Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1861-1862, 1861-12-04

The mex: quotation i. from Chancellor Kent. I. i,

The mex: quotation is from Chancellor Kent. I. is
thus:
p" All writer's upon the laws OF nations and the highest
authority acknowledge the right in time Of war; resting
upon eoUpd principles Of public lrispru oacp, aud upcn
the institutions and rracc9 o. all great maritime poRerg
ard if upon making the search the vessel be found en-
poyed In conraband trade, in csrryng enemy pro
perty or troops dsplchss sho is liable 10 be taken
and brought in for adjudication before prize court"
The predcsment in which the word disrach'nere sant
shows, tha: the writer had in view despatches in res
ton to military operations and no. dispatches Of The BEL
HgeEent TO the court Of ardI poEer which could aid
neither party in any such operators.
The Herald proceeds, "ya.,e sIys (boOk chapter 4,
secion lOD that the impartisy which a neutral should
nation between bigerent parties conss a.
two points l. To give assistance VIXEN there Pr
yioas stipulation 10 gye nor voluntarily to iurni5l
'roopl, arms, munitions, anything Of great in
var do rot say TO give assistance equally but 20 give
no assistance for t wonld be absurd that State should
assist at the same ime two enemies And besides, i!
would be impossible TO do It with equality the
things the lk, number OF troops the ike qlslitY onr,
Of munitions &s., furnished under different circumsta0
ces, are no longer equivalent succours"
Tie writer makes express application Of this our =
tloD aud Lciu bayenone unless il be supposed, that
the carrying of the Ministers of one of the bsgerept
with hs ordinary documents, from port OF neutral
State TO the per! of another neutral Power on crG
nary neutral sacket intended by the learned Vsel
to be included in the torm "a thing great
Ii any body can believe this, let him DO it.
Tie Rera'd still proceeding with his quotations, ssys
"Whestoo, in his Law Of Nations comedies with the
views Of other plbeists whom have qloted-( Page
525 0lhs same nature vita the clrryDg of colraband
goods IS the transportation OF military persons or 90
spatches in the service OF the enemy"
Here i. will be noted Mr.. Whesoa says unambguousy
military persons and we think that the fair construc
ton of the sentence is military persons and military de-
spstches. Butneither Mr.. Aasor Sijel Euss Mac
rard WAS military person, nor did they carry sry
itsry despatch communication OF any sort to ary
bellgerent officer or government
The Herald, however, continues and says:
"Ar. Wheaton makes exception of the case Of
ryng dispatches Of an Ambassador or other public min
ister of the enemy resident 10 a neutral county"
Aud the Court Of Admiralty Of England, we have
already seen lays It down expressly that despitches to
and from the neutral coustry stand on the same
ground.
The words of Mr.. Wheaton are
"Bu! an Ambassador other public minister resident
in neutral country for the purpose Of preserving peace
and amty, between the neutral State and his Gov
ernmsnt has righ. to freely se1d his dispatches in
neutral vessel Wnc1 cannOL ne
cruiser at with his own country"
Tho Herald saw and endeavors to avoid the consa
quepces Of this exception quoted from his author
slys
'But the exception does no. apply here, there s
not legally nor in fact any rebel resident or
recognised By any country. II tina. the the
circumstances might be materially altered"
But there powers or STATES in Europe, who hal
the rgh, 10 receive ambassadors from the Coufedra.
States and treat with them at their own courts and who
therefore, had the undoub,ed right sow them TO b.
carried on their own neutral passenger vessels.
And Great Britain, having allowed them to be carried
on this mail steamer Trent carrier was boun
to protect them on board other.
The Hsraid finally on this head, supposss that the
proclamation Of the Queen OF Spain or Great Britain
ties the law Of this case, and that the Government Of
Great Britain will be estopped by her procamation.-
But il does appear that the Ministers Of either Of these
sovereigns have considered the matter, and will
hereafter shew that neither of these documents is sub
ect to any such construction,
The Herald aud other writer's in support of the unlin
tied Government, now at Washington, have some cur.
Gus notions about the right of search. They 10
suppose that Great Britain and their Federal Government
have right to search for what they would have right
TO seize when found They give, example, the
Of an American vessel which has violated tue laws Of tie
United States against tao slave trade vhicn they say
Great Britain had the right to search
They suppose that If they have the right to search for
aud sez, thing in any place predicament then tbey
may lawfully search for and seize 1t in every other place
or predicament These errors will be hereifer eIpoied