The spirit of the age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1840-1844, 1843-03-10
ID ltttraI.


The last arrivals from Europe bling ntelligenc
D OF an important and exciting character.
IL appears from Sir Robert Pees speech, tina
the British do not conslrue the provision of the rea
ty OF Washington relating to the adjustment of tn
question Of The fright of visitation" (Which Pres
ident Tyler, in his annual message, very propel
desgnales as only another name for the right o
search, view of the subject which will be sus
tanned by the nation, as it is understood and inter
prHted by The whole American people Indeed
Sir Robert more than in,imatcs that tie President
has misrepresentcd the purport of that portion o
the Treaty which provides for the suppression Of
the slave trGde-and that the Secretary of State
was satisfied of the justice Of the claim sci up by
Great Britain TO the fright of visitation" mas
much as despatch sent over by the Earl of Alb
erdeen in ISL, asserting that right, had neither
been answered nor its receipt acknowledged.
But the speech itself will better explain the in
tenlOns Of the British Government:
81 rejoice that the honorable gentleman has Civ
en- me an opportunity of making some observations
on the late message of the President Of the United
States The sincere and earnest desire have al
ways entertained for the maintenance of a good
understanding between this country and the Uni
ted States, and the spirit in which have always
spoken of America, makes it douby painful du-
ty TO Inc to have TO refer TO that message, which
am sorry to say does not give n correct account OF
the negotiations relative To the right Of visit. Per-
haps may do right TO confirm what the honora-
bile gentleman has said, that there is nothing more
distinct than the right Of visit is from the right of
search.
Search is begcr0nt right and no, TO be exer.
cised in time Of peace, except when it has been
conceded by treaty, The right of search extends
no, only to the vessel, but to the cargo also. The
nj, Of = a., Al,
two are often COMPOUNDED. The right of search,
with respect to American vessels, we entirely and
utterly disclaim; nay, more, il we knew tina, an
American vessel was furnished with all the mate
rails requisite for the slave trade, if we knew that
the decks were prepared to receive hundreds Of
human beings within n space in which life is al
most impossible, still we should he bound TO let
that American vessel pass on But the right we
claim, is to know whether vessel pretending to
he American, and hosting the American flag, be
bona lido American, Qlear, hear.)
We claim the righ, to know whether grievous
wrong has not been offered to the American flag:
To know, for instance, whether Portuguese OF
brazilian schooner. smiling under the American
lag. be really VIVA, she seems to be. In the ud-
lnrGbc despatch of my noble friend, dated the
2Olh December ISL, he wrote thus: "Ihe un.
designed Opprehends, however, that the right of
search is not confined to the verllcaiion Of the ma
;iOnality of the vessel, but also extends TO the OBJ
ject of the voyage, and the nature Of the cargo
The sole purpose Of the British cruisers is to asccr-
tain whether the vessels they meet with are really
American og not. The right asserted has in truth,
no resemblance to the right of search, either in
principle or IN practice. II is simply right to sat
i,ly the party, who has legitimate interest in
knowing the truth, that the vessel actually is wha,
her coors announce" | am surprised he United
States should contest this, considering the many
| small states by which they are surrounded, and
how easily their revenue might be injured # it
could once be- established rs n principle that for
rgn vessel might become exempt from visitation
hy hosting any particular flag, (llcar) With
such principle recognised neither the revenue
nor the commerce Of the United States could he
,af, for an instant, But know that the United
States do literally exercise this right in the seas
adjacent 10 their own coast; | know that if a Mex
lean vessel were to hoist the British flag under sns
picous circumstances, the United States would
not hesitate to exercise the right Of exposing the
| iaud and knowing this, am the more surprised
at the claim now set up by the President of the
United States Therefore, sir, il will be my duty,
in the face Of the public, expressing deep regret
that there should appear TO be any difference OF
opinion on this topic, explicitly 10 declare that we
have not waived one Of tie principles contendcd
for by my noble friend (car Of Ahcrleen) in hi-
| despatch of December, lsil and il Is further my
duIy to declare that that despatch has remained 10
the present boar unanswered by the Government
| Of the United States. | know. ! think too well
what is the ability and what the kccnncss of a
Secretary of State in the United States, 10 believe
that il doctrines 50 important rs those advanced
in the despatch could be questioned, it would have
been permitted TO remain fourteen months unan
swercd and uracknowe1gcd, had it been thought
wise TO contest those principles. CLEAR, hear. y
And, sir with respre, 10 this right Of search, that
no bcligerant but conventional right which IL used
by one power Cor the purposes Of humanity, 10
check the traffic in slaves, am bound to say that
even on that point, am surprised at the dctcrnl
nation wiih which the United States refuse TINT mu
,ual right. UIcar, hcar.) am now speaking o.
that right Of search which, by the treaties with the
great powers of Europe, by treaty with France
and other States, il mutually conceded by parties
DESTROYS to prevent cicctually The traffic IN slave,
IA right 10 search vessels belonging 10 each com
try which il party to the treaty, detected in The
act Of CARRYING on this trade For, in the year
1924, a convention was signed in this country b,
Mr. Rush, the minister Of the United States, alnos
at the insgaiion Of America, which prolcssed lh,
utmost desire to put an end TO tho slave trade
4 convention, say, was signed by Mr. Rush, will
lIr llrsksson. which did mutually concede thu
r,ht Of search; that is To say, which enabled YES
sells of war, Of the United States and Great Brit
ain respectively, to exercise, under certain siipn
laiion., that very righ; of search against wheel
such a camof is now raised in neighboring ccun
iv IIear, hear, hcnr.) That treaty was rcjec
ted hy the Senate Of the United States, not on The
ground Of an objection to The right Of search, bu
because the right Of search extended to the coas
Of America and The United States objected to tn
right Of search bcing exercised in the immediate
neighborhood Of the coast Of America. allegn!
thai il was not necessary for the SUPPRESSION OF Ih
suppression Of the slave trade. The Senate of th'
United States omitted the coast Of Amcricn, ant
Mr. Canning refused to ratify the treaty in conSe
auence Of that omission; but if Nr Canning had al
lowed the coas, Of America to be omitted from ih
treaty, at this moment convention authcrizln!
the right Of search would have been in force viii