Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1861-05-24
TFrom the N. Y. Tlmes1

We have at last the text ol Lord John Rus
ser's declaration IN Parliament In regard to I
the policy which the British Government has
decided TO adopt concerning the issue Of let
ters-of marqne by the so-called Southern
Confederacy. He announces that the rebel
lioua States are, ia this respeot, 70 be regard
ed by the British Government "ds 6eihge-
rssts;g and, in the remarks with which he
accompanies this declaration, quoting pre-
cedence for this action, he fully yind'oate5
our statement, made when the Telegraph hrst
announced this debate, and which has been
severely contested By correspondents, that the
privateets Of the Soulh are TO berecognized
and protected by the British Government
when they bring prizes into British ports
We repeat what VIC said then that this IS an
,.afriefdl7 act, and If Carried iAto practical
effect viii be so regarded and treated by
the Government of the United States The
British Government strains point Of inter
national law, ,-dlscards utterly the establish
cd pritcipie, that none but an established ma
tion, having recognized national flag, ana
already received by formal action into the
family ofnRtions, can issue letters-o marque
against private property,-and cites the a6-
surdly inapplicable example OF the Greek
Revolution as precedent to justify its giving
the most effective aid It could possibly render
10 the Slave 0ligarchy now in rebellion
against the Government of the United States.
Such an act will net pass unpunished. II II
does not at once force the present Ministry
TO give place to better men, it will lay the
seeds of Hostility which will bear fruit long
after the present rebellion has been extin'
guished. aj bs5sreu ta.T slc.,.
But there is another aspect OF this ques-
tion which deserves the prompt attention of
our Government. The United States has
always been opposed to war upon private
property, aRd has done more than any olher
nation 10 put an end to this utterly Daroar-
Gus and unjust practice. Al various periods
of our history we have made treaties Oy
which privaieering WINS abandoned. An4
our laws have always forbidden our citizens
to. accept letters-oEmArque from any pellg-
erent Power. We are committed more thor
ohghIy than any other nation to the utter
abolition not only Of privateering, but OF
private war in ali its forms; and if we had
not attempted too much in this direction, the
whole world would now have been united in
placing privateering andpiracy upon the same
basis. Itis aot yet too late. q
| Il will be remembered that on the 10th Of
ADril, 1855, the Plenipotentiaries OF Great
Britain, Austria, France, Prussia, Russia,
Sardinia and Turkey, in their Conference at
Paris, signed Declaration, agreeing among
themselves that the following fixed princi-
ples should be introduced into international
relations:
Privateeriug is. and remains abolished.
2 The neutral Gag covers enemy goods, with
the exception of cOntraband OF war
X Neutral goods with the exception of contra
band Of war, are mot liable to capture under enc
= Riockade5, in order to be biLding. must be
eFeetive-that is TO say, maintained by force
sufeient really to prevent access 10 the COAST Oi
the enemy.
This was presented BIZ the French minister
at Washington to the American government
for its concurrence. On the 2Sth OF July,
1856, Mr.. Marcy, then Secretary of State, re-
piled substantially, that the fourth principle
concerning. blockades was already fully and
universally recognized as a rule Of interna-
tionaI law; that the American Government
promptly and cheerfully acceded to the steoHd
and third, which for many years they had
been irving to introduce into international
relations; and that to the first they proposed
to add these words;
.sAnd that the private property Of the subjects
or citizens of bellgerent on the high seas shall
| be exempt from seizure by the Plolic armed YES
sells ofthe other belligerent except 1t be contra
band
This, it will be seen, was simply propo7
| sal to add 10 the declaration to which the
Conference of Paris had given its assent. It
ives not rejection of the original PROPOSE
ton. but simply proposition to amend it.
4 MI 30 rTo ora a.
! tbat our Government refused its assent to the
proposed abolition of priyateering land the
as 6Idss h aff6ffnjlz Gitea t8l} Esjas9I
the priysteers of the Southern rebels. But
Any one who will take the trouble TO reier TO
Mr.. Marey's letter to Count Ssrtiges, which
NAV be found in the New York Times Of
August IL, 1856, mo. l52s,) will see that
this Is an entire, mistake. Our Government
did not reject the propositions of the Euro
pean Powers-it did q not refuse its concur
renee to their declaration Of 'fxed princi-
plesp-on the contrary, it promptly accepted
three Of them, and merely proposed an amend
ment to the fourth. No one can fsil. to see
that this did not, in the least, conclude the
action of our Government 1t left the whole
question. open for further negotiation be-
tween the United States and the several
Powers represented in the Conference at
Paris. 81 i.rd- .1s v5ss tsli g!s.-a-
WehAye, moreover, proof positive that az
those FosOsrssO regarded Il, in the fact that ne
gotiations were continued. We presume that
official records will Eiudicate the truth o.
statements on tbls subject which we received
personally from Mr.. Mason, our Minister in
Paris, in the Summer of 1858. BE stated
that under Mr.. " arcy's instructions be had
been pressing the proposed amendment upon
! the attention of the Government Of France
as Mr.. Dallas had upon that Of England
that he was making good progress and had
every reason 10 hope for success, when, upon
the accession of Mr.. Buchanan, he received
lperemptory orders to suspend the negotiations
Mr.. Mason spoke of this as an utterly mex
I plicable step on the part of Mr.. Buchanan,
and was by no means sparing of his censure.
He said inst as we were on the eve of a most
brilliant diplomatic success, in securing the
introduction of a most important principle,
for which we had long contended, into the
code of international law, Mr.. Buchanan had
seen ct to interpose and deprive the country
of the glory within its grasp. he hoped
still, he said, to be permitted to revive the
negotiation, land was perfectly confident Of
speedy and complete success. iIa
Mr. Buchanan, however, did not see fit to
1 anthorizs such a course. Whatever may
have been his reasons, during bis administra-
ton the question remained in abeyance.
Bat there IS no reason sOhy tbs should be so
any longer. The Declaration of the Confer
ence at Paris still stands. The seven Powers
there represented have given their assent to
those four principles, es,-Which only await our
assent to become fixed principles of interna-
tienal law. Mr.. Seward has only to notify
the Governments of Great Britain, Austria,
France, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia and Turkey
that the United States conelrs in the decla-
ration Of April 10, ls5e,-and he binds al
those Powers TO the permanent abolition Of
privateering. Not one of them could witk-
draw from the Protocol in which they then
Joined, or recognize the Southern privateers,
without bssing their withdrawal upon ac-