The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-04-08
UNTOWARD |!

The National Inleligencer Of this morning
favors the public with its views OF the doct.lne
of the right of search. II declares its dissent
from those entertained by The Executive, and
supports its opinions by quotations from two
distinguished authorities:
Isl. Mr.. Horace Everett, We thought,
when we first read the name IN the article au-
ded TO, that our distinguished Minister at the
Court Of ST. James was meant, but no such
thing. II is not Mr.. Edward, but MI. Horace
Everett, whose ideas on the right of visitation
and search are SO profound, and whose dcta are
so authoritative as, in the opinion Of the lntelli-
gencer. TO overthrow the argument Of the Secre-
tary OF State, contained in his last despatch on
this subject TO Mr.. Edward Everett.
This is good one Mr.. Horace Everett !!
Good! If il were question now about the
depth Of water in Onion River, Vermont, or
right of fishing in the Connecticut, we should
think Mr.. Horace Everet.'s opinion entitled 10
consideration but the idea of quotng his
views upon the 'right Of search" on the ocean,
the height of the burlesque
Had The editor quoted MIR. Adams,
Mr. Clay, or Mr. John Sergeant, or any gentle
man of acknowledged ability and general ac-
quaintance with such subjects, their dissent from
the views of the Executive would have been
imposingly supported; but to be driven 10 the
Green mountains, and bring down Mr.. Horace
Everett, as the great living luminary Of Inter
national Law, is to be hard pushed for supper,
indeed; nor can we conceive why this course
has been adopted, unless Mr. Horace Everett is
the only American authority on that side to be
found, or the Inteliigencer supposes that, from
living somewhere near the frontier, on the Ca
NADIA lines, MIR. II. Everett must have picked up
some knowledge of such international law as
exists on the border.
The second authority is M. Azuni
II the quotation from Mr.. Horace Everett had
not satisfied US of the straits 10 which the In
tellige.cer is driven 10 find authority for its no
tions on the RICH, of search, this Citation of Azu-
nj would. We believe We may say that M
Azuni is not generally esteemed by those learn
ed in such matters as among the first authorities.
In the various cases before the Supreme Court,
In which he has been cited by Counsel, no no
,ise of him has been taken by the Court; and
man most eminently distinguished, above all
others for his profound knowledge of maritime
law, the late Mr.. Pinckney, pronounces Lin "a
feeble writer" "a Sciolist," and his treatise on
the maritime law, one from which it is difficult
10 collect any Ineligible notion"
If, therefore, the reading Of the Intelligencer
on the subject Of maritime law has been con-
fined chiefly to NJ. Azuni. we advise it to imi-
tate Prospero, and get rid of its books In con-
clusion, were all the Azunis extant, and all the
sour, defeated politicians, from every nook and
corner of the Union, to be collected. and brought
"dgmine facto' TO controvert or overthrow the
principles set forth in Mr.. Websier's late de-
satisfactorily to themselves, the very pregnant
cstions which we quote below, and " Inch
60, as Mr.. Webster says, to The "very essence"
Of the matter
"Bu, if the vessel thus approached attempt. to avoid
the vessel approaching or does not comply with her
commanders order to send him her papers for his
inspection, consent to he visited or detained what
is next to be done Is force be used and il force
be used, may that force be lawfully repelledi These
qussti ms lead at once to the elemental principle the
essence OF the British clam. Suppose the me re liant
vessel be in truth an American vessel, engaged in
lawful commerce. and that she does not choose to be
detained Suppose she resists the vsitl What the
consequence In those 10 which the belge.
rent right Of visit exists resistance to the exercise of
that right regarded as just cause of condemnation
both oil vessel and cargo, Is that penalty, or what
other penalty to be Incurred by resistance to visit in
time OF pesce' Or suppose that force be met by
force, gun returned for gun, and the commander Of
the cruiser, or some OF his seamen be killed. what de-
serPton OF offence will have been committed 1t
would be said in behalf Of the commander of the CRUZ
SER that he mstook the! vessel for vessel Of Eng
land, Brazil, or Portugal bat does this mistake of his
take away from the American vessel the Of self
deiencef The writers of authority declare II to be
principle Of natural law, that the privilege of selfde
fence exists against asssilant, who mistakes the
object of his attack for another whom he had right
To- .niIfi