Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1861-01-27


So much for the question Of rebellion under
the Law Of nations. But, Sir, I wish to call
/ the attention Of gentlemen 10 an authority
which, on the other side, Is seldom disputed
upon questions Of constitutional and inter
national law. / refer 10 Mr. Webster. On
the occasion Of the disturbance on the Canada
/ frontier, Alexander Mcleod, British subject,
came across the line in time Of profound peace,
seized steamboat called the Caroline, killed
one % the men on board, moved it from its
mooFings, set IRE to it, and It plunged over he
| Falls Of Niagara. Some years afgerward be
was found in the State Of New York, arrested
/ and brought to trial for the crime. The gsv-
eminent of Great Britain communicated to
| this Government that, as a government, 10 as
sumed the responsibility, and therefore, under
! the law Of nations, required that the individual
should be gwen mp. Mr. Fox, In his letter to
/ Mr. Webster, said;
Z" It would be contrary to the universal prac-
lice Of civilized nations TO fix individual re-
sponsbility upon persons who, 18th The ssuc-
tioh or by the orders Of the constituted author
tiles Of a State, engaged in military OF naval
enterprises 10 their c0untTy's cause and it ia
obvious that the Introduction Of such princi-
pie would aggravate beyond measure the mis-
cries, aud would frightfnlly increase the de-
national evaporation the ferociiy Of personal
passions, and the cruelty and bitterness Of in
diyiiual revenge.
"Her maiesty's government cannot believe
the Government Of the United States can really
intend TO set an example 60 fraugbt with
evil to the community of nations, and The de
rect tendency Of which must be TO bring back
into the practice OF modern war atrocities
| which civilization and Christianity have long
ka~ ~ a a. IL.
vol. 6, p. 2i3
To that Mr.. Webster made reply:
f'The cOmmunica ion Of The fact that the
destruction Of the Caroline was an act o. pub
lie force by the British authorities, being
| formally made TO the Government OF The United
States by Mr.. Fox's note, The case assumes
decided aspect.
s'The Government Of the United States en-
ertaius no doubt that, after this ayowal Of
be transaction as public transaction, au-
! thorized and undertaken by the British author
tiles, individuals concerned 10 it ought not, by
the principles Of public law and the general
usage Of civilized States, 20 be holden person
ally responsible 10 the ordinary tribunals Of
law for their participation in it. And toe
President presumes that Il can hardly be nee
essary to say that the American people, not
distTustful of their ability to redress public
wrongs By public mt ans, cannot desire the
tlained of is declared 10 have been an act Of
tbe government itselt."-WOrhs Of Daniel
Webster, vol. 6, p. 253.
Instructions 10 this effect were accord ngly
sent to the Attorney But, Mr. Web
ster was subsequently attacked in The Senate
for his conduct 10 relation to this negotiation;
and be delivered a very elaborate speech tn
defense OF the treaty OF Washington. This
brings me to the point which I suggested 10
f 3D..
be told US the other day that each citizen
owed allegiance to two severe gnties, and that
be was bound at his peril to distinguish be-
tween their orders, that he could commit trsa-
son, under the Constitution, against the Uni
ted States, and that the Constitution also rec
ognizss that be coald commit treason against
the State, and yet the honorable Senator went
50 far as to say, that il this State ordered him
to do a thing, and the United States forbade
him from doing it, bo'h under tAe penalty Of
death, it was bis misfortune 10 be placed 10
such position that be might be hanged or ex-
ecuted by either, and under the law Of nations,
have no redress, no escape. | answer bin IL
the Language Of Mr. Webster on that very sub
ject:
ain the next place, and on the other hand,
General Harrison was OF the opinion that the
arrest and the detention Of Mcleod were con-
trarY to the Law Of nations. McLe.d was a
eTnment, and obeying orders which he was
bound to obey. It was absurd to say that
soldier, who must obey orders or be shot, may
still be hanged if be does obey them. - P0rks
Of Daniel Webster, vol. 3. p. 123.
I do not use the word 80 absurd;D is Mr.
