The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-09-30

of naval forces or ohes be explicitly t~citly
authorized 10 undertake. either of their accosd
upo die order Or with the consent Of diplomatic OF con
suIar agent, TO commit acts OF aggression and oil war
az ansl The vessels qhe troops OF another nation, with
out special instructions from The supreme authority OF
their country, notified in the forms prescribed by the
law OF nations 8E#
II is impossible that the regular governments OF the
civilized world can wish TO expose Their authority. as
we'll as general peace, TO the hazards oil hoslities
menced without their knowledge, and without special
authority from the sovereign power, by such or such
funconary. in foreign land.
IDLY This act Of hostility has been committed in
neutral port OF power friendly to both natons.
Certainly. If there be point OF maritime and inter-
national law which IS clearly and positively dehned and
il is the nyloaby OF neutral ports, the absolute proh
biton from committing, in such ports, acts OF war and OF
open war. Modern history furnishes but few examples
Of OF this kind One OF these rare instances the
attack the Dutch East India fleet which had taken
shelter in the port of Begne IN Norway by The admiral
commanding the forces of the enemy; and although that
attack Tepulsed by the guns OF the tort Of that
neutral port, Vonan authority universally IeSos Missed
IN matters relating TO the law OF naions--does neverhe
less accuse the neutral power (Denmark) OF having
complained in TOO faint voice oil an undertaking so In
furious to her dignity and TO her rights.
In order the better TO establish The concurrence Of
all nations, and the unanimy OF all expounders oil
civil law en- this question, we can quote the authori-
ty OF American statesman The following Is the
opinion Of Mr.. Henry Wheaton The rights Of war"
says he, elements of International Law, part Nv, chap.
HI ~ can be exercised only within the territory OF the
belgerent powers, upon the high seas or IN territory
belonging TO no one. Hence u follows that hosilies
cannot lawfully be exercised within the territorial urs
dcton OF The neutral State winch IS the common Trend
OF both parties" Then, o. mot only all captures
made by the beligerent cruisers within the limits OF ms
jurisdiction absolutely illegal and void but caplores
made by armed vessels stationed IN bay or ryef, or IN
the mouth OF rve or IN the habol OF neutral stale
tor The purpose OF exercising the rights OF var from ms
station, also invalid. Thus, where a British priva-
,eer stationed itself within the river Mississippi IN the
neutral territory Of the United Slaes for the purpose of
exercising the rghtof war from the river by standing
of and on, obtaining information at the Ballze, and
overhaulng vessels their course down the riger and
made the capture IN question within three English miles
OF the auvia islands formed at its mouth, restitution Of
the captured vessel deceed by Sir w. Scott So,
also, where beligeIent ship lying within neutral terri
tory, made capture with her boats out oil the neutral
territory, The capture held 10 be invalid; for though
the hostile force employed was applied 10 the captured
vessel lying oa OF the territory, yet such OF
trail territory for the purpose OF war is TO be permitted
II all hostility against an enemy declared 10 be within
the territorial jurisdiction oil neutral State, which has
friendly relations with both parties, ia severely
denned by all writers on International law; il captures
made by belligeren cruisers in the bays OF anen,fal
States by the boats OF the vessels stationed there
ou 81 that territory null and illegal according 10 the
law OF the United States and the DEGREES of the maritime
courts Of Great Britain, an attack upon vessel belong
ing 10 friendly power IN neutral port would deserve
TO be censured IN still more severe terms.
The history OF maritime wars at the period Of the
French revolution furnishes abundant proofs of The very
particular jealousy with which the government Of the
URied States maintained the rights OF neulras and the
undersigned would cite some celebrated cases, which
the first statesmen OF the Union the most distinguished
predecessors OF Mr. Marcy in the high position which he
fills, have defended the absolute inv;oaby of neutral
ports by OF most elaborate But the
undersigned is fully persuaded that the doctrines
will guides TO the government OF the United
States the present occasion, he confines himself 10
this slight allusioa 10 those principles which for
merly maintained and very recently supported BY the
government Of the United States In relation the rights
of neutrals and especially in regard the inyola-
biliiy OF neutral porls
The imperial government enierains too high opin-
ion of the of justice and OF integrity oil the govern
ment OF the United States to doubt tor single
its anxiety dsavow the conduct OF its agents. under
the circumstances above mentioned, and that it will hasten
to call them TO account. and tender TO Austria
satisfaction proporionae TO the magnitude of the out
rage. <s fs
The undersigned avals himself OF this occasion offer
to the Secretary of Stale the renewed assurance of his
high consideration.
HULSEMANN.
The Hon VIM. l.. MARCY,
Secretary of State of the United States.