars !
are to be Immediately entered in the lo.y-book OF
the first cruiser, and .EuN statement is 20 be sent
by the first opportunity direct TO England"
These precautions and acts can haze 10 mean
inc unless they imply that an aggression IS com
mittcd, for which rcparation may justly be re-
quircd.
The whole matter, then, when siiied down,
appears to us to be this his Lord;''n claims the
right of doing ackat is right, and va "oEody cv-
er thought of denying to Great Brtain-the right!
to visit and search her o'rn SHIPS; and should
mistake be made, and all Amer .ca vessel be IN
terfered with, repara:on is due, AID will be made:
To this doctrine TO one can Object; although we
can yery easily perceive that more difficulties
NAV arise from the "errors" which may &c 'ccm-
,mifted." than Lord Aberdeen seems to apprc-
hend. If they have no rigltto interfere with an
American vessel an American vessel has the
right not to allow herself to he intcreTed with
Shemav neither allow herselfto be boarded, Eor
may she come to, at the mandate toir British
cruiser. The PREPARATION may then not be apollo
getic or pecuniary merely, but nat'onaI; and we
are inclined to think that resistance on the part
ofohr merchantmen may be necessary to prevent
abuse. THE question, however, so far as dlplo-
macy goes, appears to us, for the present, to be
settled between the Governments of Great Brit
ain and the United States. The former Govern
mcnt has abandonedthe ground assumed bysis-
count Palmerston, in his correspondence with
Mr.. Stevenson, and authorized by the act OF
Parliament passed in 1880. Lord Palmerston's
language is: "Hcr Majestys Government have
decided that the flag of the United States shall
exempt no vessel, phether American or moi,
from search by her Majes:y's cruisers in the AT,
rcan seas unless such vessel shall be found
provided with papers emitting her to the protec
tion of,the flag she wears, and proving her to be
United States property, and navigating the ocean
according to law" The act of 1889 takes it for
granted that the British ministry had neither the
authority to order, nor the naval officers to inst
tute and carry on the search Of the vessels Of
other nations on the high seas, which it legiti-
mizes and sanctions. To screen the officer from {
the consequences of an act which was known to
be illegal, and to make it national, was the OBJ
iect of the act; whilst, if other nations could be
caioled by treaties, or ntimidated by force, they
would be practically subjected to the legislation
of England Here was the pretension which
we resisted; and we think the civilized and COM
mercial world are indebted solely and entirely
to the United States for its abandonment. We
attribute the change of policy IN the British Go
yernment, not to fear, (although the consequent
ces to her, as well as other nations, of war
forced upon them by her upon such principles,
would be nothing to smile at,) but to thorough