The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1843-03-23
lleuse q fiepresen. atIfes--teh -
THE british TREATY.

lie cpeakeriziu heiore ute Rouse ne
following message from HE pEesident ri
The United States. IN answer 10 reaniu-
tion nf The House on the suhieel % The
construction OF that portion Of de treaty
81 Washington which relates 10 iks right
i visitation.
wsshinF'on. Fsbrus ) s7,L. isfJ
To dLe House If Representatives.:
IN compliance with The resolution of
The House Of Representative Or he 22d
inst. Tequs sting me 10 communicate 10 lhs
House :. whatever eUrrespnndence or
Communication may have been rcreised
from the British Government respecting
The Presidents construction Of tic Iale
British treaty concluded AT Washington.
as il concerns m alleged right 70 visit
American vessels" herewith transmit
a report made To me by the Secretary Of
Sisss.
have also thought proper 10 commu-
nicaie copies OF Lord Aberdeen's letter Of
the 20th December. 1871. 10 Mr.. Eve
reii,-Mr. EveFett's letter Of the Esd
December in reply thereto, and extracts
from several letters Of Mr.. Everett lothc
Secretary Of State.
Il cannot forego the expression Of my
regret al the apparent purpori 81 part
OF Lord Aberdeen's despaichio Mr.. Fox.
I had cherished The hope thai all Proba-
bilily of misunderstanding az 70 The irne
construction Of the 9Th article Of the irea-
~ lately concluded between Great Bri-
tain and The United States, was preclu-
ded by the plain and well weighed Lam
guagc in which tits expressed. The de-
sire Of both Governments is 10 put an
end as speedily as possible 10 the slave
trade, and that desire, need scarcely
add, is as strongly and as sincerely felt
by the United States as II can be by Great
Britain. Vel il must mol be forgotten that
the trade. though now universally repro
hated, was, up 10 late period, prosecuted
by all who chose ioengage init, aud there
were unfortunately but very few Chris
tian Powers whose subjects we're not per-
mitted and even encouraged to share in
the profits Of what was regarded as per-
fectly legitimate commerce. II origina-
ted at period long before the United
States had been independent, and was
carried on within our borders in oppo-
siiion TO the most earnest remonsiran-
ces and expostulaiions Of some of die CO.
lonies in which il was most actively pro- /
secuted. Those engaged IN il were as lii
lie liable TO enquiry or interruption as any
others. It's character thus fixed BY com.
mon consent and general practice, codld
only be changed by positive assent of
each and every nation, expressed eiiherin
the form of municipal law or convention
al arrangement. The United States led
tic way in efforts to suppress it. They
claimed no RICH. 10 dictate to others, but
they resolved, without waiting for the CO.
operation Of other Powers, to prohibit il
to their own citizens, and to visit its per-
petraiion by them with condign spGnish-
ment. ! may safely affirm that il never
occurred 10 this Government that any new
maritime right accrued TO il from the no
sition it had thus assumed in regard 10
the slave trade. IL. before our laws for
its suppression, the flag of every nation
might traverse the ocean unqneslioned by.
our cruisers, this freedom was not, in our
opinion, abridged by our municipal legis-
laton. 49, a=. ....
Any other doctrine, il isaplain, would
subject to an arbitrary and ever varying
system of maritime police, adopted at will
by the great naval power for the time be-
ing, the trade of the world in any places
or in any articles which such Power
might see fit 10 prohibit to its own sub
jecis or citizens. A principle of this kind
could scarcely be acknowledged without
suLjecting commerce to the risk Of con-
slant and harrassing vexalions.
The attempt TO justify such a preten-
sion from the right to visit and deiaia
ships upon reasonable suspicion of piracy,
would deservedly be exposed to universal
condemnation, since il would be an al
tempt TO convert an established rule Of
maritime law, incorporated as a princi-
pie into the International code by the con.
sent of all nations, into rule and prin-
ciple adopted by single nation, and en-
forced only by its assumed authority. To
seize and drtain a ship upon suspicion of
piracy, with probable cause and in good
faith, affords no just ground either for
complaint on the part Of the nation whose
flag she bears, or claim of indemnity ON
the part Of the owner. The universal
law sanctions. and the common good re-
quires, the existence Of such rule. Ehe
right under such circumstance S, not only
TO visit and letain, but to search ship, is
a perfect right, and involves neither re-
sponsibility nor indemnity. But, with
this single exception, no nation has, in
time of peace, any authority to detain the
ships of another upon the high seas on
any pretext whatever beyond the linz
its of their territorial jurisdiction. And
such. ! am happy to find, is substantially
the doctrine Of Great Britain herself, in
| her most recent official declarations. and