Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1861-1862, 1862-02-18
THE MASON sLIpELL ARREST.

Msjesty's Minister in the United States:
IARL RUssEtL TO LYONS.
FoRRIas OFFICE, JAM 2s.
Ny Lord II mentioned in my dispatch of the l0:h
instant tina. her Asesys government hared from Mr.
Seward of the conclusions at which he had arrv-
cd and that should you on future occasion
wherein these differences consisted. will now proceed
TO DO 90.
Il is necessary to observe that propose to discuss the
question involved in this correspondence solely on the
principles of international Law. Mr.. Seward himself
speaking Of the capture Of the four gentlemen taken
from on board the Trent Gays:
The question before us is whether this proceeding
was authorised by and conducted according to the laws
of nations This is in fact the nature OF the question
which has been bat happily no longer, at ssue II con-.
cerned the respective rights OF bellgerens and Of
trails. We must therefore dhcard entirely from our
minds the allegation that the captured persons were reb
Ella and We must consider them only as enemies OF the
United States at with its government for that the
ground on which Mr.. Seward Ultimately places the dis
custom 1t is the only ground upon which foreign gov
ments eau treat IL.
The frs. inquiry th,t arises therefore, is Mr.. Sew
ard sates IT, Were the persons named and their des
patches contraband OF wary
Upon this question Her Asjes,y's Government differ
entirely from Mr.. Seward.
Tho general right and duty Of general Power to
maintain 1t communications and friendly relations
with both beigerents cannot be disputed. "a neutral
nation says Vatte Vattel book III, chap q sec. u.s.
continues with two parties at war; in the several rela
tons nature has placed between nations. 1t is ready 70
perform towards both of them all these duties OF hui
manty recprc caly due from nation 10 nation In the
performance Of these duties on both sdes the neutral
nation has itself direct and material interest,"
pecaly when IL has numerous citizels resident in tie
territories Of both belgerent which may be exposed
to danger from OF conh5cation and violence, If
the protection Of their Government should be with
held This is the case with respect to British subjects
during the present civil war In North America.
Acting upoa these principles, Sir William Scott In
the case OF tie Caroline The Caroline Ohr. Rob- 46l
cited and approved by Wheaton ('Esmens", part w.,
chap s. sec % during the between Great Brtan
and France decided that the carrying Of dispatches
from the French Ambassador resident in the United
States in a merchant ship no violation Of the
traty of the United States in the between Great
Britain and France aud that such dispatches CO I'D not
be treated as conTaband OF war;
"The neutral country, he said, "has right to pre-
serve It's relations with the enemy, and you at
liberty to conclude that any communication between
them can p.rtake in any degree Of the nature of hos
ty against you. The enemy may have it's hostile pro-
ects to be attempted With the neutral State but your
lance on the integrity OF that neutral that it will NJ
favor participate il such designs, but as far as its
own and actions concerned will oppose them
And there should be private reasons 10 suppose that
this confidence in the good faith Of the neutral State
has doubtful foundation that is matter for the
ton OF the government to be counteracted by just
which this court pronounce that the Neutral carrier
mas violated his duty by bearing dispatches which,
far as he know may be presumed TO be OF an nno
cent nature and in the maintenance OF pacific conner
on" And he continues shortly afterwards: 1T is TO
be considered also with regard to this question, what
NAV be due 10 the convenience Of the neutral State for
ia interest may require that the intercourse Of
nondence with the enemys country should no! be Alto
yether interdcted. II might be thought to amount al
most to declaration that an ambassador from the en-
emy sha not reside in the neutral State II he is de-
sred 70 be debarred from the only of communi.
eating with his OVID. For to what useful purpose can
oe reside there without the opportunities OF such
muacaon? IL Is TOO much 10 say that all the business
of the two States shall be transacted by the minister OF
the neutral State resident In the enemys country The
practice of nations has allowed TO neutral States the
privilege OF receiving ministers from the belgerent
States and the use aud convenience Of immediate
| negotiation With them"
That these principles must necessarily extend TO every
kind of diplomatic communication between Government
and Government whether by sending or receiving am.
lssadors or commissioners personally or by sending
receiving detpltches from TO such ambassadors
commissioners from or TO tho respective Govern
neuts ia too plain TO need argument and Il seems
es clear that such commune ATOMS must De legitimate
and innocent in their first commencement Afterwards
and that the rule cannot be restricted TO the in
which diplomatic relations already formally estab
sbed by the redence oil accredited minister of the
belgerent Power 10 the neutral country Ii is the
,ray OF the one party TO tho communication, and not
either the mode of the communication or the time when
frat takes place. which furnishes the test Of the true
,nncaon OF the principle The only distinction arising
out of the peculiar circumstances OF civil and OF
rhs non.recuRnition of the independence Of the dc
Gscto Government OF one OF the beigerents either
by the other bellgererts, or By the neutral poser
Ia this-that "for the purpose OF avoiding the din
eulties which might arise from formal aud positive
oluton Of these que ions diplomatic agents FREE
,,enty substituted who are clothed with the powers
and erioy the mmunites of Minister though they are
not invested with the representative character not ont
| lied 20 diplomatic h0nors" (Wheaton: "Eements."-
| mart III chap l. sec. Upon this footing Messrs Ma
son and Slidtn who expressly stated by Mr. Seward
20 have been sent pretended Ministers Penpotentiay
from the Southern States TO the Courts OF St James
and of Paris have been sent and would have been
II at all received and the reception Of these gentlemen
upop this footing could not have been justly regarde'
| according 10 the law OF nations, hostile
repdly act towards tho United States Mar indeed Is il
lear that these gentlemen would have been clothed with
aoy movers or have enjoyed any immuuiiies beyond
those accorded diplomatic agents not ofc ally recog
| nIed.
II nppears TO her A-jesy'5 government to be a neces
s,ry and certain deduction from these principles that
the conveyauce Of public agents OF this character from
Havana to ST. Thomas their way TO Great Britain aud
France aud Of their credentials or dispatches m any
hoard the Trent was and could no: BIZ violation o.
The duties of ne utraiy the part of tina. vessel and
botb for that reason aud also because the destination
those persons aud ofther dispatches was bona ie
traI il Is in the Judgment OF her Majesty government
| clear aod clear they we're not conuaband.
Tho doctrine of oontrsband has is whole foundation
and origin in the principles which Ia nowhere
raey explained than in the following passage Of Bynk
ershock Alter stating in general terms the duty OF i'm
partial neutrality, he adds
81 sane 3D. qaod nIodo dicebam non tautum rstio do
Get sed ct uses inter fere gentes eceptus lam
vie chin liberia sint amicorum nostroram hos!ibu
commercs, usu tamen plscuit no G!,erurun his rebu
iuyemus bus belum contra AMIGOS nosros instruatu
ct foyeatur Non lice gitSr sGbehere ca, quihus ia
bsllo gerendo opus habet ut sunt 70 nents arma, e.
quorum p ecipnus b,lo nsus, mites.
Optiuo jurs intrdietgn
est ne giG corun hostiC| '"5m'ni'sroHH'; q"ia hi,
rebs nos psi cuaddmmodo vidremW dmjeis nostris bel
hpn faeors (Byuksrshock: "Qae.t Jpr. Publ. Rb. l.
chap %
The principle Of coLtraband ofVsr Ia here clearly
explained and il impossible that men, or dispatches,
which do not come within tina, principle can in this sense
| leo of kuo rinplv % c0n