New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1863-05-07
Great Britain.
IMPORTANT DEBATES ON AMERICi

Great Britain.
IMPORTANT DEBATES ON AMERICA.
BY the Norwegian we were advised of debates in
both Houses of Parliament in regard to the seizure OF
British vessels by Federal cruisers. The following
10 q condensation Of those debates:
In the House of Lords the Marquis Of Csnricarde
called attention TO the Of British vessels IN
the West Indies by American cruisers, and more e.
pecialy TO the case of the Dolphin while on Ieglt-
mate VOYAGE from Liverpool 70 Nassau. He urged
in warm terms that these cases could not be over
looked as isolated acts
They showed a predetermined policy on the part
Of the u. s. Government, and 1t must be reeollected
that they took place under the orders OF Admiral
Wilkes an officer notorious for bis hostility toward
England. He also wished TO know what course
Government intended to take with regard to the as
sumption of Mr. Adams to grant certlhcates 10 Dlt'
ish vessels trading 10 neutral ports and referring
to the CAGE of the Sea Queen, insisted that Govern
mcnt ought not 10 have withdrawn the maui. Strong
rexnforcements ought 10 be cent 10 the West lDdla
station with orders 10 the Admiral OF that station 10
protect British interests.
Ii was in the interest of peace and OF British COM
merce, Which was already suffering greatly from the
arbitrary acts Of the American cruisers, that ne
advocated such a course.
SPEECH OF EARL RUSSELL.
Earl Russell-My noble friend has made a very
warm speech upon this subject, and woud be per-
fecily justified if the points 10 which he alluded had
been facts aud were not Tor the most part, assumed
n
rious vessels had been condemned by the Prize
Courts-tbe Adela. the PeerhOf, and others. That
certainly is unknown 10 me, because, though the
Adels has been condemned by the Prize Court Of
Key West, sn appeal has been made; and with re-
gard to the Peterhoff, we have account that any
such event has laken place. Hear, bearl For
my own part, instead of proceeding on assumptions
have thought il my duty, IN the grave and respon-
sible position which hold, not 20 proceed in any Of
those cases without Get king in the first place the
hest information TO the facts that could be pro-
cured, and in the next place, without referring TO
che law officers of the Crown, IN order 20 know the
character 10 be stscAed 10 those facts. Heart 1
have not thought it right 10 proceed in matters OF
such difficulty without taking soundings at every
step IIIeer besrl That bias been my course
in the various instances TO which hoy noble freud
has referred. With regard 10 the Dolphin, thought
necessary, having received the reports witt regard
10 that vessel to refer those reports to the law Off
GERS Of the Crown; and what they say N, that there
does not appear from the papers that there was O
rina fdcte ground for seizure they 90 not zee any
probable reason for her capture but, they add there
raay be facts unknown 10 me ana unknown 10 them
with respect the master OF that vessel which may
have afforded sufficient grounds for sending the
vessel to a prize court. But they say that two
evident violations Of neutral rights have takeI
place with regard TO tbat vessel. They stat,
that the vessel which took the Dolphin had
made use of neutral port for the purpose Of watch
Ing British merchant vessels, and that as the
Dolphin left the port, she was Immediately pur.
cles of water of the neutral power she seiz ID
BY tis United States vessel Of war. Hear, hear.
There another point upon which they ray there
great reason for COMPLIMENTARY, the taking a
part OF tic out Of the vessel and lsnding them
sfterward upon neutral territory. Hear, bear !
With regard to these two matters they cay there
cannot be doubt that her Majesty's Government
have right TO complain; and accordingly, having
ths day received their report which dated yeeter
day, shall Immediately, by the next mail, bring
those matters of complaint under the notice of the
United States Government. Hear. My noble
friend says that this impunity which the United
STATES have affected to claim is owing 10 neglect
of outrsges which have taken place on the part
OF the United States Now, with regard 10 that
particular pOat TO which the law officers have
overwhelmingly the unDeutral use Of neutral
port-the placing there OF belhgerent vessel
10 watch neutral one aud pursue her Immediately
after her departure-a case OF that kind took place
last year with respect 10 the Trscarora. Ii was i'm
uedialely brought TO the attention of the United
States Government; they laid down rules by which
such conduct should not be permitted, and said that
the officer who had committed The ofense, il could
he shown that he rad done so, should be censuIed.
Well, then sgsn we complain that IN certain cases
there 10 searches. With respect to that they
cay that no vessel wac 10 be seized without search
They lay 1t down.
Th. when that visit Is made the vessel Is not then be
seized without search carefully made so Tar to render 1t
baud Of war 10 The Insurgents and TO their ports other
wss violating the blockade aud that snail appear that
s.ea port To .noS. .d not SOan one
from port tho Possession Of the insurgents then she
cannot DO lawfully seized"
Now, that 10 the rule which the United States Sec.
rotary Of State has laid down for the guidance of the
Secretary TO the Navy, and Of the United States
Navy itself Well, then, it 10 not fair 10 sssume
that in case where the rule is apparently violated
the United States are hot able show that the yes-
sel tina, has been seized not proceeding from one
neutral port another but that she Was preceding
70 port Of the belligerent States while apparently
on her way 10 neutral port. That is a case which
che law officers Of the Crown say frequently occurs
Even supposng that Admiral Wilkes and other off,
GERS have volsted those rules, have reason TO
sssume that PREPARATION when asked will not be given
iu conformity with the rules the United States have
themselves laid down. do not think, then, it 10
oopyenieutI will say more, think II tends to inter-
rupt the friendly relations between the two nations
ss soon O. you have report OF an outrage, 70 say
that the Government Of q friendly people will act
in coutrayention Of the law Of nations; that they
meant To commit an oense, and that they will refuse
separation. Hear, hear. On the contrary, we are
bound 10 assume either that there were sumo facts
not known 70 us which will show that the act was
oct indefsnsiblo that the Government Of frendy
nation WILL even from regard to ts own character,
give rsparstioa. This then IL the case OF the Dol
phin. Thsrs were no apparent prma facis grounds
Tor the sssurs and II IL turns out that there were no
grounds, then we must not assume that the United
Bates win refuse " conform 70 the rules which they
lhAma.lvaa laid fHaap haas