Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1856-09-23
RICHMOND WHIG.

~ recount
mendng 70 the established governments Of world IN,
abolition Of prvateerag. and the nvolabity In ue Of
war Of neeira hAgs and goods In recommending these
gave that the be taken together that Is
say that any which Joined the four powers
on either OF these rules must join them both that the
abolition OF prtvatcerng and the wedgment of
ra rights wers In the opinion Of the Conference alike
desirable and Necessary for improving system
and bringing into harmony with the ideas aud princi-
pies OF modern civilization and that therefore other pow
must understand that they join the Conference
on both these points stand aoo IRON the Conference
atogstber.
= Nov the government Of the United States. ss repre-
scented In Mt Mscys despatch objects this coupling
tho two rules and imposes the alternative of accepting
both or neither The American government says that
willing 20 accept the rule respecting the nvol.b,ty
neutral days and goods having indeed ITSELF years
ago forward formally recommend IL adopuon
es maintains that this rule and the rule respecting p
watering stand quite different basis and that In ac-
cepting the it is all prepared accept the
Other, |. proposed by the Conference. "Pivsteers,"
says Mr. Marcy
Are in substance department OF the national navy
thoy stand in the relation regular vessels OF
that volunteers do 10 the line, they fight In the and
under the authority of Government What ground have
you thcn against privatecrs which does tell against
regular navy well Besides" he continues the
injustice OF such rule operates upon couatres
out navies compared with operation upon naval Pow
ers We Americans opposed in principle to great
standing forces, military naval; In time of war, then
yaecr vho only do Tor what regular
val PoSer and, therefore deprive OF prvateers
Is TO deprive of natural of defence Aud
Who Is TO decide after all what constitutes privateer
distinguished from vessel of wary IL this point be
lett to foreign Powers who thus dictate the
forms and demarcations OF naval orcess"
The rule against pivateers Is thus charged with depr
wing countries without navies Of their proper means of
defence while in their weakness il lifts up the great
val Powers the position Of formidable bues who
all the ocean TO themselves and can do what they like
there.
To this argument against the abolition of privateecing
the OF justice succeeds another the ground
IN. Aust. fAna hat NJ. a. II
jeci 70 pIvatccring for Simply because prvsees cap
vessels prey upon pirate
ty But do make any rule against the pm
vate property on the seasy No you leave 1t To meoI-
capture before But what inconsistency abo.
ish puvaeeng this ground, aud leave private pro-
Perty just exposed as ever To capture by menowar
Nov, there considerable ia this argument
used by the American Government Pivaieering is
objectionable the ground OF its invasion Of private pro-
perry alone was il that aware
argument against pfvaeers Tor everybody knows that
menowar capture merchant vessels and private property
the when they The objection pvaerring
the hregularty and barbarism which nyolved
in private individuals going about simply by way of PEE
cunary speculation capturing ships and slaughtering
crews the open Ii may suit the American
ernnet TO describe prvateers in principle vessels
war nasnuch they authorized by the Governments
OF the countries whose flag they bear but there all
difference between public vessels and private vessels
which simply procure public authority in order TO enable
them to plumber. We admire indeed the perfect gravity
with which Mr. Marcy quotes vans description OF priva
ieeriug "a lawful aud time-honored mode OF warfare
VINO generously expose their pro.
perry aud their lives the dangers priyateerngh
well the old publcsts protest against bad citizens
who under the stately mask of spurious wisdom or
crafty sensitive conscience seek mislead the judgment
and dare that this is the in which the
State and the Sovereign be served and that the
profits which individuals derive from this pursuit
Illicit at least disgraceul This all very well in
punicist writing in Louis XIVs reign. But Mr. Marcy
know perfectly well the stuff of which
is made la theory il is the Government which fights
the pvateer, but practically everybody knows that pr
watering Is trade which carried because gives
much cent the capital employed in it, that il
Is IN "ct piece OF paper alone which distinguishes be-
tween the privateer and the pirate their real spirit
exactly the The Conference, then, very prope Is
wished TO put down this mercenary disgaceiu mode
OF Warfare and the rule against privateerng had moral
OBJECT IN view, and not merely the protection of private
property
The American argument however. appears to have
some force when it the difference of the opera
ton Ut this rule upon countries with and without regular
navies aud il may be admitted perhaps that the rule
proposed by the Conference, and without addition
it TO counierbalance such result would operate unfairly
upon country like the United States, whose merchant
vessels would be exposed the OF
eyery~here, without a navy Of their retalate
When Mr. Marcy then proposes addition this in
the shape oil general prohibition against all attack
private property the high seas, confess
are not altogether disinclined him. Mr.. Marcy
proposes TO add to the proposition in the declaration
the Congress o Paris against pdvaeeng the follow ing
words: Aud that the private property the sulec,
OF citizrs OF a belligerent the high shall be
exempted from seizure by public armed vessels Of the
'othcr bciigerrnt'" Thus amended the Government,
OF the United States willing adopt the rule ngans
p'ivateerng, and their offer undoubtedly demands yer,
serious consideration. As question OF principle there
eau be 40 doubt that private property has right
to protection in by t has in war by land
though there may possibly be difficulties attending such
protecon, IA government property is clearly dis
-unSnished from private il is by land. rrgi
mrnt cannot doubt that farmhouse OF n house in street
Is private house while public do not so openl,
show their ownership distinguished from private
ehandise Making exception, however, for few difficult
nes the principle is undoubtedly the in both
Such rule would OF course, be geat Innovation anC
some might be disposed to saw that would be de
PVed oil some OF lite legitimate severity and be- in il
soiiened state weakened an engine Of int rna
uona justice. But very heavy aud effective machinery
OF annoyance still remains any doubt that
mere blockade Of the principal ports of the United
would OF itself be the greatest possible infection Mr.
harcSs offer, then, deserves serious attention. and will
we hope. obtain il ON the mart of the fnnr nnwers