Webster who uses l.. But perhaps gentlemen
will say: mr. Webster says that he was act
ing under the suth lritv of hi Government,
and o5eying orders which be was bound to
~ hr,Ar fak a ,-rl TNa-
olina is bound to obe7 the orders Of bis gov
ernment. To that reply. in the language OF
Fattal, that no citizen Of auy State has The
right to question that il is a principle Of
the law Of nations, that the citizen owes obe-
{ dience to the command Of his sovereign, and
be cannot enter into the question whether the
sovereign's order is lawful or unlawful, except
at his peril. II his severe 'gn engages in war
if his State declares her inde3erdence-he
is bound by the action Of his State, and has no
authority to control it. Why, Mr. President.
how idle end absurd to suppose that you can,
in principle and in practice, separate each
particular individual Of State and make him
responsible for The collective act Of his gov
erHnsnt-eaeh agent in turn. The honorable
Senator from Ohio { Mr.. PHgh), who delivered
to MS the other day so magnificent 5nd patri-
otic an appeal, read you the laDgulze Of he
different Presidents Of The Unitfd States upon
b
Mr.. Adams, in which he said that be had been
forced to avoid making use Of the power Of
the Federal Government, in the State of Geor-
gis, against certain surveyors acting 10 def
anee Of the federal au hority, because be un-
derstood they were ordered 50 TO act By their
State government, and believed themselves
bound to obey The order
Sir, if there was anything in this idea in
theory, you might reduce it to practice; but
frhn h1 11.
fanciful, than the suggestions put cut by gen
tlemen here? You ars g9irg now, observe, to
declare 70 war and to coerce a Safe; you are
simply going 10 execute the lsws Of the
United States against Individuals in the State
Of South Carolina. That is your pro"ositfon.
Is it serious? One gentleman saws he viii
hang for treason. All. where is tie marshal
to seize, and where is The court to try, where
is the dstric attorney to prosecute, and where
is The jury TO convict? Are you going 10 es-
tablish all these BY arms? Perhaps vou tel
me you will remove them elsewhere for trial.
Not so, our fathers have ROT left our liberties
90 ungusrded and so unprotected as that
The Constitution originally provided that no
man could BE- brought 90 trial for an cfaase
out Of the State where be committed t. The
fathers were not satisfied with It. and they All
dsd an amendment that be should not be
brought to trial sut Of the district even in
him out Of the district. You have got no
judge, no marshal, no attorney, no jurors,
there; aud suppose you had; who is 20 ad-
Judge, who is to convict? His fellow-citizsns,
unanimous in opinion with him, determined
that be has done his duty, and has committed
no guilt. That is the way you are going to
execute the laws against treason.
What next Oh, no, says the Senator from
Ohio Mr.. Wade thar is what we viii do we
H.
blockading your ports, and stopping them up.
At first blush this seems a very amusing mode
Of collecting revenue in Sou Carolina, By
allowing no vessels 10 come in on which reye-
nue. can be collected. !, is the straugcst Of
ali possible fsncies that that is ;he way Of coll
leeting revenue there, Of enforcing the laws in
the State against individuals. But first y0u
are to have war. And what is blockade /
Does any man suppose that blockade can exist /
by nation at peace with another; that it is /
peace power; that it can be exercised on any
other ground than t5at you are at war with 1
the party whose ports you blockade, and that /
you make proclamation to all the governments /
OF the earth that their vessels shall not be au- I
thoTized to enter into those ports, because you I
are reducing your enemy by the use Of regular |
constituted, recognized, waTiike means Oh, /
but perhaps it is not a blockade that you will /
have; you will have an embargo, that is what /
you mean. We are guarded here. The Con-
stitution heads you off at every step in this
Quixotc attempt to 90 into a State to exercise
} your laws against her wkol- citizens, without
declaring war or coercins the State. You
cannot embargo the ports Of one STATE with
out embaTgoing an your potts You cannot shat
one up without shutting up all; the C0nstitu-
ton Of the United States expressly forbids &c.
IL your blockade or your embargo were
peaceful measure, you are prohibited BY the
very words of the Constiut itself from
forcing q vessel bound to or from one State to
enter or clear or pay duties in another, or from
making any regulations Of commerce what
ever, giving any preference 20 the ports Of one
State over the ports OF another; and you have
no more right to blockade or close the ports Of
Sou D Carolina by embargo, even by ac5 Of
Congress, than you have to declare that a SOW
ereign State shall have no right to have more