The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1862-01-04
WHOLE No. l.06S

| accusation against him. The neutral State
has taken rim under its flag, is bound to
protect him if he is not contraband, and is
| therefore entitled to be satisfied upon that
| important question. The faith of that State
is pledged to HIS safety, if innocent, as its
justice is pledged to his Surrender if he is
really contlaband. Here are conflict ing
national claims, involving welfare, safety,
honor, and empire. They require tribunal
and trial. The captors and the captured are
equals the neutral and the belligerent State
| are equals.
While the law authorities we're fonnd silent,
it was suggested at an early day Try this Gov
ernnent that you should take the Captured
| persons into convenient port and institute
judicial proceedings there to try the controver-
sy. But only courts Of admiralty have iuris-
diction in maritime cases, and these courts
have formulas to try only claims to contrabanh
chattlcS, but none to try claims concerning
contraband persons. The conrts can enter
tain no proceedings and render Judgment
in favor Of or against the alleged consrabaEd
| men.
1t was replied that all this was true, but
you can relch in those courts decision
which will have the moral weight of ii judicial
| one by circuitous proceeding. Convey the
suspected men, together with the suspected
vessel, into port, and try there tho question
whether the vessel is contraband. You can
prove it to be so by proving the suspected
! men to be contraband, and the court must
then determine the vessel to be contrahand.
If the men not co1tralJand the. vessel
will escape condemnation. Still, there is no
Judgment for or against the captured persons.
But, it was assumed that there would result
from the determination ofthe court Concerning
the vessel legal certainty Concerning tho
character OF the men.
This course Of proceeding seemed open to
many objections. 1t elcvatcs the incidental
inf hf.~i int, f1.,y
Of the main paramount public one, and posi-
| bly, it may max" the fortunes, the safety, or
the existence of nation depend on the acci-
dents of a merely personal and recunafy
| litigation. Nor cover, when the Judgment of
the prize court upon the lawfuucss Of the
capture of the vessel is rendered, it really
concludes nothing, and binds neither tho
bc!ligcrcnt State nor the neutral upon the
great question Of the disposition to be made
Of the captured conraband persons. That
question is ST i'll to be really determined, if ut
ALL by diplomatic arrangement or by war.
One may well express his surprise when
told that the law of nations has furnished no
more reasonable, practical, and perfect mode
than this of determining questions Of such
grave import between sovereign Powers
The regret we may feel on the occasion is
nevertheless modified by the reflection that
the difficulty is not altogether anomalous.-
Similar and equal deficiencies are found in
every system Of municipal law, especially in
t; nu " T. d.; - -, d. ~ e. t
Thn III, ~ nnrsannl ,,ra ,r o,n I"n1,'.
n,nr ha roso,,, h,, p'"f ,,i,h, o"
to the fiction that the claimant has lost and
the poSscssor has found it and the title to real
estate is disputed by real !itiganis nndcr the
naa-s OF imaginary persons. 1t must be con-
nations demand and all in,narti,I one, can
c,dr thc need of some form, of ;udiciaI
urnc,ss in dnter,,ini,r th, c,r,c,.-s. nj confr"'
band nrsons M other farm, than the iIlogica,
and circuitous one fms described EXISTS nor
has any other vet been suggested, Practi,
cary. therefore. the choice is between that
judicial remedy or no judicial remedy what
ever.
IF thcrc he no iudici,l remedy the result
is that the question must be determined by
tho cantor himself IN the dcc, If tbc nrizr
vessel Ncrv or,yc affections arise agn;nst
sucb a coursc The cantor is armed, the
neutral is unarmcd. The captnr rs inter.
csted, nreiudrcd. and ncrbnps violent the
neutral. if truly neutral. Is ,Fisintereeted
subdued and helnless The tribunal is
} IRRESPONSIBLE. while its Judgment is carried
into instant execution. The captured party
is compellcd to submit, though bound by no
lcrnl. moral. or treaty obligation TO acoui-
) csce. Reparation is distant and problemat.
icnl. and dcncnds at least on the in;tfce.
m,onanintv. or weakness of rhe State in
, whose behalf and by whose authority the
, conture was made. Ont of those d;sputes
rcnrisals and wars necessarily arise. and
,, these are so frequent and destructive that it
may well be doubted whether this form Of
remedy is not a greater social evil than all
that could follow If The bellircrcnt right of
= search were universally renowned and
abolished forever.
But carry the case one stop farther
, What fthc State that has made the CAPTURE
unreasonably refuse to hear the complaint
of the neutral or to redress it? In this
case. the very act of capture would be an
act of war-of war begun without notice,
and possibly entirely without provocation.
think ali unpreiudiccd minds will agree
that, imperfect as the existing judicial
remedy NAV be supposed to be- it would be,
as a general practice better to follow it than
to adopt the summary one Of leaving the
decision with the cantor and relying upon
, diplomic debates to review his decsion.-
, Practically, it is a question of choice between
law. with it's impcrlections and DELAYS, and
war. with it's evils and desolntions. Nor is
f. if ever TO he forgotten that neutrality. hon
s cstv and ;pstlv preserved. is ALWAYS the har-
hinrer Of neacc and therefore is the com.
!, mon interest of humanity itself
l At tbe same time it is not to be denied
t that il NAV somat;1ne baprcll that the iudi-
cinl remedy will become impossible, rs bv