The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1858-01-28
nnr Naval Onicers in the Cali.

""~s ~ sr.zrz---~r-==z=zs.z=
Our Naval Oficers fn the S"H'
srycre censures have been lasished upon orr Ma
val officers iu the Gulf for their course towards
Gen. Walker and his expedition. We think there
are two sides TO thst question, a. to most others
We cannot conceive OF more embarrassing posi-
tion than that Of naval commanders, who have
70 treat practically such questions those
which Pauiding. Chstard, Davis, aud others, werO
called 70 decide. Our naval men are not educated
70 the legal profession, and probably, in point Of
fact. with the exception Of Commodore Stewart,
Skinner, AND q half dozen others, none Of them
have any intimate acquaintance with the princi-
ples of international Law. What marvel then II
the Gulf captains have made q blunder on ques-
ticn about which the abiest putlicists and civi'
lians diIeri We find high authorities on one side,
maintaining that pauldug had right to land IN
Central America, and they point to the fact that,
at this very moment, the squsdrons of America
and England run mp the African rivers, aud pene-
trate any distance they choose in tho interior,
landing If they please, and where they please, in
order TO protect weak country, aud that not a
contiguous one from the depredations Of the slave
traders We understand, also, that In the negotia.
tions at Client, the American commissioners con-
tended for the right to enter the domains of the In
dian tribes for the purpose of protecting them from
sggressions and wrongs which they are not capa-
BILE Of resisting. They were regarded as weak
nsighbors, entitled TO the protection OF the
stronger power though their nationality had been
distinctly recognized in the various treaties which
had been made with them by the President and
Senate. On the other hand, there is the case OF
Commodore Porter, one of the most heroic seamen
who ever sailed under the American flag, and who
was deprived Of his commission In the Navy for
making q descent upon neutral territory under
circumstances which, If we recolect Alright, chsl-
lenged the sympathy of the country. Now, we
ask, unless our naval officers have explicit In
structions how to act In such contingencies as
those which have recently occurred in Nicaragua,
ought we not 20 make great allowances for them,
even II they commit what we consider "a grave
error" What motive have they to act In any
other manner than their most enlightened sense
ofduty dictatesi We don't deny the grave error"
of Paulding, but there able lawyers In this
country who would have Instructed him to do just
what he did 1t is no more reasonable to expect
sailor TO be at home in law than lawyer on the
quarter deck. Tho sailors highest idea OF duty
10 obedience to orders and In the absence OF posi-
tive instructions, we have no more doubt that the
Gulf officers thought they were carrying out the
intentions of the Government In taking Walker
our existence. We have just as little doubt that
such we're the intentions Of the Government, and
We cannot but think It would DO we'll hereafter.
and in all future time--that it would be candid,
courageous and Just to the servants Of the Gov
eminent, to let them know In plain terms what
they arc expected to do, aud not leave them In n
position to commit ia grave error" and take the
consciousness of IT, when they are trying to do
their very best and the error Is one of tho head
and not of the heart.
I'm fpe, whatever blame attaches TO the course
OF our naval officers towards Gen. Walker, we think
Justly belongs to the Government of the United
States Nothing can be easier than TO give expl
cit instructions to the officers Of the Home Squad
ron, In regard to any contingency to which a Cen
trail American fillibustering expedition may give
rise nothing more readily done than to put down
In black and white,--"Sir, the President of the
United States orders you to take Walker and bis
: men, whether on sea or land,"-f that be the Pre-
sidets intention. If not, it s just easy TO put
in writing what is the Presidents desire. Why Is
it not done1 Why are these sailors provided with
instructions, 80 vague and general, that ii would
puzzle a profound lawyer to understand them p
Il strikes us that the responsibility of any grave
errors which result from such proceeding, rests
with the Administration, and that it should be
held answerable; not its naval officers, who, as a
class are, in our opinion, as faithful and gallant
abody of gentlemen as any service In the world
can boast, and who unless they believed that they
were doing precisely and emphaticaily what the
Government desired and expected, would rever
have touched hair of the head of Gen. Walker.