Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-05-13
PRoPosED REPEAL OF THE NEUTRALITY LAWS.


mess of the Public Press upon this obnoxious pro-
position, including even that portion Of il which
supposes that We have cause Of complaint against
Spain. The mode Of redress suggested is generally
denounced as derogatory to the standing and cha
raeser Of any civilized nation and more especially
Of great and powerful one like the United States
when directed against weaker Power. These
sentiments, We are pleased to see, advanced by
Democratic rs well as by Wing journals, and we
sincerely hope that there will be such an unre-
served expression Of public opinion on the subject
as to cause this, the FIRST, to be also the last pro.
position Of the kind that will ever be brought for
ward in either House Of Congress.
independent Of the objections to the mode
which it is proposed to adopt for the purpose of OBJ
tanning redress for real or imaginary wrongs from
Spain, there are others connected with the subject
to which we propose briefly to allude
The resolutions Of Mr.. SLIDELL have their
foundation in a measure which it is alleged Spain
proposes TO adopt regards the slave population Of
Cuba. 1t is stated that the apprentice system is TO
be adopted in the Island for all the negroes which
have recently been introduced from Africa in viola
ton not only of the laws Of Spain, which absolutely
prohibit the slave trade but also in violation Of her
solemn treaties with other Powers on that subject.
Admit the fact to be true stated what grounds
and under what possible pretcnce We, matter
of right attempt to interfere with such an act Of
not more stringent against the African slave trade
than those Of Spain, and if cargo or cargoes Of
African slaves were thus surreptitiously introduced
into any Of our Southern States, does any one sup
pose that, on tho fact being operly authenticated,
any of these slaves could be or would DO re-
tanned in bondage? We greatly mistake the cha
racter Of the chvalric South if single voice, even
in that section of the country, would be raised in
support Of such gross violation Of the laws Of the
land and the sentiments Of the American people.
But let us take another view of the subject.
Has it ever occurred to the Senator introducing
these resolutions how dangerous precedent he is
advocating in thus assuming the right on the part
of the United States to interfere with the system
of slavery in other countries? If we can thus in
terfere with the course which Spain may think pro-
per to adopt as regards her slaves in Cuba, how
can he deny similar right to a combination of
European Powers if they thought proper to inter-
fere with slavery in the United States? If we can
say to Spain you shall not at your peril adopt the
apprentice system in Cuba, why shall not France,
Spain, and England unite and say that we shall not
continue to hold our slaves in bondage?
1t behooves the United States, and particularly
the South to be cautious how they put forward the
doctrine asserting the right Of nation to inter-
fere with another on this delicate question, for it is
precedent which might be quoted and acted upon
as regards ourselves with most fearful results.
We would here inquire why this excessive sensi-
tiveness is felt and these ultra measures proposed
because Spain has thought proper (assuming such
to be the fac of adopting the apprentice system for
those blacks which have been brought within her
territories in direct violation of her own laws
Where was all this sensitiveness when but few
years since Great Britain first introduced the APP
prentice system into all her colonies and included
in it all the black population, and then, long before
the apprentice term Of service had expired, by
single dash of the pen decrced the entire and imme-
diatc freedom of all the black apprentices to more
than double the number which exist in Cuba and
thus Ajrfcanized not one, but six or eight black
colonies nations, almost as much at our doors rs,
Cuba is? We never thought we had any cause Of
complaint against Great Britain on that occasion, or
at least we never expressed any. Why did we not
then show our teeth 2" Why did We not then
propose to repeal our neutrality laws as regarded
Jamaica, Antigua, ST. Kits, st. Vincent, &c. The
obvious reason was that we had no right to in
terfere, and with the additional reason that John
Bull was not nation which would allow any such
interference, and had the power, as well as the dis
position, to effectuay resent it if attempted, come
from what quarter it might. Some people, however,
think we can, with IMMUNITY, play different game
with Spain but whether that would be any credit
to our prowess or our magnanimity we leave to
others to say.
The treaties between England and Spain on the
subject of the slave trade are not secret but have
been published to the world years since, without
ever having elected remark or complaint on our
part. Those treaties stipulatc the course to be
pursued towards the blacks who, being shipped
from Africa in violation Of said treaties, may be
captured on the high seas or successfully landed in
Spanish colonies; and mixed commission has en-
listed in Havana for many years to take cognizanee
OF all such cases. The English Government has
again and again complained that the effective inter-
terence of this commission in favor Of tho slaves
AI,.A~