Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-08-11
SAN JUAN AND THE RIGHT OF EN-
BAssY.

We have seen much defamation against the
destruction of San Juan and we have read
many violent paragraphs, based on that text.
1t is easy enough to rail and rant. Almost any
one can assume pious ceuntenance to depre-
cate the employment of force, and Willy those
who inAict punishment upon culprits deserving
castigation. But thusfar we have seen only
few feeble attempts to prove that the course of
Captain Hollins was not just, right, and proper.
Amongst the feeble attempts to prove our
government in the wrong is one that is well
calculated to mislead, because Of the manner
in which it is expressed. The argument is put
forth in this manner:
aSan Juan either belonged to Nicaragua, or
it did not If it belonged to Nicaragua, then
our claim for redress ought to have been made
on the Nicaragua government If it did not
belong to that State, then the insult to Mr..
Borland at San Juan could not be noticed, be-
cause it was offered beyond the limits OF the
country to which he was accredited as min
ister.n
Neither Of these positions are tenable
In the first place, the abstract territorial
rights of Nicaragua at San Juan cannot be
considered as pertinent to the question IN
volved We believe that the title of that State
to the, district Of country in which San Juan
is situated is perfectly clear But then it
must be borne in mind that the title of
that State has been denied, and the pos
session of San Juan wrested from her by
British force who seized upon the place in the
name of the Sambo Chief of the Mosquito In
dams. And what is more, the State Of Nicara-
qua has never been able to regain her rightful
possession. The authorities Of San Juan have
never acknowledged her jurisdiction on the
contrary, they have pretended to act under the
hostile claim put forward in the name of the
Indians. If San Juan had recognized its de.
pendence on, and allegiance to, the State OF Nj
caragua, then our government would have
taken different course But the truth is, San
Juan repudiated all dependence on, or ALE
glance to, the State of Nicaragua, and being
protected by British influence, Nicaragua could
not vindicate her territorial rights.
1t is plain, therefore, that no matter how
clear the title of Nicaragua was, we could not
hold her responsible for the acts Of people
over whom she was not permitted to exercise
any control. San Juan existed in defiance OF
her laws and in contempt of her authority. She
was not, therefore, responsible for the acts OF
the people Of San Juan, and any demand upon
her, because of their conduct, would have been
ridiculous and absurd. They denied all ale
glance to her, and she owed no protection to
them. Their organization did not emanate
from her authority, and she had never, by i'm
plication or otherwise, become responsible for
their conduct. 1t follows, necessarily, that no
demand for redress could be made upon her.
If our government had been silly enough to
make such demand, Nicaragua would have
replied, by saying that San Juan was within
her rightful Jurisdiction but nation too pow
erful for her to cope with, forbade her to exer
else her rightful jurisdiction there-that the
settlement at that point was in derogation Of
her rights, and that the settlers denied her au
thority to control them--that she had never
recognized them nor protected them, and was
in no manner responsible for their conduct.
This answer would have been strictly true
and perfectly conclusive. If a nation harborl
nest Of pirates, and affords them the protec
ton Of its nationality, she becomes responsible
for their conduct; but the idea of holding {
nation responsible for the deeds of men who
by the strength Of foreign influences, plan
themselves on her territory without her con
sent, and against her will, is contemptibly ab
surd. We think 1t clear, therefore, that, moi
withstanding the fact that Nicaragua is tn
real owner of San Juan, we could not hav
made any demand on her for the insult to Mi
Borland.
Thus we dispose Of one branch Of the seem
n. ING dilemma constructed by the San Juan ape
lopists. The other can be disposed Of withor
difficulty. The assertion that If San Juan wa
not part Of Nicaragua, the insult to Mr.. Boz
land was not an insult to the nation, is base
mon an entire misconception of the law of n,
tons. A minister is entitled to perfect securii
in those countries through which he may pas
as well as in the particular country to which b
~ IL accredited. vattel states, that to insult
minister on his way to or from the scene Of b
duties, is an injury to the whole nation to whic
he belongs; and to arrest him and offer hi
!, violence, is an infringement on the Right
g Embassy.
After announcing this principle vattel cit
the case of the murder Of two French emba
sadors in Italy--the one proceeding to Consta
tinopic and the other to Venice; and denounc
II, not as murder, but as ian atrocious Violate
Of the public faith and Of the law Of nations
He justi6es the declaration Of war that tn
transaction occasioned, and says that the Fren'
king had just cause, not only to take up arm
but 70 call in the assistance Of all other nation
for, he says, an injury to minister passi'
+ through country is not in the nature Of p
vate dispuie, doubtful queston--in viii
each marty pretends to have Justice on