Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1862-1865, 1863-12-09

those rights creates suffering among thsir pee
pc and njuriausy affects great interests. But the IL
tmaton that relations with these States would be dis
Gre dtate because they are savehodng, would probe-
bly, have been omitted if the official personsge who has
published il to the world had remembered that these
States were, when colonies, made saveholding by the
direct exercise Of the power OF Great Britain, whose
depsndepcjes they we're and whose interests in the
then supposed to require that her COL
onies should be made savehoding
But the other ground stated is of very grave cha--
acer 1t asserts that violation of the Law Of nations
by Great Britain in 1907, when that government de-
clared paper blockade Of 1000 miles Of coast "a VIC
ation then defended by her and urists on the
sole ground that her action retaliatory), affords
justification for similar outrage on neutral rights by
the United aes in 1861 for which pallAton be
suggested and that Great Britain sis bound in justice
to the Fed ates to make return for the war Haged
against her by the Uaited States in resistance OF her lie
gal blockade OF 1907 by 1cquiescence in the Federal
illegal blockade of 1881 The most alarming featfre in
this statement is its admission of Just claim on the
part Of the United States require Of Great Britain
during this war; disregard of the recognized princi-
pies of modern public lAT and OF her own compacts,
whenever any questionable conduct OF Great Britain,
''n former times" be cited as precedent 1t is
not Inconsistent with respect and admiration for the
great people whose government have given us this
warning to suggest that their history, like that Of man
kind in general offers exceptional instances Of ndefsn
sibe conduct 'n former times !" and we may well deny
the morality Of violating recent engagements through
Difference to the evil precedeniS OF the past.
After defending in the Just stated the course
of the Britsh Government the subject of the block
ade, Her Majestys Foreign Secretary takes care to
leave no doubt of the further purpose Of The British
Government to prevent purchase OF vessels in Great
Britain while supplying our enemies with rifles and
other munitions Of war; and states the nten ion to ap
uly to Parliament for the furherance Of this design
He gives to the United States the assurance that he will
do their favor not only everything that the law Of
nations requires everything that the present foreign
enlistment act requires but hSt he will ask the sane.
| ton OF Parliament "to further measures thai Her
Msestys ministers may still add" This language is
unmistakAbly an official exposition Of the policy adopted
by the British Government in relation TO sffars
that the duty imposed NE by the Constitution Of
giving you from time to time information Of the state
Of the Confedeaey" would not have been performed
| If lad failed to place it distinctly before you.
refer you for fuller details this whole subject to
the correspondence of the State Department which
pinies this message. Tee facts which have brief
narrated are, trust; sufficient to enable you to ap-
probate the true nature OF the neutrality proiessed in
this war II is not ir my power 10 spprse you 70 what
extent the Government OF France shares the views SO
unrcserVedy aVoWed by that Of Great Britain, no pub
ished correspondence of tie French Government the
subject having been received. No public protest nor
opposition however, has been made by His Imperial
Mgiesty against the prohibition Of trade with US, i'm
poRed on French citizens by the paper blockade Of the
United States although have reason to believe that an
unsuccessful Stterps made his plrto secure the
assent of the British Government to of action
more olsorant with the dictates Of public Law and with
the demands Of justice towards Us.
The partially of Her hajestys Government in favor
of our enemies has been further evinced in the marked
difference Of its conduct the subject of the purchase
of supplies by the two belgerents This difference has
teen conspicuous since the very commencement al the
war As early as the lst Of May, 1891, the British
Minister in Washington was informed by the Secretary OF
or ha fited he had IN
England and that others would 20 to France TO pur-
cease arms, and this fact was communicated to the
British Foreign Office which interposed no objection
Yet in October of the year, Earl Russell enter
tanned the complaint of the United States Minister in
London that the Confederate States Wers importing
con raband of from the leland of Nassau, directed
INQUIRY into the matter and obtained report from the
authorities Of the island denying the allegations, which
report was enclosed to Mr. Adams and received by him
a. satisfactory evidence TO disEpae the suspicion
naturally thrown upon the authorities OF Nassau by tlao
una arr Antabs act" So, too, when the Confederate
Government purchased in. Great Britain, as neutral
country (Aud with strict Observance DO of the law
nations and the municipal law of Great Britain YES
sells which subsequently armed and commissioned
"a vessels of war; after they had been far removed from
Engsh waters the British Government in violation of
lie own lass aud in Difference TO the inporturate de-
mands of the Upited States, G1e an Intellectual At
tempt to seIs vessel, and did actually seize and
detsin another which touched at the island OF Nassau
on her WY to Confederate port and subjected her TO
an unfounded prosecution at the very time when car
goes of munitions of war being openly shipped
from British ports 10 New York. to be used in warfare
against U.s. Even the public journals bring nIel
gence that the British Government has ordered the
SEIZURE, in British port, OF two vessels, on the
suspicion that they have been sold to this Government
aud that they may be hereafter armed and equipped in
our service, while British subjects are engaged in Ire
land by tens of thousands TO proceed to the United
States for warfare against the Oonederacy, in defiance
10th of tho law Of nations and the express terms Of
the British Statutes and transported in British SD p
without 6Jrt at concesment, to the ports Of the
United States there to be armed with rss imported
from Greas Britain aud to be employed against
people 10 for conques. No royal prercgative is
invoked no executive interference is nterpcsed against
this fragrant breach Of municipal and international law
on the part OF enemies while strained constructions
are placed on existing slatutes new enactmeus pro.
posed aud questo able e1pedients devised for pre-
cudDg the possibility OF purchase, by this Government
of vessels that useless for belgerent purposes
lees hereafter armed aud equipped outsde of the neu-
trial jurisdiction of Great Britain.
For nearly three years this Government has exercised
unuuestoned jur sdiction many millions Of willing
AID united people It has met and defeated vast armies
of invaders, who have in van sought its subVersion
Supported by the confidence aud affection Of i,s Citi-
Eens the ConlsdsrGcy has lacked element which dis
tnRushes an independent nation according TO the prin
ciples of public law. Its legislative executive and ju
dcA prtments, each In Its sphere have performed
their appropriate functions with regularity as unds
turbed as in time of profound peace, aud the whole
energies of the people have been developed in the
ganzaton of vast armies, while their rights and lib
critics have rested under the protection Of the
courts OF justice. This COnfederacy is either ndepen
dent or it is dependency OF the United States for
9th earthly poW claims the right to govern it. With
out one historic fact on which the preension can rest
without one line word of treaty covenant which
can Eiv title the United Safes have asserted
aad the British Government has chosen Concede that
these sovereign States dependencies Of the govern
ment which is administered At Washington. Great Bril-
tain has accordingly entertained with that government
the closest and most intimate relations while refusing
on its demand ordinary intercourse with ub and bas
under arrangements made with the other nations Of Eu
rope not only denied just CAIN Of admission into
the family of nations but interposed passive, though
eectuAl bar TO the ackno sledsment Of rights by
other powers So soon it had become apparent, by
the declarations of the British Minister'S ia the debates