The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-03-18
roR THE MApIsoNIAN
OUR RELATIONS WITH ENGLAND.

ais TO glide insensibly into inexircabe difficulties re
GREETED equally by the parties, and which might have
been avoided had each been constantly free from ex
element. and intent upon the matter really al isslp
between them The recent news from England, "
to the Creole mutineer- seems to be very xpecte
TO many-is at once regarded by them as ominous 0
war--as hostile to American slavery, and necessa
ry involving the question of property in portion q
our colored population The South, with their cha
racerstic ardor, and proper jealousy upon tina, sub
ject will be greatly excited the foolish aud wckes
abolionis will take couragethe restless ami bell ge
sp rts throughout theland will inhame 1t into dt
rect and papable Invasion OF our rights AMI as just
of war, and fear that even The coolly think
ing and patriotic North, in their eagernesst appease
the irraled feelings Of our Southern brethren, may
be seduced into regarding this Nassau affair as but
link in the chain of British policy, which gees for uni
yersal emancipation Were this truly, or ecessarily
the case, the writer would bs prompt for war, and
would be panied TO the sword returned 10 It's scab
bard until that question and all other cosnate ones
should be for at rest But, my consignment Is
this necessarily so-s the recent decision in England
prima faeie evidence of hostility 10 slave in
stitution-is il, in iru'h, any thing more than what
has been often previously asserted and lanerted viz
thai in he great code of international law such case
is casus omiS$us--a case not provided tO by the
jus gsn.ium by customary law-by treaty stipulation
and, perhaps, not by that vague and QUESTION
able thing called the Comfy Of Nations-and fnaly
is not the case of the Creole mainly one Of musy and
murder having no necessary connection whatever
with the question OF property in siar:s?
Suppose there had not been colored man on board
the Creole and tina. the storage passengers had mutt.
MED and murdered one or more in command, and had
taken the vessel by riS major into Brtsh island
would the voluntary, or the customary law Of nations
or any treaty with England or even the usua CONT
OF nations, require the Imprisonment the nutneers,
and their surrender by Britain 10 our Government,
upon demands Ii the affirmative be the sound
reply then Britain is in the wrong but not because
the mutineers were freemtn; if the negafee be tie
correct reply she Is in the right but STILL ,ol because
the mutneers were ffeenen for the civil condition, as
to freedom slavery, would have pos blc bearing
upon the case, bat they would be retained
dered, according there law or moi, without the
least alluson to their condition at home In such a
case, II would be sufficient that they belong 10 the &C.
nus homo and being morally responsible as such,
they would be justiflble in this county in Eng
land exactly in the same way as white men nor does
any human being in England contend for any other
doctrine; nor, indeed would even the abolilionsts
make Distinction in this respect between slaves and
freemen.
The only questions, then, are first is there any
treaty stipulation between the two countries, for the
reciprocal surrender of criminals Of any SORT whether
the crime be NAHUM in Sc or NAHUM prchibitum, and
whether committed by freeman, or by slave} The
reply must be in the negative In the treaty Of peace,
Of 1888, no ausion is made TO the subject. In the
treaty, usually called Mr.. Jays, Of November 1894
the 9th article provided for the surrender of persons
charged with murder with forgery but that treaty
also provided that his article, among some others,
should expire in twelve years thereafter; and il con-
sequenty ceased be operative in the year 1906
Then came the treaty Of Client, of 1914, ratified in
February 1875 but that treaty is wholly silent upon
the subject and the matter has rested to this hour
Secondly Does the law Of nations or even the
clearly established con,y -f ""tions--nr finally the
..o,----. :. of the r--Lftcists, sus,aii, ,i,o
doctrine of surrender Of criminals though they
be fugitives from execution for proped crime, nai,
in (the strongest case that can be put)-and here
negative; One of the reasons why the law of ma
tons does not enforce the surrender is because il
early became fundamental principle that all crimi-
nal and penal laws essentially local in their opera
ton-they have extra territorial efficacy and even
though the crime be confessedy against the universal
law Of nature, and the express law Of God still the
offender has an asylum in other nations, and the Of
Tended community has asserable, perfect right
to demand such refugee and, in so strong case as
this the courtesy comfy Of nations would confer
at most, but imperfect right but the denial of an
imperfect right never be the ground of very Sc
rous complaint, and certainly not just cause of
war
Again does the general practised comfy of
nations require the surrender of criminals of anu
kind? Were there such general or pra ctsed CO.
nifty the habitua disregard of it by any particu-
lar nation, would still be no just cause of war 1t
would, indeed be very properly regarded by all other
nations conclusive evidence of an extremely chur-
lish and morose national temperam and would
Justify them in dealing with such nation in the mode
in which individuals of that temper are often treated
in society but in society pretends to say that
the Withholding of beneroience, would Justify
oheiS LII ucsuoyhb PioPcrty, ire, even stCu-
rity of such illiberal and coldhearted individuals
And so with nations. That there is not in point of
fact such national comfy among nations generally
must be evident, because, in the cases which occa-
sionally do occur, there were special reasons
for dong-the surrender confessedly ca gratia
or upon the principle of necessary reciprocty-or
hey arose from some special policy which then hap
pened to exist. Cases of this kind have occurred
or the prevention of border warfare and contermi-
nous nations, all over the world, have sometimes
ound it to be their interest gradually to glide into
he doctrine that their fugtves from justice should
,e reciprocally surrendered. So, again. surrenders
r motu may sometimes take place, without any
UGH selfish nducements-bu in all such cases, the
surrender is not of right, nor is any injury positive
wrong inflicted when there is denial. Canada,
lpon our border, may surrender fugitive and