New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-06-03
PRIvATEBRING.


general tone or substance of those discussions
anything hostile to our Government or to our
democratic institutions. All we have TO complain
of is that the unusual amount of legal learning
displayed by our noble friends in the debate OF
the 10th Of May, fails to dispel the mists OF dip
omatic vagueness in which the Congress of Paris
left the subject. The questions as to what does
or does not constitute effective blockade, what
is or is not to be con6scated as contraband OF
war who is or is not to be hanged as pirate,
have come no nearer to satisfactory definition
by their lOrdshps' learned lucubrations than they
were before.
At the conclusion Of the Eastern war, the
plenipotentiaries of the Five Powers with those of
Sardinia and Turkey, proclaimed to tho world
that, with a view of removing all uncertainty
from the maritime law respecting the rights of
neutrals and belligerents in time of war, they
would " establish uniform doctrine on 80 i'm
"portant subject" They consequently joined,
on April I6, 1856, in q declaration embracing
four articles, of which the first simply sets forth
that PrivateeriDg is aud remains abolished"
Our Government being invited to become
party to this declaration, Mr. Marcy, while ex-
pressing bis concurrence on the whole with the
remainder of the instrument, objected to the first
article on the ground that the privateering sys-
TEN held on the ocean the place of the volun.
tsering system on land; and that it was the pro-
per system for free nations to maintain, instead
of keeping up powerful fleets and large standing
armies. But, if the object was TO secure private
property in time of war from molestaton, that
property ought to be as secure from armed pub
lie vessels as from privateers Hence, the United
States were willing to accede to the Declaration
of Paris in its entirety, if an amendment were
adopted to the first article, to the effect "that
"the private property of the subjects or citizens
"of belligerent on the high seas shall be e1-
tempted from seizure by public armed vessels OF
/" the other belligerent except it be contraband
"of war"
Mr. Buchanans Administration held TO Mr.
Marcy's doctrine, but Mr.. Seward has thought
fit to surrender the point-a policy which at
this precise juncture Of our affairs We will not
here stop TO consider. At all eyents, the acces-
sion Of the United States Government to the ar
ticles of the Declaration of Paris whether accept
I'd or not, does not in any way affect the posi-
ton of the Southern Confederacy in the eyes Of
those nations which have acknowledged or may
vet acknowledge that Confederacy as q belliger-
ent. Not being in any sense party TO the
Declaration of Ppris, the Southern COniederacy,
by issung letters Of marquee cannot be considered
to commit any breach of treaty obligation
against any State that does not regard the ex-
istence Of that Confederacy as Of itself o breach
of public law. Hence ts priyateers pre- not pirates
in the view Of other States, howsoeyer they may
DO rebels and traitors TO us. On the other hand,
if other States ara under no obligation to adopt
our view Of the character Of the Southern Con-
federacy We are Us little under obligation 70
adopt therst our own right to treat the Sc
ces.oniets as rebels and traitors is not denied
by international law, though other nations
do not assume tho same right for themselves.
II follows that we for our own part are per-
fcctly OF liberty, if we zee fit, TO hang the
Southern prvateers as pirates, or If it better
suits the English statesmen, as rebels-a dstinc-
ton in the reasons for hanging which, We pre-
sumo, would be considered Of no great practical
importance by the party most directly interested.
Now, their lordships all agree, and we have
the authority Of the Lord Chancellor himself for
il, that after the publication of tho Queens
proclamation, British subject, if he were 10
center the service Of either Of the belligerents
" on the other side of the Atlantic" would not
only " be liable to be punished for q violation
" Of tie laws of hs own country" but, also,
" have no right TO claim her protection to
" shield him from any consequences which might
arise" That is he becomes m outlaw in the
eyes Of English law; and in the eyes of the Ameri-
can law no becomes an outlaw making war on bis
own account upon our citizens on the high seas.
II that ia not as good definition Of a pirate as
any ever attempted by GrOtius, Vattel or Wheaton,
we have studied their volumes to no purpose. If
them as tho Lord Chancellor adds, the British pri-
yateer ouglt not to be regarded as pirate, and if
"anyb body dealing with man under thOse circum-
stances an pirate and putting him to death,
would bo guilty of murder" tho remark can
only be intended ns q warning against Canadians or
other British suffice who from natural feeling
of sympathy with cause and regard for their own
honor might be- disposed to lay violent hands on such
of their fclow-countymen as might have disgraced
the English name by taking out letters OF marque
ron Jefferson Davis. For, surely we cannot for q
moment suspect the Lord Chancellor Of England
of indulging in the bootless and indecorous pas
time of calling us names from his woolsack, and
branding uF as guilty of murder" in antcipa-
ton of our indicating our own laws against the
open and willful attack Of persons having placed
tbouselvas Willingly bevond the palo of ths laws