The Union. [volume] (Georgetown, Del.) 1863-1866, 1863-09-18
The Conduct of England in ReIa-
tiOn to America.
A LETTER FROM THE LONDON TINES.

pciuS pullt, OF alieSeu W pe Dullt, IN lnlS
country fr the service of the Confederate
States Of America. Like other partisans of
the Federals, the association appeals not to
our sense of justice, but to the sympathies
with which, in their opinion, we ought to be
penetrated. They present the Northern States
to our view as nation struggling for con-
stitutional freedom and emancipation against
a rebellion of Shareholders" and ask that the
law may be applied with vigor" in proven
ton of acts prejudical to ga friendly Power
contending for human freedom"
This is precisely the style adopted by per-
sons Of greater note in discussing the subject,
but it is a very mistaken one. The law
knows neither prepossessions nor prejudices
nor can it enter into the merits of any cause
of war. We can only look at the Federals as
belligerents," while we are "neutrals," and
in these abstract capacities we must conduct
our dealings. 1t is undoubtedly proper that
the law should be put in force against any
parties intending to violate it; but it is un-
fortunately doubtful whether the law is sufi-
Gent to prevent what are morally offences
against its spirit. We know in general terms
what subject of neutral State may do and
what he may not do. He may have dealings
with the belligerents, even in munitions of
war, but he must not enter into the quarrel.
He must not enlist men for the war, nor may
he "equip" and send forth yessel-ofwar
for the service of one belligerent against
the other. That would be going too far, and
would be departure from the limits of neu-
trality. On the other hand, shipbuilder of
neutral State may certainly carry on his
trade of shipbuilding, and either build ship
to order, Or sell one when he has built it,
Nor could any injunction be well leveled
against his Building ships-ofwar, since he
might have built them without reference to
any particular order or demand, Even the |
character of the vessel in this respect might
not be easily asesrtaihable. A ship designed
bona 6de for mercantile purposes might be SO
constructed as to be convertible into a man
Ofwar upon occasion. We ourselves once |
made it q stipulation that the packets of o |
certain subsidized line should be capable of |
carrying gums and doing duty as fighting |
ships. There would obviously, therefore, be
great difficulty in applying to the trade in
ships any rules different from those applying
to the trade in munitions of war. Of the |
two, indeed, it must be far more certain that
a battery of field pieces, such as the FederaIs
have had by scores, is intended for the imme-
date uses of the war than that an empty
ship, however constructed, is destined for
such objects.
Nevertheless, when we have said all this,
we cannot pretend to deny that there is some
thing, short, perhaps, of legal offence, which
we ourselves, if We were belligerents,
should be strongly disposed to complain of as
n breach of neutrality, If vessels were built
in the yards of foreign country of such a
character and design as to be directly avail
able against us; if such vessels were actually
made over to our enemies, and if they then
against us under the enemy's flag,
we should probably demonstrate with consid-
cradle energy; nor should we be very well
the assertion that they were
not actually equipped" at the time of de-
livery. "Equipment" in the legal sense APP
pears to constitute the difference between a
lawful and an unlawful sale. An empty hull
may be anything, but vessel equipped for
The sea is an active engine of war.
This view of the case manifestly leaves
openings for any amount of evasion A ship
has only to be towed out of our harbors to
another port or to another vessel, whence she
may take her guns and stores, and the inter-
lict of such supplies becomes dead letter.
Should we be likely to acquiesce in proceed
ngs of that kind for any length of
time, or is it our interest, as a nation, to see
The precedent established? We are assured .
ut this moment there are two vessels in the ,
Mersey and a third in the Clyde designed in ,
with the latest conceptions of !
naval warfare, and VIGOROUSLY designed for
The use of the Southern States.
The memorialists of the Emancipation So ,
,iety speak of them as powerful iron-plated
'team-rams," and ingeniously describe them
rs equipped" with " steel prows and tur-
'ets." We are not sure that this would be
equipment" under the meaning
If the act but if the statement is true-and
we have no reason to doubt tive should ask
With what feelings we should regard similar
ON the part of others. The Fed
erals are not entitled to call upon us to change
)ur laws, nor can we submit to be bullied |
sven into a change of practice; but the case
$ now becoming q very strong one. We
lold and acknowledge it unlawful to equip I
1essels of war for the use of belligerent !
We being neutrals, and yet every cruiser. in
he service of the Southern States has been, /
IS matter of fact, sent TO sea from the (
ports of this country. mt
1t is not the fault of the Government as |
he case of the Alexandra sufficiently proved, z
,ut there must be clearly fault somewhere,
when we see the spirit of the law evaded,
md things done which we would rather see
eft undone, and which our own national in /
erests call upon us to stop. We admit that |
he case is exceptional. 1t turns, in fact,
lpon the passionate, and overruling determi- t
nation with which the FederaIs are enforcing t
/ prodigious blockade. To this one momen- t