Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1861-06-07

light on the one hand that the people of this couns
ny should De warned of the peril Of engaging in
'rivaeerlng undertakings; but It is essentially
;essary, on the other. that the Northern States
should not be induced to rely upon our forbesrance
With regard to violation of the law of nations by
visiting praYateerlng with penalty which is not
attached to it by that law. tHearl 1t is said that
The Northern States treat the Southern Confedera-
on not as having the rights of belligerents but as
rebels, whose acts will be visited with all the PEN
ates of high treason, including capital punishment
But that is not a doctrine we admit. because we
have declared that the Southern States are entitled
to the rights Of bellige2ents.
The Northern States, on the one hand. cannot be
entitled to claim the rights of beigereus for them
selves, and on the other, to treat the Southern
States not as bellgerents but as rebels These are
the two points upon which it Is most desirable that
g clear understanding should be come to between
her Majesty Ministers and the Government of the
United States-frst, that we cannot recognize anv
except really effective blockade such as the Uni
ted States may be able to enforce; and, secondly,
that we cannot recognize the doctrine that BY any
proclamation or any enactment the Northern States
has e power as against the Southern Confederation
to treat priyaleering as piracy and to visit it with
d. ath.
Lord Brougham heartily wished that all priva-
teering were piracy BY the law of nations but
unhappily, it was not. His opinion upon this point
had been misunderstood. What he said was that
priyateering undertaken by the subjects of ons
country against Tue tfdue OF alOtler country With
which their own was at peace amounted to piracy
Privateering. however much it might be to be re-
pretended. was undoubtedly, in the case of recog-
nized belligerents not piracy according to the law
of nations, as that Law was ut present undo stood
and administered; but if any persons, subjects Of
this country, fitted out a vessel against another
country with which we at peace that in itself
constituted piratcal act and he was clearly of the
opinion that the persons go acting would have
only themselves to blame if after full warning they
entered upon that course.
Taking into account the great changes and i'm
provements in all the appliances of warfare which
had of late years taken place. he should bold that
coal might be looked upon as amounting to contra
band of war if furnished to one OF the belligerents
to be used in warfare against the other. He might
add that he entirely concurred in the opinion that
was not necessary that blockade. in order to be
looked upon as effective should be of such nature
to render access to any part of the coast mpos-
sble, but that it would be sufficient to constitute it
real blockade, that it precluded the existence of
any reasonable chance of entrance.
Lord Chelmsford said he wished TO bring the
opinion to which his noble and learned friend had
given expression TO test The Confederated States
of America were admitted by Her Msjesty's Gov
ernment to be entitled to exercise the rights of
beligerent Power That being so he should wish
to know from his noble and learned friend whether
he meant to contend that if English ship were
missioned by those States and fitted out as prlva-
teer against the Federal Government, her crew
would under such circumstances be guilty of piracy?
British subjects so engaged would, no doubt, be
answerable to the laws of their own country, but
it was perfectly clear that in accordance with the
principles of international law, they would not be
liable 10 be IL Gated as privates.
That warning should be given to English seamen
by means of the proclamation was, of course most
useful and necessary STEP and if after that warning,
they would engage in such expeditions as those to
which he was referring, they must of course, take
he of ha milo
add, the Southern Confederacy had not been recog-
nized by US as a beIigerent Power, and Englishman
aiding them by fitting out privateer against the
Federal Government would no doubt be guilty of
the abdication of James II, when he had been ex-
PEELED from Ireland when he had not foot of ter
ritory there, and when. therefore, he was merely a
sovereign claiming right de jure
James H. at that time commissioned certain per-
10 fit out priyateers against the commerce of
this country, and the question having come on be-
fore the Lords of the Privy Council they desired to
have with respect it the opinion of learned civil
ians Several citizens had in sequence, attended
before the Council and report of the proceedings in
the given by DR.. Tindal who was one of its
members. Accordingto that report Sir Thomas Pm
fold had asserted that the persons to whom the in
quiry related not pirates and for the following
verystrange reason-that pirate must be regarded
as hosts hlmd geriS, bat that those persons were
not enemies to all mankind, and were, therefore
not pirates. A Taught
Whereupon one of the Lords of the Council asked
whether there could have been such q thing as a
pirate if no person could come within that catego-
ry who was not actually at war with all mankind.
