The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1861-12-13


that these decisions were given under circum-
stances Very different from those which now
occur. Steamers in those days did not exist,
and mail vessels, carrying letters wherein all the
nations of the world have immediate interests,
were unknown. We were fighting for exist
ence, and we did in those days what we should
neither do nor allow others to do, nor ex-
pect ourselves to be allowed to do in these
days" So, then, England must make a new law
suited to modern times and the progress of the
age. In other words, her will is to be law to
the nations, and she can blow hot or blow cold
as suits her convenience.
The Times then proceeds from the point
raised about mail steamer, in contradistinc-
ton to an ordinary merchant vessel, to dis
cuss the question whether the ENJOYS from
Jefferson Davis were contraband Of war. The
Times is not aware that there is any authority
in the Affirmative. But there is authority to
show that " hostile dispatches " are contra
band, and that the act Of carrying of them for
feits the ship If the dispatches are contra
band, q fostiori, as Captain Wilkes rightly
argued, the bearers of the dispatches, who
were living dispatches themselves, are
amenable to seizure. But it appears from
a statement in the news columns of the
Times that the Trent did carry the des
patches in charge of Mason and Slidcll and
it is boasLed that they had safely reached
England. Hence it was that at Fort Warren
no dispatches were found in the trunks of the
rebel commissioners. Had not Captain
Wilkes, through courtesy to English travellers,
waived his right to make prize Of the vessel,
these dispatches would have been now forth
coming in evidence Of his right to capture all
on board. That very courtesy is raised by the
Times as point which renders the arrest
Illegal, though in the beginning OF the article
extreme rudeness is made n charge against the
commander Of the San Jacnto. The Times
contends that ''thc legal course would have
been to take the ship itself into port and have
the question Of contraband decided by a
court Of admiralty, which might not have
altered the result but that as the case now
stands the proceeding was irregular, and
England has ''surely a right to de-
mand that these prisoners shall be re.
stored According to the report Of our
Secretary of the Navy, the omission to seize
the vessel is not an error into which our cruisers
are likely to fall hereafter Tho Times COM
plains that Captain Wilkes did not do enough
Bas we are at loss to see the force Of the arg,-
merit, which maintains that sAough he had
right 70 capture the ship and ali siae passengers,
he had no right to capture four Of them. We
had always supposed that the greassr included
the less; bat it may not be so in these fast days
Of steam.
The Star, bespever, the organ of Cobdsn and
the liberal party, IS assured that 1.-The law Of
fccrs Of the crown are entirely in favor sc the
right assumed by the United States govern
nsent," and after observing that 'submissisn to
sech untoward incidents is only part of the
penalty exacted of civilized nations in any part,
Of the word,' goes on to quote the advice S.
Lord Stanley, mot to show Irritation at casual
sanoyances such as must inevitably arise in the
course of such struggle" More sound and
sensible advice could not lie. given, and we
have 40 doubt the British government will lay
it tel9sFt.