Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1861-1862, 1861-12-12
RICHMOND WHIG.
Tue CASE OF nEssRs MASON AND sIIDFLL.

(RIGHr OF sxARoH) oc 10 .ci --
To the Editor Of the Whig:
Il was shown in our former numbers tia. the practice
of natonsn the language Of the Court Of Admiralty ef
Engand-alowed to neutral nations the privilege of re-
esvng ambassadors from the beigerent States and Of
thereby having the benefit and convenience of mmsdi
ate negotiation With them at their own courts.
Il folio Sed aud was otherwise proved tina; the mnis
tsrs Of the bslgeren mgh, bs lawfully carried board
neutal vessel from eveh his bellgersnt port to
the port of neutral State aniit followed, il might
seem for even stronger reasoa that kessrs lson and
shdel might have been lawfully carried on the neutr
British packet from HAvarna neutral Spanish port to
any neutral port of England and yet was supposed BY
the belHgerent government at Washington and is con-
tended by its advocates that had the igrent right
arrest this neutral vessel the high seas aud there with
force and arms invade her deck and make search for
these ministers. .... ..
This fair statement Of the proposition ought TO be sui
cient of itself for its refutaon But it is contended
that is founded what is called the right Of ssarch
and VIC promised examine the matter and expose the
fallacy. ara Ea.
In order to understand this Fair it will be convent
ent not necessary all about this right of search
allegiance Of the natural born sutccfs psrpetuaa is
called or is dissolved only by his DEATH and therefore,
no. reensed by his emigration to foreign country and
naturalization there, and that the king may at any time
issue his proclamation recalling all his subjects those
zed and bound by the oath Of allegiance to ther
adaptive government, and held that he might have
them searched for and seized board vessel Of any
other nation on the high
Mr.. Phlmore thus states the law of nations and Of
EngaDd page S46, sec. Sls:
Every State has a right of recalling jas avoeaadi)
it's ozaDs from foreign countries especially for the pur
pose Of performing military services TO their
Try. Great difficulty, however, necessarily sr-es from
the enforcement OF this right No foreign nation is
bound TO publish much less enforce such decree of
revocation No foreign State legally be invaded for
the plrpose Of forcibly taking away subjects
rant there The high seas however are not subj ct TO
the jurisdiction Of any State; and question therefore
arises whether the Safe, seeking its recalled Subjects,
search for them in the vessels Of other nations
with on the high seas? This question: answered in the
Affirmative by Great Britain, aud in the negative BY tho
United States Of North America has led very serious
and much to be ameDted quarrels between the Two
tons"
lis not recolectsd that the British Government ever
did exercise this supposed righ; in any case of
binary subject but it often dcne in the case Of sail
ors. It the settled Law of the Kingdom, that the
Commander Of any public armed vessel might at any
time send his preesgng and by them seize any
Of the merchant vessels ssy ws,-rnian CO her
great rivers and carry them aboard the public vessel
and there compel them 10 ssvve the King.
In thel long war between Great Britain and France,
which terminated by the treaty Of peace In 1875
the Government having often pressing need of sliors
for vefsss Of war this supposed right frequently
exercised BY entering upon American vesses-not lnly
in British ports bu, the high seas, and in the
waters of the United stesand there seiIng and
rying OF even our naAraliIed citizens. And these az
gressions were one Of the most exciting causes OF the
var Of 1912. And does the Government Of the United
States assert and maintain this right Of search, sad
abandon all their regard for sailors rights and the honor
Of the national flag:
There is, however, . case still narrower, and which
might TO have given to Great Britain greater sp
parent right TO ske such searches Of American vessels
The Government bad the right-by not only its own
peculiar laws but, il is supposed by those to
every oher nstonso search and arrest any dessrter
from her navy Bat is not supposed that the United
States or Any other Independent Government ever sd-
mtted that Great Britain might arrest one Of its yes.
arn:, sc'Is and cary of such deserter.
We will nov inquire into the foundation Of these sup
posed rights and ascertain wha. has been the disposi
ton of the question upon them between the gov
ernnents of Great Britain and the United States We
know that the two governments made an issue upon
them, and that trial Was being had by battle. But
the issue was not thereby formally decided.
The war was ended on the termination Of hosties be.
between FrsBoe and Eugand and the other great DOW.
ers of Europe. These had given occasion for the
eIeron Of this supposed right of search and seizure Of
seamen, and for tho exercise Of the other several sup
posed beligersnt ri of Great Brin 70 the prejudice
of the United States aud the general peace of Europe
having removed the Of all these causes of the
war between Great Britain and the United States il was
not deemed necessary TO discuss any of tbase questions
in the negotiations for peace, and they all passed
over in silence and the fright Of search" was not even
mentioned in the treaty df rent mode Of obtaining
seauen for the navy shortly afterwards adopted by
England and the practice of impressnent in her
own pors was altogether abandoned; and means bav.
log been adopted TO the OF deserton of
seanen it longer necessary to insist the right
to pursue deserers board American vessels And we
believe that the supposed right to make such searches ef
American vessels was in fact abandoned.
There was in fact no ratioaal ground for any such
right, and when the beat of battle ovey aud
had thought cody the QUESTION, there could be- and
is now, but one opinion.
The argument to prove this is short The right It viii
be observed II it exist at ALL is eIetcissbe as well in
time Of peace of war it is therefore, not what is
called begereut right Its foundation must be in the
has over all s citizens or subjects anywhere in the
world 10 the unversiy Of Iii, proposition, or rather
in the of tho clause anywhere the world" with
the necessary restriction Is foand the Of the
argumen, we combat Every government has the right
the exclusive jurisdiction and the exercise Of force
all things and persons in its domnions and therefore this
jurisdiction Of the government its cz,ns cub.
iects must bo limited and cannot be exercised within
the douiuons OF another State. But the high seas, il
is said not being capable OF exclusive occupancy, is
Al. ~ ,ltu