To that question it appeared Sir t. Pinfold did not
reply, but contented himself with repeating what
he had said before. Laughter The learned civil.
ian was then asked whether, suppOsng any of their
Msjesties' subjects by virtue of commission from
the late King, should by force seize the goods OF
their ow-subjects by land they would stand ex,
cused of being guilty least of robbery and If not
why they should stand excused of piracy
To that question also the learned civilian made
no answer, Ia laughl and for the very good reason
their lOrdshps would at once perceive, that there
was no good answer to be given for it was per-
fectly clear the persons in question guilty OF
piracy. He was, he might add, of opinion that il
was equally manifest that in the case assumed by
his noble and learned friend, piracy could not fair
ly be said to exist and as the point was one upon
which it was desirable no Misrepresentation should
prevail he had deemed it to be his duty tostate the
opinion which he held on the subject. Hear. hear.
The Lord Chancellor said his noble friend the
President of the Council had laid down the law on
the point at issue with perfect correctness IT, after
the publishing of the present Proclamation, any
English subject were to enter into the service of
either of the bellgerents the other side o. the
Atlantic there could be doubt that the person so
acting would be liable to be punished for violation
of the laws of his own country, and would have no
right to claim her protection to shield him from any
consequences which might arise. There could how
ever, at the same time, be no doubt that he ought
not to be regarded as pirate for acting under a
commission from State admitted to be entitled to
the exercise of belligt rent rights, and carrying on
what might be called jusi1tm bellum. Anybody
dealing with man under those circumstances as a
pirate, and putting him to death, would he contend
ed, be guilty of murder. lHear, heart
Lord Kingsdown said he supposed the Federal
Government deemed itself justified in publishing
the extravagant order in reference to prvateering,
which it had ssusd. inasmuch America had insis-
ted upon maintaining the right of resorting to that
mode of warfare, when it had been abandoned by
the great Powers of Europe In the present case.
the issue of the order was no doubt, based on the
ground that the Federal Government was dealing
with rebels, who might be hung as persons guilty of
treason to the State of which they were subjects
That was a matter for their own consideration. but
he could not help thinking that to act upon such
barity which would raise an cutlery throughout the
whole civ lied world. Hear
He trusted, therefore, the order in question was
bTutlIn fLDien, upon which it not intend
ed to act Be that, however, it might the case as
sumed different aspect when looked on with refer
ence TO the position Of English subjects. This coun-
try had recognized, not as an independent Power,
but as a body possessing the rights of beger ent
the Confederation of the Southern States. There.
fore, they were treated as having power to issue a
regular pE1fdtSerllS5 DuL prlDCl
pie as against Briti.h subjects established by the
Proclamation that. if they chose to engage in
privateering, and act in violation of the orders
of their own Government they should not have the
right to call upon the Government to interfere for
their protection. Hear, heart
The determination of what was contraband mus
depend on the circumstances of each particular
cargo. Provisions, though they might be safely sent
under other circumstance, yet if sent to port
where an army was in great want of food, they
would then become contraband. So with regard to
Goals. They might be sent for the purposes of man
ufacture, but if sent to port where there
war steamers, with the view of supplying them,
Goals then become contreband. Hear hear.] With
respect to blockade that again had been very much
altered by the introduction of steam, as two or
three steam vessels might now be as effective as
twenty sailing vessels had formerly BEEN
This matter was brought before the Judicial
Committee during the Crimean War, and it was
settled that blockade could not be constituted by
drawing line to prevent ships going to particular
ports if the line included other ports to which they
had right to co. and that in the of an effec>