Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1861-12-27
Reward Evcrctt on tho mnsOn.sndon

Af0Nr.
In this weeks Ledger Mr.. Everett dis
cusses the Mason.Slidell affair at length,
fully justifying the act of Captain Wilkes
and citing authorities TO show the right Of q
belligerent to stop an agent Of the enemy on
his passage. Mr.. Everett disposes of the
plea that the Trent was a public vessel, as
follows:
Then it is argued that the Trent was not
aprivate but public vessel. This is mere
assertion, wholly without foundation. The
Trent is not vessel of the. royal navy, nor
commissioned nor comm anded as such. She
is one of q line of packets owned by private
company, employed in transporting psssen
gers and merchandise from England to the
West Indies and other tropical regions.
With this private company the British Gov
ernment makes q contract for the convey
ance of the royal mail for certain sum of
money. | have before me a printed copy of
the contract which was in force from 184l to
1851, and there is no reason to suppose it is
now different. 1t runs in the name Of Queen
Victoria. Does the sovereign of England
contract with the vesse of the royal navy,
and pay them money to carry the mailsH
The following passages refute the argu-
ment that Mason and Slidell were going
dDTOdu hB private peISOubs
But it is said further, Messrs. Mason and
Sldell were not ambassadors, but private
persons This may mean that they had not
yet reached their destination and been &C
credited. On that principle, no envoy from
the Oldest government in the world would be
an ambassador till he had reached his Jour
ney's end and presented his credentials. But
Sir William Scott expressly speaks of an
ambassador ION his passage" and before "he
has taken upon himself the functions of his
tflice, and has been admitted tl his representa-
tive character" Or Messrs. Mason and Sliden
may be called private persons, because the
Confederate government has not yet been re.
cos nized. But on this suppOsition, the ennis
saries of Tebellious province, going abroad
in quest of foreign sucCor-the very case
and TIE very circumstance on which the law
of nations is founded that authorizes the ar
rest of the enemy 3 ambassadors could never
be seized. Neither could there ever be such
| thing as contrsband of war, in reference to
supplies on their way to an insurrectionary
| district. But Mr.. Jefferson Davis himself
| sweeps away these technical niceties. He
does not pretend to deny the official charac-
ter of his ministers He speaks of them as
| having been commissioned TO represent the
| Confederecy at certain foreign courts; aud
be says that the United Saates have "Iio-
lated the rights of embassy, for the most part
held sacred even among barbarians, by
seiziDg our ministers while under the pro.
lection and within the dominions of q neu
tial nation" ..,
This statement, by the way, disposes also
of the assertion that there is no proof tha
Messrs. Mason and Slidell were bearers o
dispatches. All official communications are
| dispatches. The commission of a foreign
minister is a circular dispatch addressed tC
all concerned; or, if this should be doubted
no one can deny that his letter of creden
tials to the foreign government is dispatch
of the highest order. If Messrs. Mason anC
Slidell, Commissioned to represent the Con
fedeIacy at certain foreign courts" were uu
provided with letters of credence, they wert
probably the first ambassadors that eve
went abroad without them.