Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1862-1865, 1863-11-28
ANOTHER LETTER FROM HIsrORICUs.

In repIy TO letters in the London Times from George
Sanders and Mr.. Lhdaay, n. p, "Historicus" sends
the folio wing communication to that paper:
Sra. think I can answer Mr. Lindfay's question
shortly, and, I hope, .atiBfactorily.
An English merchant may manufacture cannon and
all ohtr munitions Of war for belligerent, because
there Ia no Law 10 prevent it. An English shipbuilder
NAV not equip vessel of war or TRANSPORT for bel
gerert because there happens 10 be an Engsh Act OF
P4rameat which expressly prohibits his 90 doing The
English Government do not interfere with the htst ciats
of transactions, because they have no authority TO DO
so they stop the second because IL their business to
enforce the law. .. .t.s .. p-
Mr.. Lindsay wants to know how he Is to vote when
the aims against By the American Government for
the depredatons OF the Alabam, brought before
Parliament cannot more sincsIely express my with
for the prolongadon Of Hr Lindsays life than by
ping that he may live to that question put from
the Speakers chair. think eau promise him that y
that time he will DO the Father OF the House. As he -
good enough to set some store BY my opinion, car III
he thinks the advice will keep one) confidently ad-
wise him to- give his vote against the claim. AS the
We've have previously expressed on this subject have
been referred TO, may be permitted without egosm,
perhaps to repeat what have already written on this
point: .,-e --1 -'h'
"On the whole, think II may be concluded that q
breach of the laws OF neutral State by btlgerent
Power IL grave offence, which IL Il the upquesoned
right Of the neutral to puosh and redress. IL highly
concerns the dRnty ana lnoepeuoence Vi tno neuai
State 20 violated to assert It's right and to in
sst upon the fullest and most compete reputation as
agant the offender by judicial remedies within its own
jurisdiction by diplomatic recAmadons, by accident
or fraud its Jurisdiction has been euded. The other
Who Though be may have sustained injury,
has suffered the violation Of right has no definite OF
lawful claim upon the neutral for reparAtion He may
urge upon the neutral by way Of remonNrarce, the
duty of obtaining redress for him At the hands Of the
Of nder; this however, s only duty Of imperfect OBJ
liration He cannot demand at the hands of the
trail, rs of right compensation for the injury he may
have sustained he impose upon the neutral the
duty Of obtaining from him any remedy beyond that
whloh may be had persons and iDgs which are
inra prasidia and consequently within the neutral u
rsdcon If the offender has succeeded in evading the
neutral jurisdiction, the bsgerent cannot as Of right
clupon the neutral to pursue those further remedies
TO which the latter might be himself entitled"
Ihave nothing to add to or to change in the vieu
which thus expressed. If Mr.. Lind.ay cares to see
the authorities on which the propositions are founded
he will find thenat page lao of small roans which
printed last winter. A these authorities are principal
iy derived from American sources, they will probably
serve 40 sufficient sauce for Mr.. Chase when be ha
to cot his own words-a process think he vii probs-
bly, have to perform time before he experiment.
on the hair Of ''od Mother England" with any weapon
more formidable than bis tongue. HIsToaIoU'
OCTOBER 80.