Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1856-03-08
TIE BRITISH ENLISTMENT CURREsPoN
DENCE.

The publication of the correspondence up
on the enlistment question, by placing the
facts of that controversy in clear light, will
tend to correct several material errors which
seem TO have added feeling Of bitterness in
its discussion, which might eventually have
led to mischief. In the first place, il will
show the British people that this government
has just grounds Of offence in the course pur-
sued by British agents in this country, md
hence the charges so frequently and absurdly
repeated by the London Times, that the ad-
ministration was agitating the question for
political capital, are proved to be slanderous.
lu the next place, u shows that no proper
apology has been offered for the violation Of
the sovereignty of the United States by such
enlistments, for the apology was accompan-
led with the assertion Of a claim which. il ad-
mitted. would at once neutraise the effect of
our municipal enactments' intended to give
force in our sovereign right.
The British government ia or ought TO be
well acquainted with international law, and it
is u settled principle Of public law that no
belgerent nation has the right to use the ter
ritory Of another nation for belligersnt pur-
poses without its conset If it could do SO.
no nation would be able to preserve its neu-
tralty. Offering inducements to persons
within the United States TO enter into the
service Of Great Britain, is recruiting, within
the meaning of the prohibitOry statute euac-
ted by Congress, aud the act was one OF
which Russia might reasonably take offence.
as violation Of our neutrality. Knowing that
the United States did not permit such enlist
ments within its territory, by any nation, the
British government had no right 20 make the
attempt Doing so, it committed an act OF
national aggression, and by attempting to
evade tho municipal law, 1t added insult to
the injury.
The British government, while requiring
assurances from our government that II would
repress any attempts on the part Of Russia
40 violate the neutrality of this country,
should have met these assurances OF our gov
ernment u the same fair and candid spirit in
which they were given But instead of this,
we find that government engaged in diyising
n plan whereby the intention Of our laws
might be defeated, and at the same time the
penalties for violating them might be eyaded.
We find British agents, men high in authori.
ty, no less personages than the representa-
tives of Great Britain to this country. actual.
ly engaged at this work, and when detected
in the act, and the guilt fastened CONCLUSIVE.
ly upon them, the British government itself
though protesting regret that anything in
contravention Of the laws OF the United
States should hays been attempted, under
takes to give a construction to our law which
would destroy its effective and restraining
force, and allow the wrong that it first con
demned to be perpetrated with impunity. A
justification which would impair the soyer
eighty Of the United States as an indepen
dent nation, can never be admitted as al
apology for the afiront, Of having cctuall
outraged that local sovereignty. And W
take It for granted that when these facts ar
laid before the British public, and are delhi
erately considered, they will come TO the con
clusion that their own government has blum
dered throughout this whole business, an
that what this nation asks in the way OF re
paraton and security is nothing more tina
Justice demands. The course of our govern
ment, instead of being quaTreisOme and e1
acting, has been one Of unusual courtesy ap
forbearapce.-Le