Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1862-01-08

sage to an unlawful and insurrectionary Con
gress. 1t was we think, rightly presumed
that these Ministers bore credentials and in
structlons, 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 delivered to EN-.
lsarles OF the insnrrection in England AL
though it is not essential, yet it is proper to
state, as do also upon information and belief
that the owner and agent, and all the officers
OF the Trent, including the Commander Will
llams, had knowledge of the assumed charac-
teis and purposes of the persons before named
when they embarked on that vessel.
Your lordShip will now preceive that the
cases before us, Instead of presenting merely
hagrant act of violence on the part of Capt.
likes, as might well be inferred from the
incomplete statement of it that went up to
the British Government, was undertaken a
simple, legal, customary and beligerent pro-
ceeding by Capt. Wilkes to arrest and capture
neutral vessel engaged in carrying contra
banG of war for the use and benefit of the in
surgents.
The question before us is whether this
proceeding was authorized by and conducted
according to the law of nations. 1t involves
the following inquiries:
1st. Were the persons named and their
supposed dispatches contraband of war
search the Trent for these contraband persons
and dispatches
Sd. Did he exercise the right in lawful
and proper manner?
4th. Having found the contraband persons
on board and in presumed possession of the
contraband dispatches, had he a right to cap
ture the persons
5th. Did he exercise that right of capture
in the manner allowed and recognized by the
law of nations?
III all these inquiries shall be resolved in
the affirmative the British Go, erument will
have no claim for reparation.
address myself to the first inquiry, namely,
were the four persons mentioned, and their
supposed dispatches, contrabaDd
Maritime law so generally deals, as its profes-
sois say, an rem, that is, with property. and 50
seldom with persons, that it seems straining of
the term contraband to apply it to them But
persons,a ,as we'll as property may become contra
band ,since the word means broadly sscontrary to
proclamation, prohibited, illegal, unlawful"
All writer's and judges pronounce naval or
military persons in the service of the enemy
contraband. Pattel says war allows us to cut Oft
from an enemy all his resources, and to hinder
him from sending ministers TO solicit asss-
tance. And Sir William Scott says you may
step the ambassador of your enemy on his pas
sage. Dispatches are not less clearly contra
band, and the bearers or couriers who under
take tn carry them fall under the same con-
demnaton.
A subtlety might be raised whether pre-
tended ministers of an usurping power, not
recognized as legal by either the belligerent
or the neutral, could be held to be contraband.
But it would disappear on being subjected to
what is the true test In all cases-namely, the
spirit OF the law. Sir William Scott, speak
ing of civil magistrates who were arrested and
detained as contraband, says:
cit to rarin ain1a TO ho hrt
reasonable that when it is of sufficient impor-
tance to the enemy that such persons shall be
sent out on the public service at the public
expense, it should afford equal ground of for
feiture against the vessel that may be let out
for purpose SO intimately connected with
the hostile operations"
trust that l have shown that the four per-
sons who were taken from the Trent by Capt.
Wilkes, and their dispatches, were contraband
of war.
The second inquiry is whether Capt. Wilkes
had right by the law of nations to detaiD and
search the Trent7
The Trent, though she carried mails, was
contract or merchant veSsel-a common carrier
for hire. Maritime law knows only three classes
of vessels-vessels of war, revenue vessels, and
merchantvessels. TheTrent falls within the lat
ter class. Whatever disputes have existed con-
corning right of visitation or search in time OF
peace none it is supposed has existed in modern
times about the right of a belligerent in time OF
war to capture contrabands in neutral and even
friendly merchant vessels and of the right of
visitation and search, in order to determine
whether they are neutral, and are document
ed as such according to the law of nations.
| assume, in the present case, what, as
read British authorities, is regarded by Great
Britain herself as true maratime law that the
circumstances that the Trent was proceeding
from neutral port to another neutral port
does not modify the right OF the belligerent
captor.
The third question is whether Capt. Wilkes
exercised the right Of search in lawful and
proper manner
If any doubt hung over this point, as the
case was presented in the statement off adopt
ed by the British Government, think it must
have already passed away before the modifica-
tions of that statement which have already
submitted.
proceed to the fourth inquiry, namely
Having found the suspected contraband of
war on board the Trent, had Capt. Wilkes
right to capture tie same
Such a capture is the chief, if not the only
recognized object of visitation and search.
The principle of the law is that belligerent
exposed to danger may prevent tho coDtraband
person or thing from applying themselves or
being applied to the hostile use or purpose de-
signed. The law is so very liberal in this re-
spect that when the contraband is found on
board neutral vessel, not only is the contra.
band forfeited, but the vessel, which is the ve-
hicle of its passage or transportation, being
tainted, also becomes contraband, and is sub
ject to capture and confscation.
Only the fifth question remains, namely
Did Capt. Wilkes exercise the right of captur-
ing the contraband in conformity with the law
of nations
1t is just here that the difficulties of the case
begin. What is the manner which the law of
nations prescribes for disposing Of the contra
band when you have found and seized it on