Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1861-12-19
10 the, Leaasr.l


Ia my Judgment there Is no cause OF com
llaint on the part Of the British Govern
nept. and there viii be no rupture Of our
,micable relations with Great Britain, unless
her Ministry are madly bent on our humilia-
ton, in which contingency she nay engen-
der bIoO% SkVs.
viii present the NEST simple analysis OF
the law, 90 that every one may understand
t.:
lsk. GAN neutral vessels are liable, in time
Of war, to be searched by belligerent crnl-
sara In Ordsr 70 ascertain whether they are
carrying On any traffic prohibited By the laws
Of War.h-Arnold on Insurance, Sec. ztS'
Therefore, the aSan JaOlntO' had an un-
doubted right to board the steamer 'Trent,"
and to ssarek kS. So far no indignity,
known in the law as such, is done to the
Majesty of England.
I'd. aTf neutral ships are found carrying
official dignitaries, in the service Of the en-
envy, be they civil or military, such ships are
subject 10 seizure and coniscation.' The
Orozsmbo, 9Th Chr. Robinson, 430.
This was an American vessel that had
eleArei at the neutral port Of Lisbon for
Macao in China having on board, as pasSen-
gers three military officers of distinction
and tO5 psrs0ns n civil dsoGThnnt' in the
government Of Batavia who had come from
Holland under the appointment of the Gov
eminent Of Holland, then, as q dependency
of France at war with England.
The ship was captured on her voyarge by
q British cruiser, and taken into an English
port for adjudication.
SR WILLIAM SCOTT, afterwards Lord Sto-
well, who was in England considered the
oracle Of international Law condemned the
American ship in the following luminous
opinion:
TThis e the case Of an admitted American
vessel hut the title to restitution is impugu-
ed, on the ground of its having been en-
ployed, At the time Of the capture, n the ser
vice Of the enemy, in Transporting military
persons first TO Macao, and ultimately 70 Ba-
tayia. That q vessel hired by the enemy fol
the conveyance Of military persons, is to be
considered as 3 transport subject to coadem'
nation, has been in a recent case held BY thu
court and on other occasions. What IL th'
number of military persons thai she'll consu'
tute such q case, it may be difficult 70 dehne
In the former case there were many, in tbs
present there are much ftwer in number Du
/ sccede 70 what has been observed in srgu-
ment that number alone Is IN i~nsignihcaR
= circumstances in the considerations on whici
/, the principle of law on this subject is built
since fewer persons of high quality and chsr
acter may be Of more importance than
: much greater number Of persons OF lowe
condition.
q EFo send out one veteran General G
! France to take command Of the forces at b
= tavia might be q much more BoZious act tina
} the conveyance of q whole regiment. In
consequences of such assistance are greatel
, and therefore it is what the belliserent be
a stronger right to prevent and punish. l
this instance, the military persons are three
} and there are, besides, tOo Othe PeTssHs WI
were going to be employed IN ciUiI capdelh,
' in the Government of Batavia Rhs.heT q
prineipLs tDOuld apply 10 them dtoBe,I do not fe
, it necessary % determine. am not AVA
Of any case in which thai question has bee
y agitated, but Il appears 10 me-, on Prine1Pt,
IA be bat rsasonobk that IOhsHsUer IL Is d sg
Gent importance to the enemy, that sueh PESOi
: ahould Be sent out on the public SeTVief at q
!" public expense, q should gfOnd eggay g-oE'
of forfeiture against The VssIeL that mar 60
10 out for a purpose 50 intimately contacted si
the hostile operations"
The learned Judge then went OF to say tn
-
h ignorance, on the part Of the captain OF Il
!. neutral vessel, Of the character Of the Sc
vice on which he was engaged, Wonld ma
no difference in the result Of the case. 6
ns will be sufficient" said he, ri there is an
. jury arising to the ~bsIigsTeHt from the eHsIO
msat N DhieA the VesssliS found"
in And thus, by the decree of this emiae
I'd Judge, was the American ship cUrsr {
prived Of bis property, because he was traE
n porting, from one neutral port to snoth'
al upon the high seas, the national enemies
Great Britain, with which power the Unit
States was at peace,
In the light of this adjudication By 10
"a stOWsr, where would: the steamer 'T7en
stand2
She was stopped by an Ameri>Nn maa''
war and searched
zee She vss IoHnd to be transporting to Z
. pope rWo distinguished citizens Of the Unit
States, who were svowed traitors to the 60
~ ernment and who were going abroad Is pu
Ut lie Commissioners of a Tebellious couuaI
ty, confessedly for the purpose of OTerthrO'
Oh ing that Government by negotiating, if pC
y sibls, a treaty of alliance with some fOrei
~ power, to the end that their reasonable py
Ia poses might be successfully carried ont.
y Could she have committed q greater in
bis my to the United States GOvernme-t if
had carried a cargo of Enfield Rihes to
Dy Vannah, or Of gunpOwder to Chsrleston7
cie Was not the act Of transporting thsse moi
rious rebels "Gs n~oziOus' Ito use the VOL
al of the English Judge) to the GoYernm'
Of the United States as the transportation
any class of contrabands whatever?
But It is intimsted BY Mr.. Raymond
the New York Times, that although the s
he Jacinto might have proceeded to capture I
ifs Trent and bring her into port for G4iEdi
ls- lion, as Capt. Wilkes did not see ct 70 do
on it may admit Of q doubt If Great Britl
IN has not q right to complain thst the t.
We Commissioners were taken from benes
lg- her flag.
sm The argument amounts to this snd
go more;
nd Because Capt. Wilkes, by force of intern
ee. tional law, had a clear right to hke arm
nd possession of the British vessel snd bri
"a her, together with the rebel passengers, il
we the port of New York, where tie lat
-. Il Afna hnr traaann and fha firm