New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-11-19

the arrest and detention of these Confederate Repre-
se 1taives whether regarded in point Of political OF
military strategy, it would be dearly purchased al
the cost o. single principle Of that public moiiit
whose rules govern, or should govern, the conduct
of civilized and Christian States in their mutual IN
tercourse in peace aud in war. .,
Those, therefore, who are not already fannIar
with the principles involved In the proceediIR OF
Cart. wilkes will Learn with interest that IL IL fuiy
justified by Tie rules Of International law, rs those
rules have been expounded by the most illustrious
British jurists and compiled by the mos. approved
writers ON the Laws OF Nations. SO far from having
transcribed the powers with which he was clothed
by that code, Capt Wilkes did not exhaust the full
of Lis authority, for he not Only had an I'M
doubted right to arrest these Embassadors o. the
Confederate Government on their passage to Europe,
but might have Justly captured the vessel on which
they were found, and brought her Tito port to be
condemned as lawful prize.
The points of public law involved in the case and
on which it turns, are as follows:
i. The right of visiting and searching merchant
ships the high seas, whatever be the ships, their
cargoes, or their destinations, is an inconesible
right Of the lawfully commissioned cruisers Of a
6eifgerent nation. Being purely belgerent right,
essential to the capture Of enemys property and
neutral vessels, it ia from its very nature and deli
milton, incompetent TO state OF peace but accrue5
to each belligerent on the outbreak of war.
z. 10 engage 10 the transportation Of military
PERSONS bearers OF dispatches and dispatches them
selves, ID OF the same nature with tie carrying OF
contraband goods, and vessel 30 engaged in the
service Of one belgerent is subject to capture and
confiscation by the Other.
3. a belligerent may lawfully arrest an Embassa-
dor OF the adverse beligerent, il found at sea in
raj vessel his passage and therefore before he
has arrived IN the neutral country, or has assumed
the functions OF his Office near the Government to
which he is accredited. But, when he has arrived
and been admitted in his official relation he Is pro-
faaf cd Nv nfotit int. al,
acter.
4. The fact that the voyage is made to neutral
port does not change the legal character Of the trans-
action, where coDtraband Of war-includiDg of course
military persons, dispatches, and their bearers-is
found on q neutral vessel.
As the foregoing principles are derived wholly
from the adjudica.ions OF the British Admiralty
Courts, and as Capt Wilkes has exercised something
less than the scope OF power vlndieated for bel
gerent by these ruings, 1t would seem idle to sup
pose that his action afford any ground for Ieca
nations by the British Government which will be
more likely to express is grateful appreciation OF the
forbearance displayed by that officer IN not capturing
the vessel found engaged in favoring tho offensive
projects of the enemy" If the British legsts rec
ognze the right OF bellgerent nation to CAPTURE
on the high seas the ambassador Of another belge-
rent nation, Jort,ori, must they acknowledge the
right Of a sovereign begerent Government 10 seize,
under similar circumstances the ENJOYS OF faction
to which, in the present case they have conceded the
rights, and therefore the responsibilities, Of bel.
ligerent.
1t may be proper TO add that il makes no difference
in the law Of the case whether the master OF ves-
sci be ignorant or not of the character of the service
in which he is engaged In the present case, how.
ever, the master ofthe Trent must have been well
aware OF the character borne by Messrs Mason aud
SliGell and therefore knew that III doing service
to the Confederate belgerents by forwarding their
ENJOYS to Europe, he was doing an injury TO the
Government OF the United States
THE ARREST OF SL1DELL AND MASON.
The following article from Tile Boston DAILY Id
rertiser Of Monday is probably from tho pen Of Mr..
Everett, who has long made study Of the law Of
nations 1t appears to dispose of the question in the
most satisfactory manner:
To ne Ediior, Of The Boston Daily Adrcrti'r.
Some doubt has been expressed whether the arrest
of Messrs. Mason and Slidell On an English vessel
may not be made ground of complaint by Great
Britain. In recognizing the Rebels as belligerents,
however that Power has accorded TO both parties
the free exercise OF every belligeent right. Among
those rights no one Is better established than the
maritime right Of visitation and search. We speak
now Of the right of visitation and search in time of
war--not Of the claim which has bear Inc sn1iect
Of disagreement between this country and Gieai
britain, 10 visit our vessels for slaves alleged
deserers. So well recognized is this right that the
mere refusal to submit to It by vessel otherwise
innocent il eanie OF confiscation and forfeiture.
The detention and examination OF the Trent, upon
which Messrs Mason and Slidell were found, fur
nishes then no cause Of complaint Ii is also clear
that any vessel engaged in the service OF OF the
begerent parties subject to forfeiture at the hands
Of the other.
Among the acts which authorize seizure and con.
fscatiou, common violation Of neutrality In the
transporting munitions OF war s not the most heinous.
81 The conveyance Of dispatches" Gays Chancellor
Kent, is the most injurious and deemed to be the
most hostile and noxions character !; it is alone
sufficient TO justify seizure and coniscation A
t0rti0ri would transportation Of an embassador-an
embodied dispatch-be a yiolstiOn Of neutrality.
Sir William Scott held the carrying by neutral of
dispatches FROM the Governor Of an enemy's colony
to the Government at home ground OF confscaiion.
Ii would seem, indeed, absurd Inconsistency that
veseel ght transport with IMMUNITY accredited
messenger provided with authority and with means
70 obtain munitions OF war, and to intrigue and
negotl ate while il might be seized and coniiscated
for returning with theee very munitions, purchased
by the same messenger or for transporting the dis
patches announcing bis success. Nor Is there any
thing in the position of these OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES to
furnish protection. SO far MS Great Britain Is con-
cerned these persons did not occupy the position Of
ambassadors, and without violating her own proc
lamation, her Maje.ty's Government could not
accord it TO them. They were merely messengers or
agents of the rebels seeking recognition as enbas-
sailors.
Agsin-we see no ground for supposing that the
course of Capt. Wilkes could be considered as vio
lation Of the right of asylum upon English soil,
represented by an English vessel. These persons
were not seeking refuge. They were engaged in
acts for which they would be subject by our laws to
capital punishment. The officers OF the Trent and
their vessel were openly and knowingly engaged in
aiding them in these acts in violation Of the neu
traty proclaimed by the Queens proclamation and
of the law Of nations
"Private vessels, moreover" says Mr.. Wheaton,
" form no part of the neutral territory" The
owners Of the Trent should find cause of gratitude