New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-01-11

Should future events pr0trsct the Eastern war,
or still further cOmplcate it by embrong other
Governments, il can hardly fail to result In the
establishment Of new points in the international
code. These may relate exclusively to European
affairs, in the definition of boundaries or reciprocal
interests; or they may bear upon general questions
involving the policy Of the United States, IN respect
of commercial intercourse and the freedom of the
seas We have heretofore defined the rights OF
aiet,als as in our judgment the law Of nature and
common sense would dictate. We now proceed
to inquire how far American statesmen, in their
private capacity as well as through the official
acts of our Government at different periods, have
protested against old European abuses OF these
rights.
After the adoption By the American Government,
in 1881 of the doctrine that free ships make tree
goods Franklin was the first to express hope
that the whole international code might be re-
formed; and in his opinion, the first step was TO
abolish priyateering. At the same time he regret
ted that the uncturc had not yet arrived when
America by voluntarily depri'ing herself OF m arm
so effective in war with any naval power of Eu-
rope could afford the needed precedent. To the
honor of our country, however, be it remembered
that her earliest annals record her diplomatic
efforts to provide in her treaties with other ma
tons for the abolition of prvatcering and thus NJ
secure to neutral bottoms, and TO the unarmed
vessels of begerents, undisturbed right OF way
on the marine highways OF the globe
The first and at that time the only, Sovereisnto
respond to the call of justice and common sense,
was Frederick the Great OF Prussia, who In 1883
concluded treaty With the United States bywhich
goods otherw ise called contraband-suoh as naval
stores, arms, and munitions of war-wcre not 10
be condemned in common with the bottom contain
ing them. Such goods the captor might. detsin, if
the owner would not sell them, but he could not
forcibly appropriate them without paying. With
this treaty, in its general terms We do not perceive
that any fault can be found.
The epoch of the French Revolution for
this country period of trial. from within no less
thanw ithOut neutrality assailed and the Genet
episode of impudcnce and arrogance rebuked by
Washington and Adams, provoked violent assaults
on those statesmen, both at home and sbrosd. II
should also be borne in mind that early asl793,
brpadstufs in American bottoms going 10 France
were, by the British Cabinet pronounced cou.
traband, and condemned to be brought into
British ports and sold. Our exporting commerce
was thus threatened with heavy blow to avert
which Madison and Jefferson recommended ener.
getic measures. Washington accordingly sent
Mr.. Jay to England, by whom treaty was con-
cluded which failed however, to satisfy the Demo
cratic party. The instructions of our Government
to its diplomatic agents at that period prove that
the United States sought by all means to procure
such international laws IS would efectualy pro-
tect neutrals. COtempOraneOus with these com.
mendsble efforts were the British Orders in Council,
the Berlin and Milan DEGREES, aud the Continental
System of Napoleon, which are the plsnest ex.
pOnents of the old arbitrary system They
proved that no sound principle lay at the
bottom OF the code but that it, shifts and
peryersiOns were determined by political exigency
And even atthe close Of that bloody epoch the Con-
gross OF Vienna had on this subject, 40 new prn
ciple or measure 10 propose. Nor was solution
10 be expected from that body, representing. a. /.
did. stale lies and mody slams-.n whose coun-
els America did not NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS., alone
capable OF fresh, logiOai aud Just international
IDEAS the fruits o. her 1epp,-afc system. aaj. Of