The southern press., 1851-09-06

Mr.. WEBsTER's LETTER TO Mr.. Fox-As
Mr.. Webster is quoted as authority for the right
of American citizens to lend their aid to over
throw Spanish authority in Cuba, it may not be
uninteresting to the reader to see what the
statesman really did say and under what cir
cumstances he said it. The ground he takes
is in the case where cipil Uar already actually
erists, as in the Canadian revolution of 184l,
not where the invasion precedes civil commotion.
If citizens of the United States fitted out, or
were engaged in fitting out, military expedition
from the United States, intended to act against
the British government in Canada, they were
clearly violating the laws of their oDn country,
and exposing themselves to the just consequent
ces which might be inflicted on them If taken
loithin The British dominions. But, notwithstand-
ing this, they were certainly not pirates" nor
does the undersigned think it can advance the
purpose of fair and friendly discussion so nomi-
nate them. Their offence whatever it was, had
no analogy to cases of piracy Supposing all
that is alleged against them be true, they were
taking part in what they regarded as civil
war, and they were taking part on the side of
the rebels Surely Great Britain herself has
not regarded persons thus engaged as deserving
the appellation which her Majesty's government
bestows upon these citizens of the United States.
at is quite notorious, that for the greater
part of the last two centuries, subjects of the
British crown have been permitted to engage in
foreign wars, 9th national and cipil, and in the
latter in epery Stage Of their progress and yet it
has been imagined that England has at any
time allotoed her subjects 10 turn "pirates."
Indeed, in our times, not only have individual
subjects of that Of that crown gone abroad to
engage in civil wars, but we have seen whole
regiments openly recruited, embodied, armed,
aud disciplined in England, with the avowed
purpose of aiding rebellion agains. nation
with which England was at peace; although it
is true that subsequently an act of Parliament
was passed to prevent transactions so nearly
approaching to public war, without license
from the crown.
cit may be said that there is difference be-
tween the case of civil war arising from
disputed succession, or a protracted revolt of
colony against mother country, and the case
of fresh outbreak or commencement of a rebel.
lion. The undersigned does not deny that such
distinction may for certain purposes be deemed
well founded. He admits that a government
called upon to consider lis o,on rights interests.
and duties, when civil war breaks out in other
countries, may decide on all the circumstances
Of the particular case upon us oiOn existing stip-
ulations, on probable results, on ,ohat It's own
security requires, and on many other considera-
tions. Itmay be already bound to assist one par
ty, or il may become bound if il so chooses, TO
assist the other, and to meet the consequences
of such assistance
. But, iohefLer de reroA be recent or long con-
,inued, they who join those concerned in it,
Whatever may be their offence against their oUn
country, or however they may be treated if taken
with arms in their hands in he territory Of The
government against ohich the standard Of rsroh
Is raised, cannot be denominated 'pirateS with
out departing from all ordinary use Of language
in the definition of offences. A cause which
has so foul an origin as piracy cannot, in its
progress, or by its success, obtain claim to any
degree of responsibility or tolerance among ma
tions; and civil wars, therefore, are not under
stood to have such commencement.
q 1t is well known TO Mr. Fox, that authorities
of the highest eminence in Great Britain, living
and dead, have maintained that THE GENERAL
LAW OF NATIONS does not forbid The citizens NJ
subjects Of one government from taking part IN
The cipl cOmmoiit ns Of another. There is some
reason, indeed, to think that such may be the
opinion Of her Majesty's government at the
present moment"