The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-01-25

! :, - E 'pglly 4y!X m
ixIak NJ ssae : 50 d: a ss q, ~
pss q q ', ssssu a e = sss :
sslxa Aad starry her into port fbr ihfthsr sxamipa-
tioa. HtB BY the aess Of CoAgrses a. AmsfiEan
yeesea II authorized LIST, 70 rssis< The stStk ~
tr.ash public vessel; q. q say:ps: say vsausi
seerch; ~ 70 FseapauFe any Jaaesiean vsesSt
seized by French vessel; and ~. 10 esptnrs
any French armed vessel wherever found On the
high seas. This suspension Of the law Of nat.ous
This right Of capture and recapiurs--eAn only be
sutho,,zed by an sct o. the government, which il
But il would weary The 6anete II vsre 10 read
all the AxirHcts from that CASE which arr pestinent
TO the question under Confederation Suffc6 III "
say that the circuit court decided ths< The Fro1ak
man was an enemy; thus deciding thai Il va var:
and the Supreme Court unAaimousiy suslainei
opinion Of all the judges-and all Of them del;v.
cred their opinons--Judge Moore, Judge Wash-
ington, Judge Chase, and Judge Pattssson---;n lhe
opinion Of all these judges, il was war, public
war, and Of the kind which civilians denoainate
imperfect war.
Now, Mr.. President, what s laid down - shs
satisfaction Of all obligations on the part of 4 "a
ZION To prosecute the claims for indemnity 81
the part Of it, citizens; what il laid down a. The
satisfaction which may be urged and pleaded Nv
foreign and belligerent nation itself, a. againsk
such claims! II il, that war waged on that &C.
count is satisfaction. That the war wAs wseed
on that account we know from the history Of 1hs
times. For what else was il waged. except for
these spoliations'
Judge Marshall, in the 5th volume, page rs,
Of his life Of Washington, says: sin Congress
vigorous measures were adopted for retAliating
injuries which had been sustained. and for repe-
ing those which were threatened '---thns clearly
lagu .ls-ss-
war which was waged. ! have given American
authority, Judicial authority, a. 70 the character
Of these hosties. Let US see what was the
French opinion upon this question. See same
document, page 633, In which we are informed
that the President ofthe French commission said:
~ the question could be determined by ~ ia.
different nation, he was satisfied such trihuuai
would say that the present state Of things va
rar on the side Of America, and that no indemni.s
ties could be claimed. The other commissioner
made similar declarations Same page he said:
IL the government should think proper to in
struct them TO make treaty on the basis OF in
IDENTITIES, and modified renewal OF the old tren-
ties, he would resign sooner than sign such, .
treaty" Upon page 634 will be found letter OF
the American commissioners, chara cterizine these
hostiites as war Such, sir, undoubtedly was
the opinion Of the commissioners on both aides.
So that we have authority of all SORTS for saying
that this was a war waged on account or these
spoliations. And il It was waged on account Of
them, can any man show me reason why PER-
feet war would have been satisfaction, and vet
this il not satisfaction for these clannsi No
Those writers who lay down the doctrine thst
WIZ - satis'ac'!on' make no distinction between
PeHec' ana an Imperfect war. Both are public
wars anu y any reason can DC gwen for the suf-
hciency Of one that cannot be given for the other.
it does not suggest itself to me. Why is it thar
perfect war is satisfaction Il s because We az.
pend money to avenge injuries; because We spill
oiood; because we sustain losses on account Of the
claimants IN TINS case we made war upon France
az heavy expense, to protect the rights Of oar
c'Izehs; ana, having done so, we mny truly say
20 mem we nave zone all for you that you have
r'eht 70 require because we have sustained fsses
20 avehge you, ana inflicted injuries ny way Of
Pu"'shHeht upon tne nation which has afflicted
y or;
Inc citizen can claim nothing OF the govern
mem, except us ool,gation TO protect hnn--sn
oohgauoh wn'ch suos'sts both at home aud
ABROAD; Let us trace the analogy, and see whst
y tne GUY OF government IN its municipal rea-
IONS. What Is, then Its duty towards the citizen;
one man may rob another Of his purse. The
government Is oound 70 punish the man who Conn
mt,ed ,he robbery, and, having done so, its duty
d'schargeo. IL Is not bound to make hirnsg
VINO was roooeo a compensation III money. And
so IN relation 70 the obligation to protect the pro-
perry Oh its ct'zens against foreign nations. 4e{
cannot OBTAIN restitution IN money through peg6-
'a''on, Is oouha 20 PUNISH II u can, the agGTe4<
sor' mere are inueeo' exceptions to that rufess
Ior mere might De occasions when the natinn
wou'u FISK us sa,e'y 100 lar py making the ut
tempt, anu "a sucn case II could not be bound
10 peru i'seii IN va'n nut II Is bound II 1t can do
So witnout 100 much loss, to punish the wrong
aoer. ~ may mus give security for the future
70 us cit,zens. Ana when L has made war, it has
punished Inc aggressor; and when 1t has done 20,
y mas gwen perfect satisfaction, and discharged
se'' from all liability for any further negotiation
IN relation 70 the claim; and, what is more, it has
FURNISHED 70 The offending nation, plea in law to
the claim whenever a. IS presented; for the govern
ment may say, you have taken your satisfaction
IN the shape OF war; and have no right now to ask
US 10 pay the debt. And In truth did not the
french commissioners put ID tins very plea Did
.iney ho', wheh tney came TO close the nesosia-
tons, say th's IN so many words' know the
comm'ssoners on both s'des began with an at
tempt; as Mr. Adet calls It, ITO disguise the rela-
~. LIONS suos'sting between the two countries.
They attempted to act AZ If there had been no war
az !! II was possible TO obtain some restoration Of
ancient treates. iney negotiated for awhile upon
at he ,lxr