Ashtabula weekly telegraph. [volume] (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1853-1873, 1862-01-11


States7 Can there be rational doubt that
the commander Of the said Trent was con.
scious of the errand Of those Commission.
ers, and deliberately promoting its successY
Can there be shadow Of question that,
had Canada or Jamaica been 10 rebellion,
the Trent an American vessel, her eaptor
a Brilon, Mason aud Slidel emissaries Of
the rebels on their way to solicit recogni
tion and assistance from the Courts Of
! France and Spain, and the case properly
brought before Sir William Scott or Lord
Stowell for adjudication, he would have
condemned vessel and cargo as lawful prize
Of war, and that the rebel pmssaries found
on hoard would have been sent 10 the
Tower if not to the scaf'old2 For one,
have no more donbt of this than Of my own
existence.
But then, It is fairly IL not forcibly urged
times have changed, aud the extreme as
serlons of belligerent rights over neutrals
which were current in British Admiralty
Courts City to sixty years ago, are not now
upheld IN any quarter. What Great Bri-
tain did to US in the days Of our weakness
aud her maritime dominion, is no conclusive
measure Of what she must conecde to Us In
the altered circumstances Of 1851.
Perhaps: Aud yet it seems hard that
belligerent maritime rights, which we're so
hroud and graspiug when we we're neutral
aud England belligerent, should have
'shrunk TO such little measure" when we
are at war and Great Britain a neutral
| The rule works so unevenly that there is
palpable ground for suspicion of joekeying
or ''prestdigitation" in the hand that holds
and wields it.
For do but consider this specimen Of
British logic:
The Daily Ners (London) is q liberal
! journal, usually lair aud even friendly to-
ward this country. Yet even Tie Neles
coutrives this dilemma, and offers US the
choice CT It's horns.
Mason aud Slidel were either belliger-
ents or they were not. But we have de-
uied them the character of belligerents, re-
gardng them simply as insurgents or rebels
But, in that character, we can only contem
plate them on an English vessel us refugees
from justice at home, aud Great Britain
never surrenders political refugees. Our
precedents, therefore, are all abroad and
our position untenable!
The answer to this is very simple:
Mason aud Slde we're not refugees
seeking foreign asylum from our pursuing
vengeance. On the contrary, they were
enemies Of The United States, bound on an
important ertand OF hostility, wherein the
Trent was their willing accomplish Had
they been fleeing from our shores for refuge
intent only on escape and immunity from
punishment, they would be jnstly entitled
to British asylum and protection, as the.
now are not. But the assumption that
because we do not accord to our rebel
belIigerent rights, they may be aided b.
neutral powers to any extent, aud may tbs
; pursue with impunlty on the high seas thei
projects Of hostility to the country the
have ioreswOrn, needs but TO be illustrated
: to be secuted, Were it tenable, a British
merchant feet might be employed 10 trans
porting rebel troops from Norfolk TO Char
= lesion, from Charleston to Pensacola, from
Pensacola TO Galveston, ETC., etc., through
4 out the contest, aud our ships Of war mus
pass them without challenge, because VI
deny them the character Of belligerents
, Great Britain did not think so when Me
. Nab burut the rebel steamer Caroline at an
American wharf, aud her government as
1
n A nations right to pursue and to protecl
i Itself against its enemies flows inevitably
. from its right TO exist, and is not Eitally
affected 10y The character in which it re-
/. gurds thOse enemies. Refugees and active
!. sgenis of public enemy are quite distinct
. characters.
1 Bat NJ. Thouvenel is quite right 10 re-
minding Us, ard Gev Seward in so hearti
2 ly concediug to him, that, ia Ruy contro
# Versy affecting the rights Of neutrals on the
j. high seas, the natural aud historical posi-
/ lou of the United States ia On the side o.
t the largest liberty. We must not be, even
If uniustly, accused Of recreancy to thos,
u generous principles We have so earnestly
) and so honorably maintained in the past
h Let the British Government make if il
/, WILL the Queens proclamation of neutrality
Il dead letter or a mask, we must be trut
r. to ourselves aad to the memory of our sires
q Since there is an honest donbt of our righ
II to arrest Mason and Sldell on board {
If neutral vessel. their surrender is unqnes
IS tionablY right
d And having thus viudieated ourselve
n from the TeprOach OF straining belligeren
LluIltiu6 IiRbto " 9hu AQAhutaRtt W
T. may confidently assume that we have there
by shielded our own merchant vessels an
) their inmates from all future indgnity o
'r outrage Great Britain in her perempior
= demand that Mason aRd Sidell be surreI
10 dered to her, has virtaally pleadet! guilt
s. to our arraignment Of her long series
D. violations Of Neutral Rights In the in
e. preSsmeut of seamen from our merchaI
% ships to man her National vessels, uude
OF such circumstances as those narrated b
ID Mr. Lewis Tappan in tho last Iadependen
c, The right to take in time OF war whoeyt
ee was born subject TO her sovereigns from Il
deck Of any neutrul vessel aud compel hi
n. to serve for an indefinite period 10 her Nav
TO she has never till now disclaimed. o.
be Government has urged, exhorted, entrea
I'd ed her, under almost every phase of b,
liz varying fortunes, TO pledge herself to a r
o. liBquishment of this unsupported claim,
of fra0ght with peril 10 our peace and iuiusli,
~ TO our seamen-nay, TO oil Of Us "who 4