The daily union., 1852-01-13
EDITORS CORRESPONDENCE.
sNo..",n'. Proposed asvl.,on or shs Law OF Nation

skossuta's Proposed Revision the OF Nations.
Nav YoEK, January 8, 1852.
10 tds Editor of hs Union:
Sin The article in your paper Of the 3oth ut, signed
- T. r." animadverling my remarks concerning Kos
suth and the doctrines which he advances, demands
notice IRON do not propose TO reply 10 the verbal
criticisms which abound in his homy, nor 10 initiate the
temper and asperity OF the language which he employs
but | shall endeayor to show that although had not
kossuth's speeches before when | wrote, yet my
statement OF the principles avowed by him was substan
TALLY correct, and that they cannot be maintained
AT the reception given TO him by the bar of New York.
his language is that the United States may be pleased
TO protect the sovereign rights Of nations 10 dispose OF
their own domestic against the eneroaching in
reference OF foreign powers. !"
Well. il the United States make such declaration OF
the admission of the interference OF Russia in Hun
gary. and Russia will not respect your declaration, then
you might have 10 60 to and there is the rub.
Well, am not the man to decline the consequences Of
my principles. will not steal into your sympathy by
slippery evasion. Yes, gentlemen, confess should
Russia not respect such declaration of your country,
then you are obliged-lierally oblged-to go war;
else be prepared 10 be degraded before mankind from
your dignity. Yes, confess that woald be the
But you powerful enough 10 defy any power in just
cause. Its 1.-THE wafs1 greatest benefit will be
that will be the last war. because il will make the laws
of nations TO become reality, which nobody will dare
violate seeing them put under the safeguard OF all ha
manity 1t will be the last war. because il will make
nations contented--conten,ed because free"
1t is undoubtedly principle OF International law that
each nation has the right TO govern itself without inter-
ference control by any foreign power; but deny the
inference that because we deem this an important part
OF the law Of nations, are under obligations to
maintain it by force of for the benefit OF foreign
nation. The law OF nations prescribes that prisoners
taken in war shall be treated kindly, and exchanged
during the war released at its teminatio and debe-
rately putting them to death would be regarded
gross and barbarous violation of this humane provision
yet two or more OF the civilized nations OF the world al
should put ther prisoners 10 DEATH it would hardly
be maintained that under obligations TO go to
war to compel them TO respect this part OF the law which
has SO largely contributed to mitigate the horrors of that
evil A flag OF truce is respected by every nation,
whether savage or civilized; and il violated,
should surely evince our honest indignation at the act
But If Kossuhs theory OF national obligation be true
should be bound TO make war upon the offending nation
or prove recreant 10 our principles. These examples
show, what might have been before asserted, ,ha, the
question whether may interfere to prevent interer-
ence is matter Of policy entirely, and forms part OF
the law OF nations.
Your correspondent, 81 F. p" asserts that the war
made by England upon China not parallel case
to ,ha, of Hungary, because he says, England did
not send an army 10 put down domestic nsurec.
,
and compelled the Chinese to repeal law probib.
iting Englishmen from selling opium TO the people,
and forced them to open their ports 10 the world
contrary to their ancient and uniform policy. 1t was
direct interference with the right of sef-governmen
with the fundamental right to make their own aws-and
furnishes much stronger than that Of Hungary,
because China had actually been an independent nation
for ages. and soacknowedged by all the world while
Hungary yet struggling for independence. and
recognised by any power. The fact that insurrec-
lion in Hungary expressly declared TO be for liberty
does not alter the al ALL The thing was con-
tended for in Chinahe liberty their own laws
free from the control OF any foreign power II is the
very essence OF liberty both individual and NATIONAL
be governed by no law but what we have in way
agreed 10 be governed by; and this is the freedom OF
which the Chinese deprived.
Suppose The United States and Great Britain should 20
TO maintain this principle OF noD-inteerence and
the result should be anticipated by Kossuth and your
correspondent "J F. P -" that despotism throughout Eu-
rope should be overhrown would that make the nations
con,ened as kossuh declares il would Is there any
example in history where nation has preserved that lib.
eriy which worked out by ohers' Is il within the
range OF experience that things clearly, and with
their correct proportions when they suddenly lei
from dark dungeon into the dazzling light OF mid day
II they do not Of what practical advantage would il be
10 the cause OF true liberty TO make the nations OF En-.
rope as free the United States Have we not Just
continent OF Europe, has changed her republic for mil.
ary despotsm Ii 10 this TO say that Ma
poeons sa fraud upon the people, and es,ab
shed without their free All who are acquaint.
ed with the real wishes OF the French people admit ha,
very large majority prefer monarchy TO republic,
and II they do not retain Napoleon they will choose some
other monarch. By carrying out the principles OF Kos.
suth, however, shall force our government upon
France and every other nation OF Europe assuming there
By that every one must prefer the government that we
do This rule OF non.inerference would something
like that definition Of liberty which permits every man
to do as he pleases. and il he does not, compel him.
The people of England contened and think they
are eer than are, while TO their government
would be tyranny. We not TO consider which form
OF government contributes most TO the utility and ad.
vancemen OF society but why, for example, the Eng
lsh free under that government which could not
durei Because liberty, as before stated is the being
governed by the laws which prefer and the educa
tion--or, rather, the want Of educaon-among the
tons OF Europe has caused them TO prefer the govern.
mens under which they live; and any spirit OF propa.
gandsm, except moral one TO compel them TO adopt
system which they do not want and which requires for
its maintenance degree OF civilization among the
which they have yet approached, would be the ves
desposm, and by its utter failure would do eyerywhece
ireparable injury to the cause OF rational liberty From
time time. the people OF Europe acquire more inlei
gcnce and educaion aud become vruous and better
understand their rights. instructions and revolutions will
take place, which will probably result in concessions By
the rulers, and grants OF power will be made by
them the people, m ultimately they may arrive at in
sttuons perhaps as free those OF the United States