Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1862-01-02

the transaction unfinished was necessary, or
whether it was unnecessary, and, therefore,
voluntary. II il was necessary, Great britain,
as we suppose, must Of course, waive the dc.
feet, and the consequent failure OF the judicial
remedy. On the other hand, IL is not seen how
the United States can insist on her waiver oil
that judicial remedy, if the defect of the cap
ture resulted from an act OF Capt. Wilkes,
which would be fault on their own side"
Mr.. Seward next proceeds to examine the
action Of Capt. Wilkes in the premises, and
CONES to the conclusion that at mast be held
that Capt. Wilkes, as he explains himself, acted
from combined sentiments OF prudence and
generosity, and so the release of the prize ves-
sci was not strictly necessary or voluntary"
Mr.. Seward thus states his conclusions:
trust have shown to the satisfaction of the
British government, by very simple and nat
urol statement of the facts, and an analysis of
law applicable to them, that this government
has neither meditated nor practced, nor APP
proved any deliberate wrong in the transaction
to which they have called its attention, and on
the contrary, that what has happened has been
simply an inadyertency, consisting in depar-
ture by the naval officer, free from any wrong
ful motive, from a rule uncertainty established,
hliu IlODdDll ny kne SeNtIdl pulNicn NolitS'hSNt
either imperfectly understood or entirely UNI
known For this error the British government
has right TO expect the same rrparation that
we, as an independent state, should expect from
Great Britain, or from any other friendly nation,
in similar case. ! have not been unaware,
that in examining this question, l have fallen
into an argument for what appears to be the
British side OF it, against my own country
But | am relieved from all embarrassment on
al Y I..lA e.
of argument when l discovered that | was
really defending and maintaining, not an ex-
clusively British interest, but an old, honored
, and cherished American cause, not upon Brit
r ish authorities, but upon principles that consi
tute large portion of the distinctive policy by
which the United States have developed the
p resources OF a continent, and thus becoming
p considerable maritime power, have won the re-
1 spect and confidence of many nations. These
principles were laid down for us in 1901, by
james Madison when secretary of state in the
administration of Thomas jefferson, in iustruc-
: tons given to James Monroe, our minister to
e England. Although the case before him con-
n cerned description of persons different from
those who are incidentally the subjects of the
present discussion, the ground he assumed then
e was the the same | now occupy and the argu-
= ments by which he sustained himself upon it
. have been an inspiration to me in preparing
= thls repl!' whenever ne says, properly iouhd
G Ill neutral Nessel Is supposed 10 oe naole on
= any ground 10 capture ana cohdemhaton' 'he
3 RUE Ill an cases Is that the question snali not
/. be decided by the captor, but be carried before
f legal tribunal, where a regular trial may be
}. had, and where the captor himself is liable to
: damages for an abuse of his power. Can it be
g reasonable tneh. or just mat oeliserent
: commander VINO Is thus restricted, and thus re-
Spohsioie IN case oil mere property or trivial
= amount snail De permitted, without recurring
TO any tribunal Whatever TO examine the crew
d oil neutral vessel to decide the important
$ question OF their respective ahegiahces' ana 10
carry that decision INTO execution oy forcing
d every indivldual ne may choose INTO service
nohorreht 10 MS 'eeiings' cutting MN on from
n his most tender connections, exposing his mind
l. and his person to the most Illuminating dlsci,
pllne and his lie Itself to the greatest danger
reason, justice and humanity unite IN protest
n ing against SO eXtraVagant proceeding.
" Ii decide TINS case IN favor ct my own gov
ernment, must dlsallow Its most cherished
- principles, ana reverse ana forever abandon It's
~ essential poncy. Inc country cannot aiiord tht
% saGrihce. II 1 MAINTAIN those principles ana
j. adhere 10 that pohcy, must surrender the case
f. itself. 1t VIII be seen therefore, that TINS gov
l. eminent could not deny the justice OF the claim
b" presented. We are asked to do to the Brush
lie nation, just what we have always insisted al
h nations ought to do to us. The claim OF the
,f British government is not made in dlscour-
i teous manner. This government since Its hrs
:" organization, mas never USED more guarded
lie language In similar case.
A. In coming to my conclusion L have not for
IN gotten that, II the safety OF the Union required
the detention of tn captured persons, 1t would
III be the right and duty oil this government tt
- detaln them. But the eiiectual check ant
n waning proportions OF the existing lnsurrec