Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1853-10-04

| ,vitbont having obtained permission 70 e2patria1e
himself from the authorities Of thaL county, lpe
!. - IF nationality which bind hmt it. The We
1 s, eSisIaij6n oil that refugee on board the sHus-
| ~ > II tbs nreseuce of the American Consul and
| 81 IRE commander Of the st. Louis shows that
| Se sin considers himself as subject OF the Em
peror. In short, even ACCORDING 70 Terms OF the
law of the Union, such adeclaration, supposed to
have been signed by Kosztai and from which Mr..
ilrown has pretended 10 infer his naturalization in
the United Siaiess is not sutclent 70 produc that
effect. The undersigned thinks lie may dispense
entering into any further details IN regard to this
question, seeing that the Department of State of
the United States constantly refuses to giant pass
ports to individuals who find themselves in this
category, md that official publications have been
made from ime 10 time to that effect.
AS there can be no doubt, Therefore, concerning
the question Of nationality, the Consul General of
tile Emperor at Smyrna was without doubt perfect
Justified hem, in virtue those treaties which
subject Austrian subjects in Turkey TO consular
jurisdiction, lie seized the person of Roszta within
the pale of his jurisdiction.
Such being The case, the Imperial Government
trusts that the Government of the United States
will hasten to instruct its consul at Smyrna not 10
interppSe any obstacle to the EXtIadition Of the
aforesaid KoSzta 1.-THE Consul Genernl of France
to the Consul Generalo of Austria at Smyrna.
But, apart from this question of jurisdiction, il
is especially the mode adopted by the functionares
OF the United Sates in order TO settle the matter,
| which has given the Imperial Government the most
\ Legitimate grounds of complaint. 's ~
The act'of violence which the commander Of o.
| the sloop-of-war ttSt. LouS' committed against
the Austrian brig ttHuszar'-that real act of war,
committed IN full peace, in neutral port, the
| fatal effects OF which were only ayerted by the
] prudence and moderation OF our Consul General
ut Smyrna-constitutes an outrage upon the Nln-
| cipIes OF the law of nations; and the Imperial
Government has no doubt but that this act, viewed
in such hight, will have been condemned by The
Government of the United States, SAID Govern
ment being itself interested in preventing the lepe-
tition Of similar occurrences.
The events of the 2dIof July at Smyrna present
in twofold point of view serious deviation IRON
the rules of International law.
i Isl. The commander of the United States sloop-
lof-war tSt Louis'' threatened the brig oil lns lm-
4 periel and Royal Apostolic Majesty, the auszat,
with hostile attack, by bringing his guns TO bear
upon the latter, and by announcing III wIltlng'
ltliat if a certain individual detained on board
whose nationality was being discussed between ths
agents OF the two Governments, was not Delivered
over to him at u stated hour, he woul 80 aua IaAS
him by main force.
4 There can he no doubt but that the threat OF
attacking, by main force, vessel belonging
to the military maine of sovereign state whose
flag she carries Is nothing else than threat oil an
ACT Of war. Now, the right of making war rs
necessarily, and from the very nature oil thatrgnt'
inherent in the sovereign power. fsf,-
ga night of so nomentonS nature" says Vat
IteI, CLaw OF Nations, vol. O. book 3, chap l, sec.
III 1883
real grounds of complaint; whether she is auth0r-
ICED to employ force, and justfGGte IN taking up
arms; whether prudence will admit oil such Step'
and whether the welfare of the State requites IL
that hight, say, belong only to the 60dy o. TIE
notion or the SUpereign, her representative 1t
doubtless one Of those rights Without i1hieh there
can be no sdLutary government, and which nre
Therefore called rights of Majesty"
The founders of the Republic OF the United
States fully Tecog missed, from the beginning oil the
ffNtt
1.-THE articles oil. perpetual confedeIacy and Unlor
Ibetween the States of New Hampshire, MasSachu-
setts, &c. OF 1878, contain already the following
stipulation, Up, $40 "The right of declaring wal
and 10 make peace shall belong solely anu eTciu
to the Congress of the United Stater." This baSl:
OF the public law of the United states was pre-
served aud sanctioned b y:he Constitution OF the
United States of 1881, which reserves the noWe
of declaring explicitly TO Congress, (sec. VIII
Upon this point the Constitution OF the United
States hurnonizes perfectly with the public law
Europe. "
But this right, reserved tothe supreme power o.
each country, would become illuSory and null Il
commanders of naval forces or others were TO Dt
lexplictlyor tacity authorized to undertake, ethel
of their own accord upon the order or with tht
lconsentof diplomatic or consular AGENT to com
init acts of aggression and of war against the yes
sells or the roSpS of another nation without Specla
instructions from the supreme authority OF then
own country, notified in the forms prescribed by
the law of nat ons. 7-5s,.5trzf
It's impossible that the regular Governments o.
/ tue civilized world can wish to expose their au-
thority, well general peace, to the hazards o.
Ehostilities commenced without their knowledge,
and without special Authority from the sovereign
Ipower, by such or such GunctiOnary1 in foreign
land. e'"
2dly. This act of hostility has been committed
lin a neutral port of Power friendly TO both ma
tons. r-
Certainly, if there be one point in maritime ant
international law which clearly and positively
defined, and which has been adopted by oil The
Powers of tile world, it is the inviolability o
neutral ports, the Ghs0ftte prohibition from com
hitting in such ports, acts of war and OF violence
even against tile euemy with whom we are al
lopen war Modern history furnishes but few ex-
4 amples of cases of this kind. One OF these rart
instances is the attack upon the Dutch East lndt=
an feet, which had taken shelter in the port o
Bersne, in Norway, by the admiral commanding
tue forces of the enemy; and although that attack
was repused by the guns of the Tort oil that ne u
trail port, Vatican authority universally rec og'
nIzed in matters relating TO the law OF hauons-
does nevertheless excuse the neutral toWer SDehI
mark of having complsiiied in too faint voice o
an undertaking so mi unousto her dignity and to
her rights.
In orderthe better to establish the concurrence
of all nations and the unaniinIty OF all expound-
erS of civil law on this question, we can quote the
authority of an American statesman. The fol-
lowing is the opinion of Mr.. Henry Wheaton:
trThe rights of war" says he, elements OF In
i, ternational Law, part Nv, chap. III, ~ ''can
be exercised only within the territory of the bel
ligerent Powers, uponthe high seas, or in terri.
tory belonging 10 no one. Hence 1t follows that
hostilities cannot lawfully be exercised within
the territorial jurisdiction of the neutral State,
which is the common friend of both parties"
Then, SO: s'Not only are all captures made by
the belIlgerent cruisers within the limits OF this
jurisdiction absolutely illegal and void, but cap
lures made byarmed vessels stationed IN bay or
river, or in the mouth of river, or in the harbor
of neutral State forthe purpose oil exercising the
rights of war from tins station are also invalid.
Thus, where a British privateer stationed itself
within the river Mississippi in the neutral teito-
~ of the United States for the purpose OF exerci
sing the right of war from tue river, by standing
of and on, obtaining information at the Balize,
and ouerhauling vessels in their couEse down the
river, and made the capture in question within
three English miles of the aluvial Islands formed
at its mouth restitutionotthe captured vessel was
l