Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1856-01-03


The British Government passes over the
question of the rights OF Great Britain, real
or supposed, in Central America. and assumes
that she had such rights at the date Of the
treaty, and those rights comprehended the
protectorship of the Mosquito Indians, the
extended jurisdiction and limits of the Pa
ciic, and the Colony of the Bay Islands and
thereupon proceeds, by implication, to infer
that if the stipulations OF the treaty be mere
ly future in effect, Great Britain may still con-
tinue to hold the contested portions of Gen.
trail America.
The United States cannot admit either the
differences or the premises. We steadily deny
that at the date of the treaty Great Bri tain
had any other possession there tnan the limited
and peculiar establishment at the Belize, and
maintain that, If she had any, they were sur
rendered by the convention. This govern
ment having recognized the obligations of the
treaty, has, of course, desired to see it exc
cuted by both parties and in the discussion,
therefore, has not looked to rights which we
might assert independently of the treaty, in
consideration of our geographical position,
and of other circumstances which create for
us relations to the Central American States,
different from those of any government of
Europe. The British government, in its last
communication, although well knowing the
views of the U2ited States, still declares that
it sees no reason why conciliatOry spirit may
not enable the two governments to overcome
the obstacles to a satisfactory adj ustment of
the subject.
Assured of the correctness of the construc-
ton of the treaty adhered to by this govern
ment, and resolved to insist on the rights of
the United States, yet actuated also by the
same desire which is avowed by the British
government, to remove all causes of serious
misunderstanding between two nations asso.
ciated together by so many ties of interest and
kindred, it has appeared to me proper not to
consider an amicable solution of the contro-
versy hopeless. There is, however, reason to
apprehend, that with Great Britain in the ac-
tual occupation of the disputed territories, the
treaty is therefore practically null, SO far as
regards our rights. AS this international dit.
ficulty cannot remain long undetermined,
without involving i'll serious danger the friend
ly relations which it is the interest as well as
the duty of both countries to cherish and pre-
serve. it will afford me sincere qualification if
future efforts shall result i'll the success, an
ticipated heretofore with more confidence than
the aspect of the case permits me now to en-
terrain.
RECRUITMENT, sc.
One other subject of discussion between
the United States and Great Britain has grown
out OF the attempt, which the exigencies of
the war in which she is engaged with Russia
induced her to make, to draw recruits from
the United States.
It is the traditional and settled policy of
the United States to maintain impartial neu-
tyality during. the wars which from time to
time occur between the great powers of the
world. Performing all the duties of neutral
4, lnNl
we may reasonably expect them not to inter-
fere with our lawful enjoyment of its bene-
fits. Notwithstanding the existence of such
hostilites, our citizens retain the individual
right to continue all their pursuits by land or
by sea, at home or abroad, subject only to
such restrictions in this relation as the laws
of war, or usages Of nations, or special trea.
tics may impose; and it is our sovereign right
that our territory and jurisdiction should not
be invaded by either of the belligerent parties
for the transit Of their armies or operations
of their fleets, the levy of troops for their SER
vice, the fitting 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 United States
will under no circumstances surrender.
In pursuance of this policy, the laws of the
United States do not forbid their citizens to
contraband of war, or to take munitions of
war or soldiers on board their private ships
for transportation; and although, in so doing,
the individual citizen exposes his property or
person to some of the hazards of war; his acts
do not involve any breach of neutrality, nor
of themselves implieate the government
Thus, during the progress of the present war
in Europe, our citizens have, without nation
al responsibility, therefore sold gunpowder
andarms to all buyers, regardless Of the desti-
nation of those articles.
Our merchants have been and still contin-
ne to be, largely employed by Great Britain
and by France, in transporting troops, provi-
sions, and munitions of wur to the principal
seat of military operations, and in bringing
home their sick and wounded soldiers. But
such use of our mercantile marine is not in
terdicted, either by the international or by our
municipal law, and therefore does not COM
promise our neutral relations with Russia
But our municipal law, in accordance with
the law of nations, peremptorily forbidB not
only foreigners, but our own citizens, TO fit
out within the lllnits of the United States a
vessel to commit hostiities against any State
with which the United States are at peace,
or to increase the force Of any foreign armed
vessels intended for such hostlllties against
friendly State.
Whatever concern may have been felt by
either OF the belligerent powers lest private
armed cruisers or other vessels i'll the service
Of one might be fitted out in the ports OF this
country, to depredate OH the property of the
other, all such fears have proved to be utterly
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 pc
remptory in their prohibition of the equip
ment or armament Of belligeront cruisers in
our ports, they provide not less absolutely that
no person shall, within the territory or juris-
diclion of the United States, enlist or enter,
or go beyond the limits or jurisdiction of the
United States, with intent to be enlisted or
entered in the service oil any foreign State,
either as a soldier or as marine or seaman on
board of any vessel of war; letter OF marque,
or privateer; and these enactments are also
in strict conformity with the law OF nations,
which declares that 10 State has the right to
raise troops for land or sea service In another
State without its consent, and that whether
forbidden by the municipal law or not, tie
very attempt to do il without such consent
is an attack on the national sovereignty.
Such being the public rights, and the muc
nicipal law OF the United States, no solicitude
on the subject was entertained by this Gov
eminent, when about year since the British
Parliament passed "an act to provide for the
enlistment Of foreigners in the military SER
vice of Great Britain" Nothing ON the face
of the act or in the public history, indicated
that the British Government proposed to at
tempt recruitment in the United States, nor
did It ever give intimation Of such intention