New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-12-19

of search Of men-of-war and transports. The rigM
of Search on the par. OF the San Jacinto, was in
point of fact conce ded by the London press well
40 the law officers of the Crown. The objection
that the Trent instead of sailing from beligerent
to belgerent port was on the contrary, bound from
neutral 10 a neutral port, fell to the ground by
Lord Stowelrs decision that the night Of search is
intended TO ascertain the destination Of a ship.
In the second instance, the question arose whether
by firing a round shot across the bows of the Trent
and subsequently throwing shell, bursting close to
her. the San Jacnto had not violated the usages and
courteses appurtenant to the exercise Of the right OF
visitation and search. 1t was generally conceded by
the London press that since the details of the event
have ill now been only ascerained by the deposit
tons of one Of the parties concerned, no such minor
question could influence the decision TO be arrived at
BY tie British Government.
The right Of search exercised by the San Jacinto,
thus being conceded what bad sue to look fort For
coHrabaHd i irar, presumed to be conveyed by the
Trent What ia contraband OF warl Are the dis
patches Of belligerent Government conirabaDd of
war! Are the persons carrying those dispatches con-
uaband of warl And, both questions being an
swered in the affirmative, do those dispatches
traband Of war, if found merchant ship bound
from neutral port to neutral port The
London pess admits that the decisions Of the highest
legal authorities on both sides of the Atlantic are so
contradictory. and may be claimed with such
appearance of Justice for both the affirmative and
the negative, that, at all events, prinaa tacie care
is made out for the San Jacinto.
Concurrently with this prevalent opinion of the
English press, the English Crown lawyers have
altogether dropped the material question, and only
taken up the formal question. They assert that the
law of nations was not violated in subetGnce, but in
form only. They have arrived at the conclusion
that the San Jacipto failed in Selling, on her own re-
rronsibility, the Southern Commissioner instead OF
taking the Trent to a Federal port and submitting
the question to a Federal Prze.Court, no armed
cruiser having right TO make himself aJudge at sea-
A violation in the procedure OF the San Jaclnto 3D.
therefore, all that is imputed TO her by the English
Crown lawyers, who, in my opinion, are right in
their conclusion. IL might be easy to unearth pre-
cedents, showing England to have similarly tres
passed on the fornaes Of maritime law; but vio-
ations of law can never be allowed TO suppant the
law itself.
The quest ion may now be mooted, whether the rep
aration demanded by the English Goyernnent-that
is the restitution Of the Southern Commissioner
be warranted by an injury which the English them
selves ayow 10 be of form rather than OF subsfaRc
A lawyer of the Temple, in the to-day's Times, te
marks in respect to this point: L" If the case is not
$50 clearly in our favor that decision in the Amer
lean Court condemning tho vessel would have been
Liable 10 be questioned by manfestly contrary
IL. al. H. .trra. Iarffx ntf le
American Captain in allowing the Trent to proceed
"to Southampton clearly redounoed to the advantage
OF the Brtish owners ard tie British passengers.
"Could We in such case find ground of nterna-
tional quarrel in error of procedure which in
4" effect told in our own favor =
sill. if the American Government must concede,
az il seems 10 me, that Capt. Wilkes has COM
mi,ted u violation Of maritime law, whether
formal or material, their fair fame and their
interest ought alike to prevent them from nib
bling M the terms Of the satisfaction to be gwen 10
the injured party. They ought to remember that
they do the work of the Secessoniss in embroiling
the United States in IA with England, that such
a WIZ would be a god.send to Louis Bonaparte in
hjs present difficulties, and would, consequently, be
supported by all the official weight of France; and
v,
command of the British on the North American and
West Indian s;stions, what with the forces Of the
Mexican Expedition, the English Government
would have at its disposal an overwhelming mar
thine power.
As TO the policy Of the seizure in the Bahama
channel. the voice Tot only OF the English but of
tho European press is unanimous in expressions OF
bowilderment at the strange conduct of the Amer
lean Government, provoking such tremendous in
ternaonsl dangers, for gaining the bodies Of Aessrs
Mason, SIidel & Co., while Messrs. fancey and
Mann are strutting in London. The Times is GER
tainly right in saying: Even Mr.. Seward himself
&" must know that the voices of these Southern Com
missioners, sounding from their captivity, thou
sand times more eloquent in London and in Paris
ethan they would have been if they had been heard
at St. Jamess and the Tueres." The people of the
United States having magnanimously submitted to a
curtamont of their own Liberties in order to save
their country, will certainly be less ready to turn
the tide of popular opinion in England by openly
avowing, and carefully making up for, an interna-
tiona bunder the yindcation Of which might realize
the boldest hopes Of the rebels.
OPINIONS OF THE BRITISH PRESS.
From The LoRdor Times, Nor. 30.
The Cabinet met yesterday TO deliberate on the
steps which should be taken 10 obtain satisfaction
for the recent outrage on the British flag. Ou 10
momenous an occasion we cannot doubt that every
pont was discussed with the utmost care, and that
the decision was not arrived at without full con-
sderation of the possible consequences Among the
members of the present Government are men OF the
greatest experience and the most profound learning.
Lord Palmerston has been engaged ia political life
for half century, and has conducted the foreign
affairs OF this country during an agepregnant with