New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1862-01-08
NUMBER 26I.
The Con .esponde1,ee In the Case OF Mason
ga4. s,s%5s~ ard sIsdsIi. 7ap,g, T. essssls ss5s.S5

Of the 3lstnit., containing the full correspondence
between the United States and British Govern
mentsregarding the seizure Of Messrs. Mason and
Slide but its great lesgth, and the fact that we
have already published portions Of it, render nm
necessary its reproduction in extenso.- The ex.
tracts we make below will be found highly inter-
estings: 81 r. s.s4Ss $-ys z1ET
No.z1.-From Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, y!S.
Minister dated Washington, Nov. 30, in which the
former compliments the latter upon bis assertion
to Lord Palmerston that the life Of the Southern
insurreetion is sustained By i's hopes of recogni-
ton in Great Britain and in France,u and that /" it
would perish in ninety days if those hopes should
cease The letter concludes with the statement
that Capt. Wilkes acted without instructions id the
case. esw se - a7=sss T 10 So : 4
n No. 2.-Earl Russell to Lord Lyons, dated For
seign Office, Nov. 30 In this document the circum
stances connected with the stopping Of the Trent
and the seizure Of the Commissioners are 'reeapt-
ulated, as sfurnshedsoy the royal mail agent, and
the redress that !" alone conid satisfy the British
nation ia stated to be the liberation of the four
gentlemen and their delivery to your Lordship, in
order that they may again be placed under British
protection, and suitable apology for the aggres-
sion which has been committed" f
No. 3.-From Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons, dated
Washington Dec. 2s. The Yankee Premier com
pares the official statement of Capt. Wilkes with
that of the mail agent and upon this basis mod6es
the narrative OF facts presented by Earl Russell.
The round shot from the pivot gun of the San
Jacinto was fred, he says, when the Trent was
distantly approachng,s but in q direction harm
lessy divergent from the course of the Trent. He
denies that the latter vessel was slowly approach
ing the former at the time the shell was fred across
her bows, and asserts that she was, or seemed to
be-, under full head of steam, as if endeavoring
pass. He says, also, that Lieut.. Fairfax did not
board with large armed guard, that he conducted
himself respectfully and courteousy, but firmly, and
that the Captain of the Trent was not at any time
or in any way required to go ON board the San
Jacinto.a Seward seems to attach no little import
ance to these trifing details as II they might in
some way materially Affect the question at issue.
He then proceeds to remind his lordship OF" some
facts which doubtlessiy were omitted by Earl Rus
sell, with the very Becoming and proper motive Of
allowing them to be brought into the case, on the
part of the United States, in the way most salts
factory to this Government" !" These facts are
stated to be that at tire time of the capture in
surrection existed in the United States, and that
Great Britain was regarded as asineutral but
friendly power, Spain being looked upon as occu-
spying the same attitude, while correspondence
| between the two former Governments having
settled the question that the neutral flag should
cover enemy's good not contraband of war, it fol-
lowed that such as acre contraband were liable to
capture and confscation. He then proceeds:
| James NJ. Mason and E. J. McFarlane are citi-
zens ct the United States and residents Of Vir-
ginia. John Siidei and George Eustis are citizens
/ OF the United States and residents of Louisiana.
4 1t was well known at Havana when these parties
embarked in the Trent that James NJ. Mason was
proceeding to England in the affected character of
q Minister Plenipotentary to the Court Of st.
i James, under pretended commission from Jeffer
4, son Davis, who had assumed to be President Of
the nsurrectionary party in the United States, and
E. y. McFarlane was going with him in a like un
real character of Secretary of Legation to the pre-
tended mission. John Slidell,. in similar circpn
stances, was going to Paris as a pretended Minis
ter to the Emperor of the French and George Eus
tbs was the chosen Secretary of Legation for that
4 simulated mission. The fact that these persona
had assumed such characters has been since
avowed by the same Jefferson Davis in pretended
message to an unlawful and insurrectionary Con
gress. 1t was, we think, rightly presumed that
4 these Ministers bore pretended credentials and in
structions, and such papers are ia the law known
4 Paris that these dispatches, having escaped the
4 search Of the Trent were actually conveyed and
delivered to emissaries of the insure ction in Eng
land. Although it is not essential, yet tits propet
to state, as do also upon information and belief
\ that the owner and agent, and oil the officers O
+ the Trent, including the commander Williams, ha6
knowledge Of the assumed characters and pur
poses of the persons before named when they em
barked on that vessel.
T. Your lordship will now perceive that the case
4 before us, instead of presenting merely fagran
act of violence on the part of Capt. Wilkes, al
4 might well be inferred from the incomplete state
ment of it that went to the British Government
4 was undertaken simple legal and eustomar,
beligerent proceeding by Capt. Wilkes to arres
4 and capture neutral vessel engaged in carrying
contraband for the use and benefit Of the insur
gents. "a = " =''~T, - -
Il The question before us is, whether this proceed
ing was authorized by aud conducted according tt
the law of nations. 1t involves the following in
Iquiries: ~
lst We're the persons named and their suppose
dispatches contraband of war? ~ E5I ,4sz
II "a. Might Capt. Wilkes lawfully stop and searc
Il the Trent for these cOntraband persons and dis
patches? 7
Sd. Did he exercise that right in lawful an
Il proper manner? aq, - ,Fsr,
4th. Having found the csntraband persons O.
board and in presumed possession OF the contra
band dispatches, had hea right to capture the per
sons - -.- W
5th. Did he exercise that. right of capture in tn
manner allowed and recognized by the law of ma
tions
If all these inquiries shall be resolved in til
affirmative, the British Government will have n
claim for reparation? ~ a-
Taking up the first query, he shapes his argr
ment IN the af1lrmatlve, quite to his own satlsfat
ton, judging from the concluding paragraph !: ~.
J trust that have shown that the four person
} who were taken from the Trent by Capt. Wilkes
and their dispatches, were contraband Of war.
OF the I'd, Sd and 4th questions he disposes in th
r following manner: ,...s..
The second inquiry is, whether Captain Wilke
: had right, by the law of nations, to detain an
search the Trent? '"' 4 ~ IN - a@ Z
| The Trent, though she carried mails, was col
t tract merchant vessel-a common carrier fc
. hire. Maritime law knows only three classes
vessels vessels of war, revenue vessels and me-
!; chant vessels. The Trent falls within the latte
e class. Whatever disputes have existed conoernin
right of visitation search in time of peac
none, it is supposed, has existed in modern tint
. about the right of q beigerent in time Of war
9 capture contraband in neutral and even friend
merchant vessels, and of the right of visitation az
/ search in order to determine whether they are ne
o troll, and are documented as such according 20 IL
3 law of nations. s's - ~'r''F - "
y I assume, in the present case, what, as re,
J. British authorities is regarded by Great Brita
herself rs true maritime law: that the circul
stance that the Trent was proceeding from ne
n trail port to another neutral port does not modi
the right of the belligerent captor. a,l-a p
a The third question is whether Capt. Wilkes e
|, ereised the right Of search in lawful and prop