The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1856-01-12
partial issue in the place Of the general one

presented by the us. D.,
The British Government passed over the
ouestion of right of Great Britain, real or sup
posed. in Central America, and assumes that
She had such rights at the date of the treaty
and that the rights comprehended the pro-
tectorship of the Mosquito Indians, and the
extending jursdictian and limits of the Balize
and the colony of Bay Islam dsnd thereupon
proceeds by implication to infer that the stipu-
lations of the treaty being merely future IN
effect, Great Britain may still continue to hold
the contested portion of Central America
The U. S. cannot admit either the inference or
the premises, We steadily deny that at the
date of the treaty, Great Britain had any po-
sessions there, other than the limited peculiar
establishment at the Balize, and maintain that
if she had any they were surrendered by the
convention. The Government in recognizing
the obligations of the treaty has of course de-
sired to see it executed in good faith by both
parties. In it's discussions therefore, 1T has not
looked to rights that we might assert, indie.
pendently of our geographical position, and all
other circumstances, and which create for US
| relations to the Central American States diff
ferent from those if anyGovernment inEurope.
! The British Government in its last c0mmu-
nication, although we'll knowing the views of
the U. S., still declares that 1t sees no reason
why a conciliatory spirit may not enable the
two governments to overcome all obstacles to a
satisfactory adjustment of the subject. Assured
of the correctness of the constitution of the
treaty constantly adhered to by this Govern
ment, and resolved to insist On the rights of
the u. S., vet as actuated by the same desire
as is avowed by the British Government, to
remove all causes of serious misunderstanding
tbetween two nations associated by SO many
ties of interest and kindred, it has appeared
to me proper not to consider all amicable adj
justment of the controversy as opeless. There
is, however, reason to apprehend that with
Great Britain in the actual occupation of the
disputed territories, and the treaty therefore
practically null, SO far as regards our rights
this international difficulty cannot long remain
undetermined, without involving in serious
danger that friendly relation which is the in
terest as we'll AZ the duty of both countries to
cherish and preserue. 1t will afford me sincere
qualification, if future Efforts shall result in
the success anticipated heretofore, With more
confidence than the case permits me now to
! entertain. -tt
One other subject of discussion between
the U. S. and Great Britain has grown out
of the attempt which the agencies Of the
war in which she is engaged with Russia
induced her to make to draw recruits
from the u. S. 1t is the traditional and
settled policy of the U. S. to maintain i'm
partial neutrality during the wars which
from time to time occur among the great
powers of the world. Performing all the
duties of neutrality toward the respective
belligerent states, we may reasonably ex-
pect them not to interfere with the law
full enjoyment of its benefits. Notwith-
standing the existence Of such hostilities,
our citizens retain the individual right to
continue all their accustomed pursuits by
land or sea, at home or abroad, subject
only to such restrictions in this relation
as the laws of war, the usuage of nations,
or special occasions may impose, and it is
our organized right that our territorial ju-
risdiction shall not be invaded by either
of the belligerent parties for the transit
of their armies, the operations of their
fleets, the levy of troops for their service
the fighting out of cruisers by or against
either, or any other act or incident of war;
and these undeniable rights of neutrality,
individual and national, the U. S. will UNI
suance of this policy, the laws Of the U.
S. do not forbid their citizens to furnish
either Of the beligc rent powers, articles
contraband of, or munitions Of war, or to
take soldiers on board their private ships
for transportation, although in so doing
the individual citizen exposes his proper
ty and person to some of the hazards of
war {; still his acts do not involve any
breach of national neutrality, nor OF them
selves implicate the government.
Thus, during the progress of the present
war with Europe, our citizens have without
national responsibility gunpowder and arms
to parties regardless of the destination of
those articles. Many of our merchantmen
have been and continue to be largely en-
ployed by Great Britain and France in trans
porting troops, provisions, and munitions of
war to the principal seat of military opera
tons and in bringing home the sick and
wounded soldiers; but such use of our mer-
camille marine is not interdicted and there
fore does not compromise our neutral rela-
tons with Russia. But our municipal law,
in accordance with the law of nations, pc
remptorily forbids not only foreigners, but
our own citizens, to fit out, within the limits
of the U S., vessel to commit hostilities
against any State with which the U. s. are
at peace, or to increase the force of any for
eign armed vessels intended for such hostil-
ties against friendly State.
Whatever concern may have been felt by
either of the belligerent powers, lest private
armed cruisers or other vessels in the service
of one might be fitted out in the ports of
this country to depredate upon the property
of the other, all such fears have proved to
be perfectly groundless. Our citizens have
been withheld from any such act or purpose
by good faith, and by respect for the law
While the laws of the Union are thus De-
remptory in the prohibition of the equipment
or armament of belligerent armed cruisers in
our ports, they provide not less absolutely
that no person shall in the Territy or juris-
diction of the U enlist or enter himself or
hire or retain another person to enlist OF en-
ter himself or to 60 beyond the limits or iu-
risdiction of the U. S., with intent to be en-
listed or entered into the service of any pow
er or state, either as a soldier or as marine
or seamon, on board of any vessel of war,
letter or marque or privateer; and these en-
actments are also in strict concurrence with
the law of nations, which declares that no
state has right to raise troops for land or
sent of that state, and that whether forbid
den by the municipal law or not, the attempt
to do it without such consent is an attack up
on nat onal sovereignty.
Sush being the public rights and the munich
pal law of the United States, no solitude on
the subject was entertained by the Govern
ment, when, year since. the British Parlia-
ment passed an act for the enlistment of for
eigDers into the service of Great Britain
Nothing on the face of the act, or in its public
it, s.l: LII A. ~