The primitive Republican. (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-1852, 1852-09-16
Editor & Proprietor.
Prom the N. O. Picayuns.
The Lobos Question.

Among the documents transmitted 10 the
Senate by the President Of the United States
on the subject of the Lobos Islands, is long
despatch from Mr.. Webster to Mr.. Osme, /.
the Peruvian Minister. It is dated on the
2lst of August, and contains carefully
considered statement of the whole argument
against the exclusive right Of Peru to the
possession of the islands.
The preliminary observations with which
the main argument is introduced, state dis
tinctly what was the use intended to be
made of the fact, previously referred to by
Mr. Webster, that these islands had been
visited by the American Capt. Morrell ia
1923. 1t was not designed to set up any
right from discovery for the United States,
but Gas fact fit to be considered in COM
mon with other facts and occurrences" The
point is stated that Capt. Morren was the
first to discover the existence of guanO on
the islands, and it is urged that all the at
tempts of Peru to appropriate them to her
self date subsequently, to the intelligence Of
this discovery
The force of Mr.. Websters position is,
that these islands do not belong to Peru by
the national law of proximity, being more
than three marine miles from the main land;
and that they cannot therefore be claimed
except by acts of possession and jurisdiction;
and he proceeds to show that Peru never
had such possession or exercised such juris-
diction indisputably. He contends that they
were unclaimed and unoceupid by Peru,
while for period Of fifty years, dating from
1913, they had been the common resort of
citizens of the United States, engaged in the
] Hsho hot I
disturbed usage of Americans is disturbed
by recent acts and pretensions of Peru.
After the publication, in 1888, Of Nor
rell's voyage, the Peruvian Government is
: sued decree prohibiting foreigners from
u fishing for seals on any of the coasts or is
lands of Peru. The Lobos Islands were
u not specially indicated The prohibition
+ was general, but it involved some of tho
u same principles, and was met at once by
i remonstrance from the American charge
Z then at Lima. He had no instructions from
his Government, and therefore did not set
&c up any strong claim, but asked the recon-
! sideration Of an act which was deemed ur-
L friendly to the United States. The remon-
> STRANGE elected no reply, and the subject
Y was dropped, as the decree was never enfOrc-
. ed against the American sealers.
/ Mr.. Webster considers this as formal
~ remnnstrance by the United States against
II the asserted sovereignty of Peru over the
q. islands. and a sufficient reply to the aver
n. ment that the Peruvians have had an sun
s- disputed" right of possession. The Ameri-
IL cans, Mr.. Webster contends on the contrary,
.. had an undiSputed right of usage as of un-
:, occupied land and when Peru FIRST asserted
st jurisdiction it was met with protest on the
: part of the United States.
in Mr. Webster examihesat length the sup
e. posed decisions of the British Government
d. to acknowledge the Peruvian title to sover.
Id eighty, and shows strong points Of difference
e; between the case for the English and that for
eli the American occupants. He shows first
Id that no British Minister has given decided
.te or conclusive opinion on the points as invol
to wing question of public law; but they have
IL yielded as a matter hardly worth examina
he tion; and in the second place that "the Bri
)o- fish Government has no such ground t
on stand on in behalf of It's own subjects al
rn- the Government of the United States doe
in possess, and may well stand on in behalf O
an its citizens. They have established no suci
of right by long continued and undisputed u
of sage as the United States can show, and they
nj have therefore no such ground to resist al
is infraction of such usages. That however
to Mr.. Webster concludes is, a question 70
es. each Government to decide for itself and I
The treat of with Peru. The question for tn
United States is between them and Per-
in regard to a right which they have loni
enjoyed, and of which she seeks to depriv
them.
The Government Of the United States,
AL however, prepared to give weight to all tn
a arguments and facts which Peru may al
in vance to these islands. Under these circun
Ter stances Mr.. Webster advises Mr.. Osma tha
sed full instructions have been despatched {
nile the United States Minister at Lima, and o.
,oat dcrs given to the naval forces of the Unite
self States in that quarter 'to prevent collisio
cen until further examination Of the case"
and But contrary to the impression heret,
lain fore given of the orders of the Governmcn
u, Mr.. Webster denies the right of America
on shipping to resist the process of the Peruv
US an authorities By force. ''No countenance,
iren he tells them, will be given to the autho
of, of such enterprises claiming to be citizens
,es: the United States, who may undertake to
Why fend themselves or their vessels by force,
bet the prosecution of any commercial ente
fair prise to these islands Such acts would
was acts of private war, and their authors Won
was thereby justly forfeit the protection Of the
ent. own Government