Eastern times. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1846-1857, 1854-12-14

L
| in question principle Of international law, by
means of special conventions between the sew
eral powers of Europe and America Ac-
cordingly, proposition, embracing not only
the rule that free ships make free goods, ex-
cept contraband articles, but also the less con-
tested one, that neutral property, other than
contraband, though on board enemy's ships,
shall be exempt from confscation, has been
submitted by this government TO those Of Eu-
rope and America.
! Russia acted promptly in this matter, and
convention was concluded between that coun-
try and the United Sass, providing for the
observance of the principles announced, not
only as between themselves, but also as be-
tween them and all other nations which shall
enter into like stipuations. None of the 9TH
er powers have as vet taken final action on the
subject. am not aware, however, that any
objection TO the proposed stipulatons has been
made but, on the contrary, they are acknowl-
edged to be essential to the security of neutral
commerce and the only apparent obstacle to
their general adoption is in the possibility that
it may be encumbered by inadmissible con-
ditions.
The King Of the Two Sicilies has expressed
to our Minister al Naples his readiness to con-
cur in our proposition relative to neutral
rights, and to enter into convention on that
subject
The King Of Prussia entirely approves Of
the project of a treaty TO the same effect, sub
mitted to him, but proposes an additional arti-
Gle providing for the remuneration of privateer-
ing. Such an article, for most obvious rea-
sons, is much desired by nations having naval
establishments, large in proportion to their
foreign commerce. If it were adopted as an
international rule, the commerce of nation
having comparatively a small naval force
would be very much at the mercy Of its enc
my, in case of war with power of decided
superiority. The bare statement of the condi-
ton in which the United States would be
placed, after having surrendered the right TO
resort to prlvateers, in the event of war with a
belligerent of naval supremacy, will show that
this government could never listen to such a
proposition.
The navy of the first maratime power in
Europe is at least ten times as large as that of
the United States. The foreign commerce Of
the two countries Is nearly equal, and about
equally exposed to hostile depredations In
war between that power and the United
States without resort on our part to our mer-
camille marine, the means of our enemy to in
flct injury upon our commerce would be ten
fold greater than ours to retaliate. We could
not eXtrlcate our country from this unequal
condition, with such enemy, unless we at
once departed from our present peaceful poll
cy, and became a great naval power Nor
would this country be better situated, in war
with one of the secondary naval powers
Though the naval disparity would be less, the
greater extent, and more exposed condition of
our widespread commerce, would give any Of
them a like advantage over us.
The proposition TO enter into engagements
to forego resort to prlvateers, In case this
country should be forced into war with great
naval power, is not entitled to more favorable
consideration than would be proposition to
agree not to accept the services of volunteers
for operations on land. When the honor or
the rights of our country require 1t to assume
a hostile attitude, it confidently relies upon the
patriotism of Its citizens, not ordinarily de-
voted TO the military profession, to augment
the army and the navy, so as to make them
fully adequate 10 the emergency which calls
them into action. The proposal to surrender
the right to employ privateers is professedly
founded upon the principles, that private prop
erty of unoffending non-cOmbatants, though
enemies, should be exempt from the ravages
of war but the proposed surrender goes but
equally requires such private property should
not be seized or molesteG by national ships of
war. Should the leading powers Of Europe
concur IN proposing, as a rule of international
law, to exempt private property upon the
ocean from seizure by public armed cruisers,
as well as by privateers, the United States
will readily meet them upon that broad ground
Since the adjournment of Congress, the rat
II 81
States and Great Britain, relative to coast
fisheries, and to reciprocal trade with the
British North American provinces, have been
exchanged, and some of its anticipated advan-
tages are already enjoyed by US, although its
full execution was to abide certain acts of leg
islation not yet fully performed. SO soon as
it was ratified, Great Britain opened to our
commerce the free navigation of the river St.
Lawrence, and to our fishermen unmoested
access to the shores and bays, from which
they had been previously excluded, on the
coasts of her North American provinces in
return for which, she asked for the introduc-
ton, free of duty, into ports of the United
States, of the fish caught on the same coast by
British fishermen. This being the compensa-
ton, stipulated in the treaty, for privileges Of
the highest Importance and value to the United
before it became effective, the request seemed
to me to be reasonable one but it could not
be acceded to from want of authority to sus-
pend our laws imposing duties upon all for
eign fish,
In the meantime, the Treasury department
issued regulation, for ascertaining duties
paid or secured by bonds, on fish caught on
the coasts ofthe British provinces, and brought
10 our markets by British subjects, after the
fishing grounds had been made fully accessi-
bic to the citizens of the United States |
recommend to your favorable consideration
proposition, which will be submitted to YOU
for authority to refund the duties and cancel
the bonds thus received. The provinces of
Canada and New Brunswick have also antici-
pated the full operation of the treaty, by legis-
lative arrangements, respectively, to admit,
free OF duty, the products of the United States
mentioned in the free list of the treaty: and
an arrangement, similar to that regarding
British fish, has been made for duties now
chargeabe on the products of those provinces
enumerated in the same free list, and intro
duced therefrom into the United States a
proposition for refunding which will, in my
judgment, be in like manner entitled to your
favorable consideration.
There is difference of opinion between the
United States and Great Britain, as to the
boundary line of the Territory Of Washington
adjoining the British possessions on the Pacif-
ic, which has already led to difficulties on the
part of the citizens and local authorities of the