The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-01-25

out the colonies" had taken effect and thencefor-
ward there could be, lawfully, property in slaves
IN any part of the British dominions Lord Palmers-
ton ~ announcing 10 MIR Stevenson, by his note Of
Ith January, 1887, the final decision Of the British
Government on the case OF the Enterprise, added,
thai slavery being now abolished throughout the
British empire, there can be no well founded claim
on The part Of any foreigner, IN respect OF slaves
VINO under any circumstances, may come into the Bri-
tIs colonies, any more than there would be 10 res
peet To slaves who might come into the United King
dom 3 and this declaration heemphaiicaly repeated
IN subsequent note TO MIR. Stevenson Of the llth
December, 1887.
Upon the important question Of public law IN
yolVed IN This decision Of the British Government,
long and earnest discussion took place between the
two Governments but terminating, II began, in
WIDE aud irreconcllable difference of principle the
American minister at London was instructed 10 pro-
pose TO the British Government conventional
rangenent, by which, IN practice, the oiclous and
excng interference Of the local authorities Of the
BRUSH Islands W IN American vessels having slaves
ON board, when driven into their waters by casualties
OF The sea, might be prevented, This arrangement
was, Also very summary declined by the British
Government as will be seen by Lord Palmerstons
note To MIR. Stevenson, of the Both of September,
1885. And thus the matter stood down TO the close
of MIR. Van Burens Administration. The recent
cases OF the "Creole" and the "Hermosa"-one Of
them marked by incidents of most revolving cha
racter-have added fresh proofs Of the necessity of
some understanding between the two Govern
mens on this delicate subject in order TO
preserve the relations Of peace and good neigh
borhood and the correspondence which is laid
before us has taken place with view TO effect such
an understanding, on the basis of just interpreta-
ton Of the law and comfy of nations.
i he Government OF the United States contends
that, under the modern practice and comfy Of civil
ized states, the merchant-vesses Of naton-consi-
dered always part OF its territory, while the
high seas, and subject exclusively to the laws and
sovereignty OF their own country the ocean--re
tain their national jurisdiction and immunity To ma
ny purposes, IN the ports OF foreign power,
when they enter those ports voluntarily But when
they are forced, by stress Of weather,
lawful violence against the will Of the master into
foreign port, they 10 be consde ed in Justice, as
if they still upon the high seas and during the
existence of such lnvoluntiry emergency, virtually
under the jurisdiction Of their country, by whose
laws the condition and relations of all persons and
things on board are to be governed and any inter-
ference by the local authorities of the foreign port
in such case to change that condition, or to dis
turb those relations, is proceeding contrary to the
law and comfy of nations. These principles are
enforced and illustrated with great copiousness and
ability by the Secretary of State, in his letter to
Lord Ashburton; and proceeding to apply them to
the of slaves board of American vessels
forced by stress of weather or other causes into Bri
tsh ports, he says
THE usual mode Of stating the rule of English
law IS, that does slave reach the shore of
England that he is free. This is true but it
no more than that when slave comes within the
exclusive jurisdiction of England he ceases 10 be
save because the law of England positively and
torously prohibits and forbids the existence of such
relation between man and man. But il does not
mean that English authorit 5, with this rule of En-
gllsh law IN their hands, may enter where the jurs
diction Of another nation is acknowledged to exist,
and there destroy rights, obligations and interests,
lawfully existing under the authority OF such other
nation. No such construction and such effect can
he rightfully given TO the British law
He then adds
If, therefore, vessels of the United States pursu-
ing lawful voyages from port TO port, along their
shore, driven by stress of weather carried by
unlawful violence, into English ports, the Govern
ment of the United States cannot consent that the
local authorities in those ports shall take advantage
Of such mislortunes and enter them for the purpose
Of interfering with the condition of persons things
on board, established by their own laws. If
slaves, the property of citizens Of the United States,
escape into the British territories, ii IS not expected
that they will be restored In that case, the terrific
rial jurisdiction Of England W II have become erciu-
sire over them, and must decide their condition But
slaves board Of .7neiean resse lying in British
tiers, not within the exclusive jurisdiction of Eng
land under the exclusive operation of English law;
and this POUNDS the broad distinction between the
cases" "ln the opinion Of the Government Of the
United States, such vessels, driven and detain-
ed by necessity in friendly port, ought TO be regard
out of their direct course only by disaster, or ty
wrongful violence that they ought 10 receive all
assistance necessary TO enable them 10 resume that
direct course and that interference and mole .aton
by the local authorities, where the whole voyage is
lawful both in fact and intent is ground for just and
grave complaint
Lord Ashburton, in his 10 Mr.. Webster's
note begins by remarking that "hayng left England
before the case of the Creole had been brought 10
the notice Of his Government by the American min
ster, he had not been empowered TO enter into for
NAL stipulation with respect 10 the class of cases IL
which II belongs but that be felt all the importance
Of the subject and the desrableness Of falling upon
some for he prevention, in future, of such
currences. "Uron The great general principles af-
fecting the case he says "se do not differ" And
again lac observes AT the same time that we main
tain our own laws within territories, we
bound TO respect those ooT nsghbors and to listen to
every possible suggestion Of means of ayertng from
them every annoyance and injury. | have great con-
fdenot thai this may be sGeoiay done in the present in
stance but the TO be met and remedied IS new,
aud must not be too hastily dealt with. You may,
however, be assured that measures important for
the preservation OF friendly intercourse between the
two countries shall not be neglected
"ln the time, he says, 81 can engage that in
structons shall be given to the governors OF her Ma
jestys colonies the southern borders Of the United
States TO execute their laws with careful aten-
ton 10 the wish Of their Government 10 maintain
good neighborhood and that there shall be no off
oiot ieferencc irih .feoan rsis driven BY aoedeni
on by rienos into those ports The iars and duties Of
hospitality shall be erecided and these peher to
require TO justify any further inquisiton into he
state Of persons things board Of ussse situated
than may be indispensable TO enforce the Observance
Of the munie pal law Of the colony and the proper
/ regulation Of its harbors and waters"
These declarations and engagements, in their spirit
and obvious import, go far towards giving US the
practical security we have so long sought and want
ing only the tornahiy Of treaty stipulation, present
in the plighted faith Of an accredited public minister,
acting with the appreciation and authority Of IS Co
vernment, guaranty which all great nations regard
as no less sacred and obligatory Who that looks
back upon the state Of this question: IT was left
four years ago by the repeated perempory, and IN
cercmonious repulses which M. Van Burcns admin
islralion met with from Lord Pamerston on every
Lr.nnh ~ lie -.Lhl.cL -al 10 rncn-aI.n lLn i'm