The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-06-11


that the recent insxcusable and most offensive out
RACES committed upon our commerce in the West
India seas would receive the sanction OF her Msles
tvs government. II was not easy, however, 70 com
prehend how proceedings unusual and aggressive
could be perpetrated without special and compre-
bensiye instructions and least of all it to DO
reasonably concluded that her Majesty's cruisers
were acting under instructions issued near ten years
ago The acts complained of bore the character of
persistent, pervading, determined sggressions upon
our sovereign right to navigate the high seas and
they involved the vital question of the immunity Of
our flag in the pursuit of lawhl commerce. We hsd
no right to believe that they were performed under
orders issued many years ago because they were
utterly at war with the practical constructions pun
upon those orders by the commanders OF BRUSH
ships-of war up to about the first OF March last we
could not, then, without doing violence to every
consideration of the facts and without charging
upon her Maiestys government the exercise of its
authority upon the merest caprice, believe that tho
offensive proceedings of which we complain, were on
acted under instructions issued nine years ago. There
ia no parallel between the conduct of those authorities
during the first eight years and half OF the exist
enco of the instructions and the last three or four
months and we now unable, convinced as we are
that what has been done to embarrass our merchant
ships and to annoy the people of the United States
does not receive the sanction of the government Of
England to account for the extraordinary pertnacity
with which this practice of search has been pursued
We take it for granted that there ia not single
naval commander under the orders Of the British
Admiralty who does not fully understand the posi-
ton of the two governments in reference to this
question of visitation. 1t was certainly known that
the people Of the United States were quite unani-
nous in asserting the equality of all nations upon
the high seas and upon the question Of the right
Of our merchant ships to use the unappropriated
parts of the for purposes of navigation, they
are equally decided This right with us we claim and
have ever claimed to be sovereign right and we
are prepared to assert and maintain the absolute
immunity of all vessels sailing under the American
flag
We are now informed that the recent acts of visi.
tation by British cruisers in the West India waters,
are wholly disavowod by the admiral in command of
that station, least disapproved, and that orders
have been issued to stop at such offensive pro
Cccuilipo. W. aO OaASu upon W ouSpcHu Juo6ihCht
upon the matter, and are told that no now orders
have been issued by the Admiralty; that the in
structions which now govern her Majesty's navy
we're issued as long ago 1919; and that, beyond
all question, the home government will tender to
the most satisfactory explanations and PREPARATIONS
for any insults offered to flag and any injury suf
fered by our merchant vessels
Without placing implicit confidence in the recent
peaceful turn of foreign affairs in this respect,
eminent will promptly dsavow the acts of the Styx
and other vessels complained of, and will give us
abundant assurance hereafter that our commerce
shall not in like manner be molested.
Them what is the commentary upon this state of
thingss 1t cannot be forgotten that Lord Aberdeen,
in 1912, distinctly asserted and maintained in d
rect communication with the diplomatic representa-
tive of this government, the right to visit American
vessels sailing upon the high seas, with view, in
his language of testing the genuneness of their pa
pers and flag nor as we understand the history of
this question, except in some vague observations
from Lord Ashburton to Mr.. Webster, has the Brit
ish government given lib the least assurance of q
disposition, to relax her claim in this respect nor
has she renowned the pretension Of practical vista
ton which we claim to BIO clear violation of our
rights as a nation.
The conduct then, of her Majesty's cruisers is
sanctioned by the principles of maritime law avow-
ed and asserted by the London cabinet. We cannot
question the right of the British Admiralty to re-
strict its own vessels-ofwar within the narrowest
limits of action but do hold that the aggressons ro
Gently perpetrated upon our peaceful commerce in
our own waters, under principles of international
law, sanctioned and maintained by the government
Of England, should be regarded by offences de-
handing something more than apologize notes and
disclaimers If we are right in asserting immunity for
our ships upon the ocean, and that they carry with
them and maintain for their government the authority
and jurisdiction of their country, it follows that
any interruption detention search thereof by the
vessels ofwar of another nation, are gross viola
tons Of our sovereign rights And if such violations
have taken place recently, we maintain they
have, through the action of British cruisers, and
under the alleged sanction of instructions issued
nine years ago, though now disapproved tro is
one involving, in point of fact, the irrevocable
sponsibity of her Majesty government which
not be adequately atoned for short of total disa
vowal by that government of the assumed right to
visit merchant ships while ii the pursuit of law
~