New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1861-12-31

I nnnnrtun;,r 70 nbon 'aen Hn State have had fair
and the Confederate States but aeh hs,
Beauregard's eloquent and determined r,or,;sl
we snail nave beautiful Maryland yet aAIofI.
The Mason-siideII Affair.
r". - "t p$3st tgs
THE LATEST 0PISIoss OF LoEDoy TIHEs
From the london Times Dec. 81
Gen. Scott denies that it was in direct obedienc
to Instructions from the Government at Washing
ton, that Commodore Wilkes perpatrated the out
rage upon our flag. So far so we'll Cen Scott
however, has only denied what no one ever be
teved. Our special correspondent at Washington
had, by anticipation fortified US against pivine
credence to any such fabrication. He had already
told US that the act of the Captain of the San ia
cinto was his own, and that he bad undertaken
TINS enterprise as means of distinguishing him
SELF 1t is not, however, very assuring to find tha,
gen; scott like his countrymen, is rather inclined
to disavow the conception of this act than Ia
repudiate it now that it has been done He wishes
TO look upon 1t as very small affair, and he does
not seem to be able to see that the question Of
what Is contraband Of war cannot be as lawfully
determined by officer at sea as By an interna-
uonal prize court. He thinks that, after a public
insult has been offered by the officer of one couu.
Try to the flag Of another, the first thing to be done
Is, not complete restitution, but an argument
between the Ministers of the two countries Whether
what has been done in violence might not have
Deen legally effected in peaceful manner Gen,
scout gr1eyously mistakes the feeling of the coun-
Try II ne believes that good relations between
America and England are to be preserved Nv anv
such suggestions as these. We have sent to Wash.
ihglon, not TO open controversy, but to demand
a restitution. When that has been done, we shall
be happy to discuss the other questions at issue at
any length the Americans may please
AT present, however, the only question open for
discussion Is the right of belligerent power to
lake by force and carry away the passengers and
cargo OF neutral ship. We must do the Amer
cans the justice to say that they have seen this
difficulty, and have made some clamsy attemnts tn
meet IL. " course, it cannot be argued upon
pflnclp!e. The consequences of such rule would
pc universal piracy. 1t is attempted, therefore,
by some writers, and even by some who oueht to
know better and do know better, to Justify what
mas been done by Commodore WilSes-for we
cautonsly abstain from treating this as an act of
the edefal States until they have formally adopted
lt-by showing that similar things have been done
before. One gentleman at Boston, who il. We he
heve, near relative of Senator Summer who is
sad TO write under his inspiration, quotes what he
calls case in point, where, as he says, an envoy
from the insurgents in America to Holland was
captured on board Dutch ship, and was commit
ted 70 the Tower as traitor. Mr.. George Sumner
is entirely mistaken to the one important fact in
this case, for the ship which Mr.. Laurens was cap
tured was not Dutch but American: bpt he ia eauatv
mistaken II he thinks that, were his case par
allel to that of the Trent in all its circumstances it
would be allowed by US, or by France, or BY Rus
sla, or by Spain, or by any civilized maritime
natlon, to have any bearing upon the question as
VI
hundred wrongs will not make right Tie
pages of history, as far back as history can be
read, are speckled with deeds of violence and
CRIME, put these acts are not cited by morasts as
proofs that such deeds now constitute virtue.
II the Cabinet of Washington proDoses to CON
tend that we must in the year 1851 submit to en-
dure at the hands of their cruisers every ndgnitv
winch our ancestors have ever at any time inflicted
upon neutral Tag, then we understand what will
De tne issue between US. If they do not propose to
go this length, these resuscitations of long buried
circumstances are irrelevant, and are in themselves
confession OF weakness. There is nothing which
couid not be proved by snch precedents as these.
In the year 1904 the Government of France sent
detachment with artillery across the frontier of
neutral State, and there seized "a refugee brought
MN to Erance tried him by court-martial and shot
Mm This IS precedent which the world il never
likely to forget, for the name of the victim was the
DUO dEnghien. The French, however would be
a little surprised if the Americans were to think
themselves Justified by this preceeent in landing
near daVre ana carrying of some captain of Con
federate craft So, at date SO late as June 1853,
an American captain, in the harbor of SMYRNA,
uhderto0k to demand possession of q Hungarian
refugee, whom the commander of the Austrian ship
ol-"at Ossaro mad kidnapped from the shore. The
American cleared for action and proposed to fight
the Austrian in the harbor for the possession Of
person who had no more claim on America than
on England.
The American, however, would scarcely hold
this precedent TO justify the captain of an English
trlgate In SELLING in the streets of New York an
English subject, accused of treason against the
GoVernmento OF England, nor would they be Salts
nea TO see substantial justice done against the Eng
lsh lrlgate by French ship of war which shoufd
open its ports and fire broadside into her in New
York harbor. Again, the Federal Americans only
the other day selzed upon some travellers from Cali
lornla on the ground of their being suspected of
" Southern proclivites," and carried them as prs-
oners through the neutral territory of New Grana-
da, laughing to scorn the protests of the neutral
state = and the opposition of the small force which
W n ,la fp a.. n,
at Washington be willing that we should on the
hrst occasion, appeal to this precedent as rule Of
International law? Will Napoleon, or the Emperor
OF austria be justified in seizng French or Aus
tflan refugee ln let us say Canada aud bringing him
through the Federal States down to New York for
embarkation. :.
We can give the Americans plenty more of these
precedents, If they are desifous of them and we
DOUBT not that they can produce considerable
number against us. AW We are not more immaculate
than other people. When we were at once strong
and passionate we sometimes did unjustitiable
things. Having done them, we generally fought
onr way out OF the difficulty, but we never claimed
to make precedents of them, nor were other ma
tons ever willing to accept them as such
Nothing but williul ignorance or presumption
coqld pretend to draw justification from pre-
upon precedents but it deduces its rules from pre-.
cedent OF acts done with the general concurrence
OF all nations. Just consequences drawn from
natural principles" says Grotas, " discover TO us
us the law Of nations" The modern deeds of VIC.
lence have almost invariably been committed
upon weak nations, and have met only with the
general dsapprobation of mankind. The Ameri-
cans safely violated the territorial rights of Tur-
key, OF Of the petty State of New Granada, and
there were no means Of testing by war what the
opinion of these nations was. We, however
pressed our extreme rights against the powerful as
well as the weak, and the very acts which the
Boston jprists would adopt as precedents were
those which armed all the North against us, and
set us fighting with great maritime leagues. In.
ternational law, like municipal law changes with
the necessities of society, and both General Scott
and his friends at home must be prepared to &C,
cept as.international law, not what we and others
have done in old times, but what we should be
permitted ourselves to do in the present day.
Seward on Both Sides of the Fence.
Correspondence cf the Baltimore SUM-
1t ltappears from the interesting and voluminous
relating to our foreign afairs that the