Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1860-01-20
Abolition Of Prfvateering.--Th
Freedom of the Seas.

These questions are again being discuss
ed to some extent in this country, and still
occupy space in the politics Of Europe. -
AL will recollect with what SURPRISING abil-
ity Governor Marcy. then Secretary of State
under Mr.. Pierce. replied to the overtures
of the Conference of Paris Of 1856, in ref
erence to this question. That profound
statesman, in answer to the proposition to
abolish privateering. together with three
other propositions, which were promptly &C.
oepted, viz: l. That the neutral flag covers
enemies goods g. That neutral goods
were not liable to capture under. enemies
flag, contraband of war excepted; 3. That
blockades must be maintained by suffi-
cient force framed an answer which fell
like bomb among the small politicians OF
Europe.
Mr.. Marcy we'll saw the miserably help
less condition in which the abolition of the
privateer vessel-in peace the efficient pro-
moter of commerce in war, its best and
surest protector would leave our merchant
men in time of war With the large navies
Of England and France prowling about the
ocean, seizing and capturing all merchant
men under the pretence that they transport
ed contraband of war, what but our priva-
teering enterprise could protect our COM
merce from total humiliation 7? Our Secre-
tary of State, approaching this condition Of
things, in reply to the Conference of Paris,
proposed in lieu of the proposition to abol-
ish privateering, to exempt merchant YES
sells from capture either by privateers or
ships of war This would make the ocean
real pathway for the nations always neu-
trail, always exempt from war, and at all
times allowing free scope for commerce.
But to this fair proposition the Continental
powers of Europe, as we'll as Great Britain,
refused to concede, and of course Mr. Mar
cy, on the part of our Government, declin-
ed to touch the proposal of the Conference
of Paris, and so the question stood. as it
stands to this day. Our Government still
holds out the proposition to Europe. for her
to accept at any time she pleases. The u
nited States are ready ''to take such steps
as to secure equal safety to private proper
ty on the high seas, as on terra firma y but
they are not willing to give up the surest
protection for their commerce, when Eu-
rope maintains the right to commit in time
of war any depreciation upon our merchant
men.
If the London Times is fair exponent
Of public sentiment in England, the chances
of a settlement of this important question
are poor indeed. $50 long as we have the
seas" says this journal, "hostilities to all
enemies who come out upon those seas are
our chief means of bringing the unreacha
BILE home population of hostile countries to
reason. When we cease TO hold the seas,
this advantage will, of course, cease but in
that case we cease to be great power, and
war, which involves the idea Of capacity
of resistance, would be impossible. A war
between us and Continental power must
be war between dog and fish, and the
proposition now made seems to be equiva-
lent to giving up the right of the fish to
seize the dog when he ventures into the wa
ter"
Let this proposition Of the United States
prevail, the Times goes on to argue, the
British merchants would clamor that great
naval ornaments were no longer necessary;
and when Great Britain ignores these she
deprives herself of thai maritime superiori-
ty which is the breath of her nostrils. In
a word, it says its whole thsoretic people
are blowing little cloud of sentiment"
Great Britain must act as her national in
terests dictate, and so she rejects the prop
osition of the United States. And so she
will act, in the European Congress about to
convene, in reference to this great question,
which will be brought before this body by
the action of Bremen, Hamburg, and other
great cities.
Mexico.
In reply to the recently nresanfa1 mama