The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-01-17
AsM,,M w
THE NEUTRALITY LAWS,

The House being in Committee OF the Whole, having
under consideration the resolutions referring the Pesi
dent Is annual message to the standing committees
Hon WILLIAM MONTGOMERY said
Mr. Grammar: 1 rise not for the purpose of INDUCING
in defamation, but simply to discuss in legal manner
the points which have been in controversy before this
committee. The venerable gentleman from Mississippi,
Mr. Qu1aAS distinguished alike for his military glory
and his ability statesman, has assumed the position
upon this floor that the law Of nations does not prevent
our ctizens from banding themselves together to invade
the territories Of other nations with which we are AT
peace From that position entirely dissent lie also
contends that the constitution of the United States uoc
not grant Congress any power whatever To pass law
10 prevent citizens from these aggressions From THIS
also dissent enter my protest against poth these po
sitons They not correct. II is strange position
for statesman 10 assume that when We have concluded
treaty of pesoe with another nation that treaty bind
ing only this nation, aud not upon our people that the
treaty OF peace amounts only to compact which binds
the powers Of this government but not the powers o. the
peope maintain that the true doctrine is that when
our government is at peace with nation every citizen is
also peace with that nation that what the nation can
not do citizen can do 6 Il.
The government of the United States cannot invade
the territories of that nation any citizen OF this
invade them The treaty OF peace il az broad
the nation and embraces every individual In it and
only every citizen but every resident of the country
bound by that treaty of peace Nobody has any more
right to violate it than the nation itself has.
The gentleman says that the government have no right
to interfere In the of individuals who would go from
country to attack announcer natlOn. DENY
that this nation Is bound for every individual in it who at
tempts Of hostility against nation with which we
are at peace If in Canada should arm himself,
and pass into our border with the intention Of attacking
our countymen and violating the peace of the land it
would be much the duty of the authorities Of Canada
TO interfere that had arrayed around him thou
sand men, armed like himself We are bound for the
act of every citizen within limits Every individual
within our limits bound by our treaties OF peace and
when we are peace with nation, every individual n
der the is at peace with It, Noone has rights
as an individual which we have not as nation and we
have none az nation which do not belong TO each one as
an individual. sssfs n A n y. Is \. 5z...4e.ig
II would be monstrous and dangerous doctrine, in
deed to promulgate In this Union that when we are at
peace with another nation citizens band them
selves together to attack that nation notwithstanding
the treaty OF peace 1t would he monstrous doctrine
to teach that man. twenty men, or ten thousand
men, or the vast millions who people our extended do
mains themselves with the gentleman as Their
leader il you please to march In body TO attack
neighboring nation with which have treaty OF peace
care not whether there is treaty Of peace existing be
tween Us and that nation not It matters nothing IN
the argument Peace is the natural condition OF ma
ton and il IL the natural attitude in which every nation
stands to another sad is the unnatural condition
and whether there is treaty or not still our ciuzens
have not the right unless there il declaration OF war,
to armed bands into another country TO violate ts
Jaws and make upon Its citizens
Mr. QUTTMAN viii the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vania permit me for moment to state that TOOK no
such position contend simply for this position that
tons for an individual fora number OF individuals,
to commit hostility against the individuals Of the other
nation-not against the nation itself And ask the
gentleman if he recognises the authority Of Vatte one OF
the ablest writers the law OF nations /!
He says, book 3, chap. Z, sec. llG:
The oonrrels of another deprive the disposition
OF my rights pursuit which judge advantageous
10 my country Therefore, when custom In saion in order
for employing exercising its subjects permit svos Of troops IN
favor = whom = nsssa No ' %
lie claim with any that the IKE should DC grant grant
Of to they please and nobody has thought proper to
quarrel with them on this head ."
Mr.. MONTGOMERY In reply to the gentleman from
Mississippi beg leave to read further from the same
book The only difference between u.s. that the gen
teman did not read far enough upon the page. II he
had read enough he would have found the doctrine
conendng for and that the law OF nations does not
sustain the position he assumes de says
SEC ~ But OF the ought
no, suffer- the citizens % do an injury 5 tue sas so, q sno
sat- aG n,i ,bo,s Who are under his Command TO
violate preepts the law OF Nature which obds all injuries
stain from all injury from all in word from
eyshag be Of prejudice s 70 on ana wn.
foreign nation either in rs body or - members he
sht the safety State human requires this
from sovereign you let loose The rehs 70 your
manner to YOU and Of that friendly which Ma
tus has estabishsd between shall nothing but
one between nation and nation
70 And since tho l4.or ougb, not to suffer his subjects
subjects other States to do them injury much less
offence ought
pei make preparation for the damage injury
possible % naci on him an exemplary punishment tnay &C
to me offended State, to be there brought bjnsiee,"
adopt the language Of the learned writer of the law of
nations as my reply to the gentleman from Mississippi
Now sir we have tho law of nations upon the subject
That being the position occupy towards Nicaragua
the question arises what rights and powers have other
nations which are not guaranteed to by consttu
ton II it possible commended for that this mighty
nation ia an exception to all other nations the globe
has not the constitutional power to enforce the law of
tions Is it possible that American citizens can stand
here upon the floor Of Congress and maintain that
are not under obligation to sustain the law OF nations
the obligations Of good faith and to enforce treaty
stipuations with other pationsY Is that the position
which Is assumed here upon this floor and that the
position occupied by the gentleman from Mississippi
do not think that exactly It. do not think he would
20 that far Then the question arises, We having es
tablished what the law of nations provides for, and
guards against, what rights have what obligations
guard against the nraction Of the law of nations 1t Is
hardly worth while for one refer members upon this
Aoor to the constitution Of the United States but it
was denied that we had any constitutional power upon
the subject perhaps Is best to read from that instru
ent One the provisions Of the eighth section of the
constitution Of the United States II = y
nies upon high and so aasss the 'aw Of
7safions" if9ee a tadsH ~
Everything that Ia offence against the law of nations
can be provided for and guarded against by law of Con-
gre The power given to Congress Is as broad a. the
law Of naons the whole subject is under their control
Did they exsrcss 1t by the passage Of the act Of 1918
The oentlasuar from Georgia fMr STHpuRNs commended