Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1843-03-09
NUMBER 2.
LIE BkIlIsH lht.AlY.

ton Of this House, on the subject ol tho
construc,ion OF thai portion Of the treaty
OF Washington which relates to the right
of uiSiiation.
WASHINGTON. Feb. ~. ls43.
10 The House Of Representatives.
In compliance with the resolution II the
House nj Representatives Of the 228 INST.
requesting me to communicate 10 the
House whatever CORE spand, nee or com
:nnnca,iun may have been received from
the BRUSH Government respecting the
Presidents construction of the late Brit
lsb treaty concluded at Washington, as
II concerns an alleged right 10 vislt Am,r.
can vessels" ] herewith transmit a re.
port made to me by the Secretary of
Stat.
have also thought proper to commu.
nicatc copies Of Le,d Aberdeeu's letter &C
90,h December, 1871, TO Mr.. Everett.
| Mr.. Everctt's letter Of tn % Dtcom-
her. 10 reply thereto, sDd extracts lrutu
several letters of MIR. Everett 10 The SAG
rotary OF State.
csnnot forego the expression ofmy
regret ~ the apparent purpur, Of pat
ol Lord Aberdeen's despatch 10 Mr.. Fox.
had cherished the hope that nli possi-
hll,y OF misundersl andlng MS To the ifuo
construction of the 9Th article oi the trra-
~ lately concluded between Great Brit
ain nnd the United States, was pteclnded
by the plain and well weighed language
IN which II is expressed. The deslre of
both Governments is to put an end rs
| speedily as possible to the slave trade,
and tina; desire, need scarcely add, 10
rs strongly and as sincerely tel, by tho
United States as il can be by Crest Brit
air. Yet il must no, be forgotten that
the trade, though now universally repro.
baied, was up to late period, prosecu,-
ed by al who choose to engage in il, and
there wore unfortunately but very few
Christian Powers whose subjects were
not permitted and even encouraged 10
share 10 the profits Of what was regarded
as perfectly legitimate commerce. 1t
originated at a period long before tho
United States had become independent,
and was carried on within our borers IN
opposition to the most earnes, RENE nsiun-
ces and expostulations of Sumo OF the COL
onies IN which it was most actively pros
ecutcd. Those engaged in il were as liz.
tie liable 10 inquiry or interruption as my
others. It's character thus fixed by com
mon consent and general practice, could
only b. changed by tn. positive assent
OF each and every nation expressed eth.
er IN the form Of municipal law or con.
vent onnl arrangement. The United
States led the way in efforts to suppress
il. They claimed 40 right 10 dictate 10
others. but they resolved, without watt
ing Tor the corporation oi othrr Powsfs,
to prohibit il to their own citizens, and TO
visit its perpretrallon by them with con-
disn punishment. ! may safely affirm
that il never occurred to this Government
that any new maritime right accrued To
it from the position j, had thus assumed
10 regard to the slave trade. II, before
our laws for its suppression, the flag Of
every nation might traverse the ocean
nnquestioned by our cruisers this FREQ.
dom was not, in our opinion, in the least
abridged by our municipal legislation.
Any other doctrine, it is plain, would
subject to an arbitrary and ever varying
system OF maritime police, adopted at
will by the great naval Power Tor tho
time being, the trade Of the world IN any
place or in any articles which such Pow
err might see fit to prohibi, TO ITS own SUBJ
jects or citizens. A principl" Of this
kind could scarcely be acknowledged
w,ihou, subjectlng commerce 10 the risk
ofconstant and hs,rassing vexations.
The attempt to justify such pre,enson
from the right to visit and detan ships
upon reasonable suspicion of piracy,
would deseryedly be exposed TO univ'r-
sal condemnation, since il would be an at.
tempt to convert an established rule OF
m ,itime law, incorporated asa princi-
pie into the international code by the
consent Of oil nations, into rule and
principle ad pted by single nation, and
enforced only by its assum d authority.
To srize and delain 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 hears, or claim of indfm-
nny on the part Of the owner. The uni
v rsa law sanctions, and the common
good requires, the existence Of SUCH a
rule. The right under such circumstan-
ces, not only to visit and detaiD, but TO
search ship, is perfect right, aud ip-
wolves neither responsibility nor lnden-
nifty. But with this single exception, no
nation has, in time fpeace, any authors
iy 10 detain the ships If another upon the
ugh seas On any prctext Whatever beyond
the limits OF the territorial jurisdiction.
Aud such am happy TO End, IS substan-
TALLY the doctrine of Great Britain her.
sli, her most recent official derlara-
tons, aud even in those now communicst.
ed to tile House. Tn so declarations may
we'll lead us to doubt whether the sppa-
rent difference between tn" Two Govern
nents is no, rather one Of definition than
OF principle. Not only IS the right Of
search, properly SO called, disclal'ned ny
Grra, Britain, but even that Of mere VISIT
and INQUIRY is asserted with quahfi catlons
lnconslst, nj with the idva ola perfect
right.
i In the despatch Of Lord Aberdeen TO
/ n, Everett OF the Goth O: December.