The New York herald., 1862-02-12


STATE II he Z declared 20 be dsbaed the only means O
vSoos e. 1s 70 OF
the t%o GS % much TO that a. che
s. ss ss.dens II the snemy country The practice Of
ceying ministers the beliserent States and the
ana convenience Of an immediate negotiation with them
Tnat these principles must necessarily extend 70 every
KIND OF diplomatic communication governmen'
ana government, whether by sending receiving am
osssadors or commissioners personally by sending OF
commissioners from respective governments
700 plain 70 need argument; and il no less clear
that such communications be legitimate and in
nocsnt In their first commencement as Afterwards and
that the rule cannot be restricted TO the which
relations are already formally established by
Power In the neutral country It Is the neutrality Of the
one party 70 the communication, and not either the
takes place. which furnishes the the appl
cation Of tho principle Tie only Distinction ayisa out
on.recocnitiow Of tke independsnce Of he d. facto
grenment Of one Of the blgens either BY The oAer BEL
ltgerents or BY the nesra Power Is s-hat "or he pur
pose Of avoiding Ae difficulties schich might arise from a
FORMAL and positive solution Of these questions diplomatic
agents are frequently substituted, ,oho clothed NTH the
po'cers and ENJOY tAei mvsss of 4nsseys, though they
are not inused with the Representatives. character.
titled to diplomatic honors (whsaton: Elements )" part
III chap sec. So Upon this footing Messrs. Mason
and Slidell, who expressly stated BY Mr. Seward
have been scnt as pretended Ministers Plenpotentary
from the Southern States to the Courts Of st. James and
|
a received, and the reception oftese gsnlemen upon this
footing could mot haus been Justly regarded according to the
United States Nor indeed clear that these gentle
men would have been clothed with any powers have
| diplomatic agents not officially recognized.
appears to her Massty's government to be neces
sary and certain deduction from these principles that
Havana to St. Thomas their way Great Britain and
France, and Of their credentials dispatches f any)
the Trent was not and could not be violation
OF the duties OF
both for that and also the destination Of
these persons and Of their dispatches bona de ncu
ra it is in the judgment Of her Agjatys government clear
and certain hey aere mol contrcband.
The doctrine OF conraband has its whole foundation
and origin in the principle which nowhere
ratey explained than in the following passage of Bynker
shock After stating in general terms the duty Of impair
tial neutrality he adds
Et sane i'd, quod modo dcebam tantum ratio docet
sed ct uses inter omnes ere Quamvis
s %
m contra amcos n9aros Ct Non lcet
haDes n sun .Ormens, srna n 6elo
est ne qad eorum hosous qSia his raSaa
ps % 1%s P no nSs, ss%
The principle Of contraband Of is here clearly e.
planned. and it il impossible that men, or despatchss
which do not come within that principle in this
traband Of is, as Mr.. Seward states nothing less
than the connscstion Of the ship; but il Is i'm
trail has done more than employ means usual among
nations for maintaining his own proper relations with
one the begerents 10 Of the very essence OF the
hostile, and not dsdtrsi destination Goods, says
Lord Stowel (the Imna, Chr. RIB, 1877, "going to
traband all goods going there being equally lawful The
rule respecting contraband, he adds as have always
understood IT, 10 that articles must bs taken in dslcio
In the natural prosecution Of the voyage to snemys
port" On what just principle can it be contsnded that
hostile destination = ss: M o neutral dsstip.-
.0n more 81 h J" c cna
the case OF arms and ammunitionf
Mr.. Seward seeks to support his conclusion this
William Scott in the case Of the Caroline, that "you may
stop the ambassador Of your enemy on his passage'
he Caroline, Chr. Rob- Aes) and to another dicinm
civil functionaries f sent for purpose intimately con-
nected with the hostile operations" (The Orozcmbo
Chr Rob. 43) may fall under the rule with per-
sons whose employment is directly military.
These quotations il seems to her Majesty
cases applied by Mr.. Seward in a sense different from
that in which they were used Sir William Scott does
not say that an ambassador, sent from belligsrent
neutral State, may be stopped contraband while on
his passage board neutral vessel belonging that or
any other neutral State; that, il he be contra
band the other bogerent would have any right stop
him on such voyage The sole object which Sir Will
liam Scott had in view was to explain the extent and
limits OF the doctrine OF the invoabty Of ambassadors
in virtue Of that character, for he says
The limits that assigned to the operations OF war
against them by vat,el these SUBJECTS
o. %ag so %
Oh s e s he has
and has been admitted he be-
% s e the
peace in maintaining which all nations IN degree
There il certainly nothing in ths passage from which
inference be drawn so totally opposed tho gene
raj Of the whole judgment that ambassador
proceeding to tho country to which he is and on
board neutral vessel belonging that country can be
stopped on the ground conveyance Of such an
ambassador is breach ofneuraty which il must be IL
he be contraband Of sir William Scott Is here ex
pressing not his own opinion merely, but the doctrine
haxo hnav.
authority upon the subject No writer Of authority has
ever suggested that ambassador proceeding to a
State board Of its merchant ships Is con-
trsband Of war Then only writer named by Sir william
Scott s vatts (vatie, hb w., cap 7, Sec s5) whose
words are these -
rennem partouto hberte actes dhos-
tihte Non seuement done peut justement relser
les arrete meme ss de passer
secreeentet sans permission dams les heu1 don't
maitre.
And hs adds a. an example tho seizure Of French
Ambassador when passing through the dominieus Of
Hanover during war between England and France, by
the King Of England, who was also sovereign Of Han
The rule therefore, 70 bs collected from these authori
any place Of which YOU are yourself the master or in
anyothsr place whore you have right 70 acts
Of hostility Your own territory or ships Of yonr own
ter The enemy's territory, or the snemys ships,
places which you right Of hos
of neutrality are psces whore you have no right TO e.
srciss acts Of hostility.
Il would be an inversion Of the doctrine that amtss
sadors have peculiar privileges TO argue that they
less protected than other men. The right conciso t
that an ambassador sent TO neutral Popsr nvioldJte on
the high as wvil as IN neural wats, waile under the
protection Of the nesaral flag.
The other dictum Of Sir Walter Scott, In the case Of
the orozembo even less pertinent 10 the present ss
ton That related " the OF neutral ship which,
upon the effect OF the evidence given the trial. was
held by the court to have been engaged enemy's
transport to convey the ensmys military officers, and
some Of his civil officers whose duties intimately
connected with military operations from the ensmys
country TO Of the encmys colonies which was about
TO be the theatre Of operations tho whole being
done under color Of simulated neutral Destination.
But long neutral government, within whose ter.
ritories no military operations arc carried on, adj
here's TO It's profession OF neutrality tho duties Of civil
officers ON mission TO that government and within its
..l.I.