Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1861-06-22
England ON Privataering.
The following is a copy of the letter laid before
the House of Commons by Lord JOHN RUSSELL:
FOREIGN OFFICE June l, 1861.

Inc IoHo"lnS IL q copy OF tne leLter lald DelOre
the House of Commons by Lord JOHN RUSSELL:
FOREIGN OFFICE, June l, 1861
To the Lords Commissioners of the Admirably:
Ny LORDS: Her Majesty's government are, as you
are aware desirous of observing the strictest
trrlity in the contest which appears to be imminent
between the United States and the Southern Con-
federate States of North America; and with the
view effectually TO carry cut this principle
they propose to interdict the armed vessels, and
also the privateers of both parties from carrying
prizes made by them into ports, harbors, roadsteads
or waters of the United Kingdom, or any of her
MaJesty's colonies or possessions.
have accordingly to acquaint your lordships
that the Queen has been pleased to direct that or
ders in conformity with the principles above stated
should forthwith be addressed TO all proper author
tiles in the United Kingdom, and to her Majesty's
naval and other authorities in all quarters beyond
the United Kingdom for their guidance in the cir
cumstances. have, Sc,
j. RUSSELL
Similar letters have been addressed to the Secre-
tares of State, India, War, and the Colonies.
The Daily NeloS thinks that any attempt to pre-
vent privateering or enlistment in Canada for the
Northern belgerents in America would be fail
ure, and therefore is not likely to be attempted.
Mr.. LIDDELL had given notice in the House of
Commons that he would ask the government if the
Introduction of privateers is not at variance with
former practice, and on what grounds maritime
policy has been changed.
The London Shipping Gazette makes these re
marks:
1t is stated on apparently good authority, that
month since, all the Powers represented in 1856 at
the Paris Congress were formally notified by the
Depart nent of State that the Federal Government
is willing to accept the Declaration of Paris in all
its parts in order to get the countenance of the Eu
ropean powers for the suppression of privateering
The step has been taken, it would seem, with the
impression that, undsr the Declaration of Paris,
privateering is regarded as piracy. The Declare
tion in question is capable of such construction
! nor can the late adhesion of the Cabinet at Wash
lngton to that arrangement change its character or
add to the force of the provisions, IN any partcu
lar. The Declaration of Paris simply provides for
the abolition Of priUdteering on the part Of the po,oers
SubscT7biHg to that is to say tey agreed hencetoTth
10 abstain from issuing letters of mdrque and repriSdl
America refused to become party to that Declare
| ration, except upon a condition which was re-
fused by this country. But what would America
have said if the parties to the Declaration of Paris
insisted upon regarding her system of priv8teering
as piracy, simply because she was no party to the
Declaration? She would have said that she would
resist such an application of the Declaration to her
| case so long as she had ship or soldier. 1t now
suits the Federal Government in order to put a
pressure upon the South to give in their adhesion
Internationally to the Declaration of Paris in the
belief, apparently, that they are thus placing priva
teering under the ban of civilization, and rendering
1t an Oense against the law of nations to be visited
with the treatment according to piracy.
As between the parties to the Paris Declaration,
prvateering may il is true, be regarded as piracy;
but the Southern States parties to the Declare.
tiOn and they haze conferred authority on the Fed
eral Govornn,ent TO make Them parties 10 IT, is diff
cult, to understand, therefore, how the adhesion to
the Federal Government at this time of day to the
Paris Declaration can make priyateering on the
part of the Southern States piracy or subject those
who fit out vessels under the proclamation of
President Davis fiated by the Southern Congress-
to the pains and penalties inflicted by the cruisers
of all maritime States, pirates taken in the act.
Whatever may be the thought of the secession
movement BY the European Powers, we do not
think they could lend themselves to the injustice of
acting on forced construction of an instrument
which the Federal Government was the first to re-
ject, and only adhere to in the hope of bring
ing the weight of the European maritime States to
aid in crushing the Southern revolt.