Marshall County Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1855-1859, 1856-12-18

protest and subject to future adjustment
There Is reason to believe that an arrange
ment between Denmark and the maritime
powers of Europe on the subject will soon
be concluded and that the pending negoti
alton with the United States may then be
resumed and terminated in satisfactory
manner.
With Spain no new difficulties had arts
en-, nor has much progress been made in
the adjustment of pending one.
Negotiations entered into for the purpose
of relieving our commercial intercourse
with the Island of Cuba from some of its
burdens and providing for the more speedy
settlement of local disputes growing out oil
that intercourse, have not yet been attend
ed with any results.
Soon after the commencement of the late
war in Europe, this Government submitted
to the consideration of all maritime nations
two principles for the security of neutral
commerce: one, that the flag should cover
enemies goods, except articles contraband
OF war; and the other, that neutral property
on board merchant vessels of belligerents,
should be exempt from condemnation, with
the exception of contraband articles. These
were not presented as new rules of interna-
tional law. having been generally claimed
by neutrals, though not always admitted by
belligerents. One of the parties to the war.
Russia, as well as several other neutral
powers. promptly acceded to these PROPOSE
tions. and two other belligerents, Great
Britain and France, having consented to
observe them for the present occasion ia
vorable opportunity seemed to be presented
for obtaining general recognition Of them,
both in Europe and America.
But Great Britain and France in COM
mon with most of the States of Europe,
while forebearing to reject did not afirma-
lively act upon the overtures of the United
States. While the question was in this po-
sition, the representatives OF Russia, France,
Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, Sardinia,
and Turkey, assembled at Paris, took into
consideration the subject of maritime rights
and put forth a declaration containing H..
two principles which this government had
submitted nearly two years before to the
consideration of maritime powers. and ad-
ded thereto the following propositions:
Piivateering is. and remains abolished, and
blockades IN order to be binding must be
effective, that is to say, maintained by a
force sufficient really to prevent access to
the coast of the enemy, and to the declara-
lion thus composed of four points, two of
which hal already been proposed by the
United States.
This Government has been invited to &C
cede By all the powers represented at Par
Is, except Great Britain and Turkey, to the
last of the two additional Propositions
That in relation to blockades there certain
ly can be no objection.
1t is merely the definition of what shall
constitute the effectual investment of a
block11ed place-a definition for which this
government has always contended, claim
ing indemnity fer losses where a practical
violation of the rule thus defined has been
injurious TO our commerce. As the re-
naming article of the declaration Of the
Conference of Paris-that privateerinor is
and remains a5oiished--I certainly cannot
ascribc to the powers represented in the
Conference of Paris, any but liberal and
philanthroIlc views in the attempt to change
the unques:ionablc rule of maritime law in
regard to privateerin.. Their proposition
WAS doubtless intended to imply approval
of the principle that private property upon
the ocean, although it may belong to the
citizens of Il belligerent State, should be ex-
empted from capture; and had that PROPOSE
ton been 50 framed as to give full effect to
the principle, it would have received my
ready assertion behalf of the United States,
but the measure proposed was inadequate
to that purpose.
at Is true, if adopted private property up
.ea the ocean would be Withdrawn from one
mode of plumber, but left exposed, mean
while, to another mode, which could be
used with increased effectiveness. Tie
aggressive capacity of great naval powers
would be thereby augmented; while the de-
fensive ability Of others would be reduced.
Though the surrender Of the means CT pros
ecuting hostilities by employing priva-
teers as proposed by the Conference Of
Paris is mutual in terms, yet in practical
effect it would be the ACCOMPLISHMENTS of
right of but little value to one class of
States, but Of essential Importance to an
other and far larger class
1t ought not to have been anticipated
that measure so inadequate to the accom-
plishment of the proposed object, and so
unequal in its operation would receive the
assent of the maritime powers. Private
property would still be left to the depreda
lions of the public armed cruisers. / have
expressed readiness on the part of this
good to aceede to all the principles CON
tanned in the declaration OF the conference
of Paris, provided that relating to the aban-
donment of priva.eering can be SO amend
ed as to affect the object for which, as is
presumed it was intended, immunity Of pri-
vate property on the ocean from hostile cap
ture. To effect this object. i: is proposed
to add 10 the declaration that privateering
is and remains abolished the folio wing
amendment: "And that the private prop
erty OF subjects and citizens of a belliger-
ent on the high seas shall be exempt from
capture by the public armed vessels of the
other belligerent, except it be contra
band
This amendment has been presented not