The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-03-13
EXECUTIVE MANSION,
Washington, August g, le5,

ported in violation the municipal law aud Of the
tona sovereignty and neutrality, and especially upon tho
question: what legal responsibility II any those de-
volve on the British minister and British consals
FRANKLIN PIERCE.
Mr.. Cashinys Reply
ATTORNEY GEsEnALs 0rricE, Aug. ., 1855
SIM have the honor submit herewith the considera-
tons Of applicable the enlistment of troops within
the United States by the British government in far
the facts appearing in the documents before
the personal action either of the British minister Of m
British consuls in the United States.
There is no room for doubt to the law regarding
the general question.
In the first place the of Congress Of April 30 la
contains the following provisions gf
aSKc a. Andb De u JurAfy enacted, That II any gersoa
SHALL within the territory or Jurisdiction Of the United
States enlist or eater himself hire oz rssn snotstr
person to enlist OF snr himself bsyond the limits
sast;d o. entered n.o the service of Any forssa prnes
Rms Or sssnsa On beard q aay vssssl.oswss ls.5-V
as.nsd su,Isy u hish sSsmsanor, and shal Be sned
not excssdns one thousand dollars and b. imprensd not
exceeding three ysars" (ih Stat At Large p A4s.)
or course as tbs levy Of troops within the United States
for foreign service forbidden by law, ssch right has
by executive permission given Great Britain To
the contrary OF ths the British government expressly
notified by letter Of Mr. Marcy to Mr. Champion Of April
2s 1854 that no ensmen in the United States would be
permitted either to Great Britain to Russia. Exec.
Docs Is, Sec, 3sd Engr4 VOL xii, No. loa p 81
In the second place. independently OF the municipal rea-
tons of the acts question: they constitute whether they
be the acts of the British government or of Its ministers
and consus violation Of the sovereignty and Of the neu-
trail rights Of the United States asH.a
The rule of public law unequivocal this point and
is correctly stated as follows, by Wolf:
asnce the right of raising soldiers ia right Of majesty
which must not be violated by foreign nauon' - no. %
I'D raisa diera Ou
consent OF its sovereign" tJus Gennum s llIA')
BY vattel:
"A war csnno, be carried without soldiers IL s evil
dent that whoever has the right Of making var has aso
longs the sovereign and Is one OF the PreroR-
lives Of majesty (vatte Drot dcs Gems j ., ch Ii p
2s3)
aAs the right Of levying soldiers belongs solely to tho
nation or the sovereign, no person must aemP. 70 sn m
sovereign and, with that permission none put VOL
be enlisted for the service OF their country
h the question here and NO sovereign has nght 70
give or sell his subjects to another.
Whoever undertakes oenis soldersin foreign coun-
try without the sovereigns permssion ana N genera,
whoever ences away the subjects Of another state violates
one of the sacred rights Of the prince and the nation
This crime ia distinguished by the Of kidnapping or
ana Is Toegn rn .re banged
without mercy and with great Justice IL Is not pre-
that their sovereign has ordered them 70 commit
crime and suppsng even that they had scsyed such an
order they ought have obeyed IL their sovereign
having no right to command what contrary the law
Of nature. But II IL appears that they acted by
order such proceeding In foreign sovereign s justly
considered as an injury, and sufficient cause for de-
clarng agans, him. unless he makes suitable repara
tionn (yattel Droit dos Gems. l. III, oh Il, p 1881
BY Kuber;
state entirely neutral has the right to exact by
force If necessary bclgerent powers do not use its
neutral territory for the purposes Of war that they take
not thercom munitions OF war ana provisions "no otner
requirements Of for their armies that they
do not there any military preparations, enrolmeny
or collections Of troops that Of their troops armed
or upsrmcd pas through k &c that they exercise there
20 az, ~ bositv against the persons or property Of the
subjects Of the hostile state that they 90 not occupy IL
mlitariIy or make II the theatre OF war; Drot des Gems
Nodernes de lEurope 8 2e5)
BY G. r. de Martens:
aWhilst in case Of rupture between two nations,
neutral state preserves full enjoyment Of n territorial
rights IL can the absence of treaties prohibit during the
war in time peace any passage or sooorn ioregn
tesse. the recruiting mastering and exercising troops,
and II may force against hoae who shall attempt 10
violate the prohibition" Prscis du Droit des Gens g.
| 35o.) i. ##
! BY Gallant -a.... ..
tAu overnmens are accustomed forbid under capital
nenav foreigner TO make military engagements or re-
rrus vithn their territory in doing which they do no
more than 10 sustain and defend natural nRnb nu one
ha nsn,rs sovereign who leaves his subjects liberty
10 engage ,hemselve. In the service o. oeesn
% h. customary with his nation; IL IL has been usual
i IL lime o peace; Il sccords with the physical and po
al candon of the country IT. In fine he practiscs ind
frence and impsrtsity not denying to one beirerent
VIA, he comedies the other But II sovereign has not
been accustomed 10 allow his subjects TO enlist in the mi
% or naval service of other governmental II may well be
aonbed whether be may for the first time do II on the oc
OF between two states each OF which Is IN
amy with him am not prepared to say that in 50 DO
ing he gave equality Of advantage and facilities TO both,
for there might I've inequality in the need OF the begeene
for perhaps OF them suffering from dehcency OF men,
would derive precious md powerful from such por
mission bile the other ID would be usesss and super
fuous In mr. opinion therefore this qnceon comes with
in general rule of essential neutral dube-toat 70
connns In The snterior condition It being lawful only to
per.everp in what has been usual but unlawful " innoya~
tDei Doyer dc Prndpi Neutral ?, 3as, 327, 8ss)
By Taptefepille
The autlc, Of bslissOng may b, summed up N vsrI