Democrat and sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1853-1866, 1858-06-02
THE RIGHT OF SEARCH.

The recent outrages committed on Ameri- |
can vessels by British cruisers have excited
a universal feeling Of Indignation in this
country Unless the British Government
Iepudiates promptly the system which seems
to have been adopted by it's vessels in the
G ulf of Mexico, an open rupture between the
two countries may be looked for at no distant
day. War is certainly great calamity, but
our national honor must be viLdicated. The
recent insolent and unjustifablc outrages of
the British cruisers in the Gulf are of char
acter which we cannot pass by in silence,
without descending from our exalted station
among the nations Of the earth.
The Only reason urged in justification Of
these outragcs is the oeer zcalousness of the
British Government to cut Off aud prevent
the slave trade. If, under the pretext of
preventing the importation Of slaves, the
British cruisers have the right to board aud
search every American vessel they meet, no
vessel will hereafter be safc in leaving ouc
ports under the protection Of the American
flag. This attempt to revive the exploded
doctrine of the right of search, is now styled
the right of visit If cur commerce is to be
under the supervision and control Of Great
Britain. We may as vel! at once yield up
national existence, and become once n ore
| provinces of the Empire on which the sun
| never sets
We find IN one of exchanges the fol-
lowing extract from a dispatch which Mr..
Webster while Secretary of State, addressed
| to our Minister at the Court of ST. James
! 1t will be perused with interest q, the prs
| eDt time
| The British govern nment sup2oses that the
| right ef visit and the right OF search are es-
sentially distinct in their nature, and that
! this difference is well known and generally
acknowledged that the difference between
| them consists in their different objects aud
purposes; one the visit, having for its object
| nothing but to ascertain the nationality of
the vessel; the other the seal ch, by al in
| quisition, not only into the nationality Of the
vessel, but the nature and object of her voy-
| age, and the true ownership of her cargo.
The Government Of the United States on
the other hand, maintains that there is DO
such we'll known and acknowledged. nor, in
deed, any broad and generic difference be-
tween what has usually been called visit, and
what has usually been called search that tic
right of visit to be efectual, must come in the
end to include search . aud thus to exercise
in peace an authority which the law of ma
tions only allows in time of war If such
! we'll known distinction exists, where are the
proofs of itI What writer Of authority on
public law, what adiudications in courts of
admiralty. what public treaties recognize it :?
No such recognition has presented itself to
ths goverdnieut of the u Ited States !; but Oh
the contrary it understands that public wri-
ters, courts of law and solemn treaties have
for two centuries, used the word visit and
"search" in the same sense. What Great
Britain and the United States mean by right
of search in its broadest sense, ls called by
Continental writer's and Jurists by no other
name than the right of visit" Visit, there
} FORE as it has been understood, implies not
, only the right to Inquire into the national
character, but to detain the vessel, to stop
the progress of the voyage, to examine paI Iers,
; to decide on their regularity and autnentici-
ty, and to make inquisieion on board for en-
4 emys property, and into the business which
. the vessel is engaged In. In other words, il
8 describes the entire right Of beliigerent visi
tation and search. Such right is Justly
9 disdained by the British Government in tim,
$ Of peace. They nevertheless, insist on
: "ight which they denominate right of visit
and by that word describe the claim which
they assert. It is proper and due to the i'm
portance and delicacy on the questions invol
J we'd, to take care that, in discussing them
c both governments understand the terms whict
o may be used in the same sense If, indeed
: it should be manifest that the difference be
tween the parties is only verbal, it might b.
hoped that no harm would be dons but th
Government of the United States thinks it
} self not justly chargeablo with excessive jeal
ousy, or with too great scrupulosity in tn
Il use of words, in insisting on its opinion tha
|, THERE is NO sUCn DISTINCTION AS THE BRIT
! ISL GovERNMENr MAINTAINS BETWEEN yIsI
AND SEARCH AND THAT THERE IS NO RIGHT
VISIT IN TINE OF PEACE, except IN the execu
IT ton of revenue laws or other municipal regu
IS latious, in which cases the right is usual
l. exercised near the coast Ti.hlR the ma
- rine league, or where the vessel is justly sus
pected of violating the law of nations by pi
II ratical aggression; but wherever exercised,
10 is q right IF search,
,e On the whole, the Government of the Uni
% ted States, while it has not conceded mu
\ tual right of visit or search as has been don
:: by the parties to the Quintuple treaty of DE-
i cember, l341 DOES NOT ADMIT that, BY III
III taW and practice Of nations. there is any sue
Of thing as right Of uisit, distinguished j
aecu known rules and detinitions from, II
right Of search. 1t does not admit that Wis
OF American merchant vessels by BIRTHS
=. cruisers is founded on any righ., no:witt