The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-02-28

vent piracy, smuggling, and other Irregularities
This pretended right is not laid down ~ any
standard writer on the law II nstions- It 10
quite ~ much listie to abuse as the right II
search yetws ind 70 s.ipulxious in any ira
lies guarding against its abuse We can ifase
il to no origin but the pre,ensions Of the British
Government, aud those Of very recent date;
and il was first brought forth as an excuse for
certain occurrences on the cost Of Africa. II
this right were a. ancient lle right OF search.
We should long since have heard of il IN the
same way--by the discussions and treaty stipu-
atons 10 which its abuse would have given
rise.
| For fit be right, it must, like the right OF
search, and all other rights, be accompanied
with remedy, or penalty for its violation. A
resistance to it might be deemed by the British
courts good cause of confscaton: and no mat
ter what Inconvenience or damage might be
occasioned by its exercise within due limits,
| land who is 10 prescribe those limits y the suf-
fcring party would have no claim TO indemnify
| Ii we admit the right, we must be prepared 10
acquiesce in all the consequences which would
How from 1t, such as the seque,traiion confis-
cation of our vessels, or their detention, and the
breaking up Of voyages.
That practice has prevailed among mari
time nations OF visiting the vessels OF each
other. is undeniable. But thi. practice, exist
ing by the tacit and mutual sufierance of ma
tons, and under responsibility for any injury or
loss resulting from it, is very different thing
from right imperativey insisted on. This
practice is somewhat analogous to the invasion
Of the territory Of a friendly nation circum-
stances may excuse il, but il cannot be claimed
as right in the abstract.
The difficulties in the way of asserting to this
practice as right are innumTable and insupera-
BILE. 1t is pretended that the object is to verify
the nationality Of vessels But what would be
considered sufficient proof Of nationality? If
The flag is suspected, the papers might be sus-
pected also: for there is haldy more difficulty
in procuring counterfeit papers, than a counter
feit flag; or genuine papers might be Obtained
to disguise the nationality Of a vessel If the
papers were suspected, an Examination of the
crew and cargo might be demanded and if the
demand were refused, the refusal itself would
be considered fresh cause If suspicion II is
evident that in practice, the right of visitation,
exercised by powerful natien, would be moth
ing less than the right of search under new
name: and yet the British Government pre-
tends to make broad distinction between the
two in theory, and disclams the right of search
during peace.
Let US contemplate one of the many possible
and probable evils which might follow from the
admission of this right. Suppose the United
States and Spain, for instance, to be at war,
Great Britain being neutral; and that Spanish
cruiser is in chase of an American merchant.
man: British man-of-war comes up, and I'M
der pretence of exercising the right OF visitation
over the American ship, detains her until she
falls prey TO the Spaniard No indemnify can
be obtained, because the visitation was a matter
Of admitted right, and not of occasional suffer
ance.
1t is true that the British Government, pro-
fesses TO retrench and qualify this right But
what authority has the British Government to
interpolate new RICH, in the code of nations.
even with qualifications and restrictions How
long would il be before she assumed the author
lty TO alter those qualifications, and 10 interpret
a law OF her own creation as she pleased? The
practice of visitation qualities itself: every ma
ton is restrained in its exercise by the response
bilily which it incurs.
And what are the great benefits likely to arise
from the pretended right, as a counterbaance to
the manifest evils, losses and contention which
it would occasion 2 We find an American CD
newspaper (the National Intelligencer) uphold
ing the new British usurpation by the following
argument:
"No who reflects upon the subject will for
moment suppose that have undertaken TO stipuate
for the abolition of the right Of rist without the ex-
| istence Of which the ocean would become one wide
scene Of piracy, plumber, and smuggling The right
OF visit, for the purpose Of ascertaning whether
national flag be true Gag, only fraud upon the
nation whose flag IL preends TO be- is necessary to
the protection and safety of all navigation on any
sea. The right Of visit, in the limited in which
we speaking Of it, has been always exercised by
the vessels Of war Of the United States and of ne
cessIty must have been, or our vessels Of would
have sailed the seas idly and without the power Of
exercising single attribute Of the nationality whose
emblem floats at their masthead
And is it possible that the sole or main pur-
pose OF our navy is to suppress piracy and SNUG
Cling, and that except for that purpose they sail
the seas idly DO we build line-of- battle ships.
and steamers, with Paixhan guns, solely TO ter
rify pirates and smugglers, and hunt them into
the creeks and shadows in which they delight
TO take refuge According to the same rule.
the sole object for which Great Britain main
tains her immense naval force at such an enor-
nous cost is 10 suppress piracy and smuggling,
and her naval ascendancy is merely seconda
ry consideration. Surely this argument must
be fnnnded ON a mnat nneraIoL 49,. IL L..