Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1861-07-09
New Points In InIernaGIonaI Law.


PARIs June 19.-The civil war in America has
given rise to apprehensioDs that the FreRch trade
may suffer inconvenience and loss from one or other
Of the beligerents, and endeavOrs are made to OBJ
tain the limitation Of the evils within as narrow
limits as possible. \ petition has been presented
to the Senate aHd il has called forth the express
sion of the opinion Of that body upen maritime
law, brief account may be Of interest. The nett
ton states that previous to the sixteenth century
trade with the enemy was prohibited which prohi-
bi1on was submitted to, and every description Of
merchandise was deemed lawful prize.
In 1905 England and France came to an under
standing, and published a list Of articles deemed
coatraband Of war-that is 70 say, goods that might
be lawfully captured when shipped for an enemyis
country. The treaties of Nimeguen and RysTiek
limited contraband Of war to arms and ammunition
The treaty Of Utrecht to which the naval Powers
OF Europe and even Venice we're parties, added
vietuals and material Tor the construction and fit
ting Of men-of-war to the list of contraband Of
war, but declared gold and silver free. The sim
ustiOns were reproduced in the treaties Of AK u
Chapelle, of Paris, under Louis XV and OF Yer
sailes. The treaty Of 1856 left eontFaband Of war
underlined; and the petition proposes that arms wa.
Like instruments and ammunition should alone ke
considered contraband of war. The Senate states
that the Emperor has never ceased to propose, IN
bis diplomatic relations. arrangements favorable to
the free movement OF merchant ships, and that his
Government has endeavored to make an agreement
with other powers to frame list Of cOntraband
war.
These propositions were not accepted during the
Crimean and Chinese war, and the question must
be left to further discussion between Governments
The petition further asks, since priTateering IS
abolished and the commerce of belligerents VIII be
safe under q neutral flag, the merchant ships not
carrying contraband of war, may not be liable to
capture by men-Of-war. The Chambers Of Com
merce of Marseilles. Bordeaux, st. Milo, Dunkirk
BOlougne, and other French ports, have petiticned
in the same sense But the Senate replied that the
United States having refused adhere to the terms
Of the Treaty of Paris are threatened with meal
culabe loss. If the Southern pTIvateeFs should put
stop to Northern navigation reprisal VIII ensue.
War on Land Is the source of inevitable ealami-
ties and is not exempt from the evils which attend
naval war; consequently the Senate defends the
right Of capturing merchant ships and because their
sailors may be sent board the war vessels Of the
enemy, and because the vessel and cargo would be
lawful prize If taken in an enemys port. To 8ban-
don the right to capture merchant ships would be to
gratuitOusy weaken the naval fOres OF France, who
would be the greater loser by accepting the propo-
stiOns, as she possesses few colonies and little
foreign trade.
The object Of war is to force the enemy to con
clude peace; to succeed, every element Of victory
should be used-naYy, army, expenditure of Eaen
and money, and the destruction Of everything that
might become an arm in the enemy's hands. France
ought not 20 resign the power Of capturing ships
which constitute the chief wealth Of the nations
she may be at war with. Great care should be
taken not TO sanction humanitarian projects the
premature application whereof would be a cause
nf weakness if even reciprocity were promised 10
France.