The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1862-01-03

congress. 1t was, as we think, rightly pre-
sumed that these ministers bore pretended
credentials and instructions, and such papers
are, in the law. known as dispatches. We
are Informed by our consul at Paris, that
these dispatches, having escaped the search
of the Trent, were actually conveyed and de-
livered to emisSarieS of the instruction in
England. Although it is not essential. Yet
it is proper to state, as Go also upon infor
nation and belief. that the owner and agent
and all the officers of the Trent, including
TIE commander. Williams. had knowledge o!
the assumed characters and purposes Of the
persons before named when they embarked
on that vessel.
our lorlship Nill now perceive that the
case before US. instead of presenting mere
~ fragrant act OF violence on the part OF
Capt Wilkes, as might wei be inferred from
the incomplete statement of it that went W
to the British government, was undertaken
as simple. legal ard customary belliseren,
proceeding by Capt Wilkes, to arrest and
capture neutral vessel engaged in carving
cOntraband of war for the use and benefit OF
the insurgents. The question before us is
whether this proceeding was authorized by
and conducted according to, the law of na-
tons. 1t involves the following inquiries
|. Were the persons named, and their sup
posed dispatches, contrahand Ct war.
>. Might Capt Wilkes iau;ally stop and
sea'ch the Trent for these contgaband per
sons and dispatches?
). Did he exercise that right in a lawful
and proper manner
4. Having found the contraband persons
on board. and in presumed possession of the
contraband dispatches. had he 4 right to cap
ture the persons
the manner allowed and recognized by The
law of nations?
If all these inquiries shall be resolved in
the affirmative. the British government will
have no clam for rcparation. address nv
sell to the ilf>t inquiry, namely Were the
four persons mentioned. and their supposed
dispatches, contraband9 Maritime law $,
generally deals, as It's professors say. in rcm
that is, with property. and 50 seldom with
persons. that Ii seems straiuing Of the term
coLtrahand 70 apply it to them. But persons
as we'll as property. may become con'rahanl
since the wore mears. broadly, contrary tc
proclamation. prohibited, illegal. unlawful
All writer's and Judges pronounce naval o,
military persons IN til" service Of the enemy
ccntraband Nattel saws: War allows Ms
TO cut on rom an enemy all MS resources
ana TO nlhH'r ANN ironi sending ministers 70
solicit assistance And >'r William Scott
says You nav stop the ambassador O!
Nonr ehe'n! on MS passage. lr-ratcheS are
not less c.ta'!y c"ntfahanH ard the bearers
"r c'uFitf> WHO nn"Hr'ake 10 carry them tall
pnier the same c"H"rmna':on \ Suht'c'y
might be raised whether pretended minis
ter OF an n>1rmng bower not recognized a>
legal ~ eltEcF IN" h"iilgerent or the neutral
could toe held u he con'rahand. But u
would disappear on hcinS SUBJECTED I" what
IS the true test III all cases. namely: the
>pNt OF the iaE. Sir y Imam Scott. sneak
;rg G: civil magistrates. who Were arrested
and detained as '"ntrAhand. saws: ~ APP
pears t. M On 2rlnc''.'. % h" but rea>o''H-
ME tha'' "f'h II IS o. >'iii";'ht ln""rfanc"
:" the enemy MAJ. Surn persons should -
sent oE' on IN" puhnc service. ~ '"e pnh!c
expense. It Shn"iH a'i1rd equal ground OF TER
'cHurf against me vessel that may n" !'f
ONT 'or purpose 50 intimately connected
"!'il 'l' moisture operations. Fu>' that
wave SHOWN mat Inc f"lr persons "hn w"r"
, 'ahtn from the ir'h' ~ NipMn Wilkes.
'Nc .HtlF 9l>i'',til'>' were t"'lfanahH OF war.
H' S',oNH inquiry - whether zap
''HeS ma d ''-h' Nv ;nr "a" OF n"'lo'> I"
rr'an an" S"arrh TIE Trent In" Trent,
'h"u:h she CARED m1ilS. vas contract. or
m'fch'h' ''>Sr'--h common carrier tor hire
Narl''me IA" knows Only thlee classes of
V'>>%'>-'''>'IS OF war; W. revenue vessels ana
merchant Ne>Nt>. II" rent iai!S WITHIN
me .a'": c'a>>. "N2''Vcr d!SrnteS have eN-
.>'t!i concerning NGh' O. VISITATION or >earch
>" '',n' "' ',"''' .'''' = : Snn?".'d' has "N-
,>'nH II modern 'iHA' ahoHt the rights OF Il
REM III '.rl' "i "'f I" capture contra
''"" ~ "'n'F' OF even h;cniN mrrrhan'
: "''' % we f'-"' vi N.Na,'"A an"
"'FcA' II ord'r I" determine whether they
are nen'fa!' ana ere Gocnm"a'fA rs snch &c
r'r'ih2 I" III" IA" OF nations assume IN
, me present case. what As read British au-
''hnrl''eS. j. regarded bv Great Britain her
self as true MARITIME law. that r." circuGl-
>"nc' 'ha' TIE lrenf was proceeding from 4
neutral port 20 another neutral port does
not modify the rights CT tn" hrI!lgerrnt cap
'of,
!" 'h!rn question Is, whether Capt
lin * 'N'fc' ed 'fr r"ht OF search IN n
!a"'"i ana proper manner II any doubt
hnn& over ms point. a> the cas-" was pre-
.'n'ed III the statement OF II adopted by III"
i'ni!Sn government. think It must have al
ready passed away het'r" the notifications
OF that statement which have already sub
ml'l'o.
proceed to the fourth inquiry. namclv:-
Having found the suspected cnlitrohand %
war on board tn Trent had Can't Wilkes n