The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1864-05-10


CLEAR, hear.l Such has been the conduct OF SIR A.
Milne who has for four years directed the operations OF
her Maestys forces 90 the coast OF America 10 such
manner as while securing the appreciation Of his own
government, conciiiate the regard OF a with whom
he has had to deal and particularly OF the vernment
of the United States And such, wilt venture to
cay, the COZ duct Of Sir Bald ain Walker, who bad
this case to nsider. II struck Sir D Walker, "a
think IL would have struck any else that II Coded
crate shpsoiwar were e be ALLOW ed 10 send In prizes
with their cargo on board and ty p ig ore co suns
the poicyof her Nj De defeated, and
her Maiestys proclamation would become null aud void
oIcer, who havins soa the aud then the
vessel would return 10 hs ships and this process might
b. repeated Win any number OF prizes Sir b. Walker
has expressed this In some passages which notle
and learned lord did not REFER but which will read TO
your lordsbips. In his letter OF the iptn August Nc
s Ausa The tender +, TSssaessa sailing
that her original cargo q wool was s,i
real and again led the Govenor attention
ns d mere icy 70 n hs b na
that this Of captain Of ship OF constitute
70 es # As @ g ne be-
s 'r pss ne
m @ i must be seon could
And IN another letter. ~
The admission Of vessel into port will fear open
being lenders WITH ew e to
weud thai he vessel Sea Bride Captured By
& be in ss manner ss ars or ~ other
prohibition entirely null and void. IN r ~
with reference 10 that the noble and learned lord
pressod no opinion. He did not tell whether under
the law OF nations, II is permissible for the captain
man owar TO make any number OF hts prizes into
ders or vessels OF and send them into ports
and thus evAde proclamation Of neutrality. Sir Il.
Walker further says
d NST mbes has her q wool m
her armament and the number OF her
afn s9sss e s os
ding the i hST snrs %'e
could be mad. 1e Fer Il. s s
cargo the transhipmcnt Of which, your Eycelccy viii
eye1d on any part Of the
he question was whether Il was to be permitted that
prizes should De sent into our ports under the Disguise OF
being vessels of aud thus Msesiy's prociaina-
zion should be entirely defeated The Attorney General
% the colony ihoue this was perfectly bc and
shat could not be avoided In any way
and 10 support Of that OPTION he quoted paragraph OF
wheaton The law officers in this country arc Of
opinion that that paragraph does apply because it
was written with reference to different subject
very truly and Justly eeid that although in certain
cases merchant ships which have been recapured
sci has taken the character OF O man OF war, IL
the captain Of British man Of has to fight such a
vessel and has 70 his warke forces capture her.
she then loses the character OF merchant ship the
naval officers are fairly entitled TO consider her
prize That principle does apply to the pre-
sent case This then. with which the gov.
ernment had to DEAL having opinion OF the Attorney
walker on the o'her me opinion Of Sir B. waHer Is
clearly the opinion 0f common and the law officers
say that 1t Is well founded in law aud that il is not per-
mssibe TO put few gems into prize, retaining her
cargo on board and send her into neutral port to sell
It. Ny noble friend who, with the noble and learned
his Office, or we should nave heard him vndicate his
own despatch-my noble friend. the late Secretary
for the colonies followed the opinion Of the law officers
Their opinion was that this vessel being, in fact
vessoloi war; but being prize ought not 70 have been
admitted to the Cape vessel-of.war. Hear hear
But then became qnestion-dnd very srion QUESTION
adm1 to bs-whsther she ought to been warned
possession OF and restored owners The noble aud
learned lord seemed at to that there such
that when once became prize OF the power
and jurisdiction OF the authorities of another country
there certain cases n which the courts have held
and authorities have with them that vessels
properly prizes, and he avoided the contradiction
into which he had fallen by saying that in that they
800, nau psen piazes & uus noS fes
had laid down. because is certainly true that there
vessels have in vesseIso war, and rerthees
the cor hdr after argument orded 1s 10 be restored
10 their oones, aud ev have been rsstoed Undoubt
cdy the ground OF their bong restored has been that the
vessel which took them had been originally fitted out
manned By the Ugted States themselves and therefore
they were bound to restore vessels and their
20 the owners; but, whatever the ground may BE- i,
Teits csE that there are cases in which according 10
principles WHICH tbs United States s1mt The vessels
ought 70 DO restored and here passage from wheaton
On the subject. He says
In such the judicial tribunals OF the neutral State
.lS. and 10 yna..e It's neutrality by restoring prom
.r.y Of rs own subecis 81 q other States at amity with
{er hear therefore, there are cases In which vessel
may be considered 70 prize unawfully taken and II
Of his despatch that real character OF
the Tuscaloosa ought TO have been inquired into; that
Captain semes should have been called upon to produce
her papers, and he concluded -
II the result inquiries had prove
ism waters in violation Of her Msesys orders made or the
10 s her eonser thai ns
with her DIGNITY and mGst proper for the ynaca
exercise OF further control the Tuscaloosa BY the
a sna un = her
Now must say as the general tenor OF the despatch
IS founded the opin Of tho law officers OF tho crown
chat the Duke OF Newcaste In this instance as wonId
as don; . S ws1 SsySaa s
Consideration" meaning that It pout evidently
deserving OF being msturely weighed The Duke OF New
castle, however clearly saw thtt u point which
mo decide for the and that his instructions
10 the Governor must be explicit am at the same
~ ms o., a NICE ioinf Of snenaional io,o aris.
ips circumstances whieA quite ne,c, ocng
20 the fac, that the Cenftderae States hare no Port
80 whicA they can snd their prizes The point.
ahercfore, is open % further consid ratiom whelher
proper treatment OF such vessels should not be 10
warn them off, But say that the question can be de
cided courts Of the csptors is think altogether
an errcr noble and learned lord went on TO that
Nt This had occurred TO the federals there would
have been angry remonstrance, but that we should
finally have apoogized Now We have, in my opinion,
heard enough q this kind OF allegation Foes the noble
lord think that In the case 81 the Trent, In which our
honor was involved her Majestys government played
,i,ner mean or trucking psrt 1t win DO seen, may
add that h,n only the other dag federal ressei roided
az Neutrality of British woters IN ne Of e CAesa
x,.rks fhs f,dsrai psvrnm nj made cmpfe sdtction
I'm hof violation but these acts OF justice
ara mart Of shc United States in 10 tho repre-
s,ntalives Of Maesty government noble lords oppo
e,e deem II right TO pass over 10 slence we were told
aarIy IN the session that the Of tho Saxon was
dreadful violation OF tho neutrality OF England that
murder been committed and that the offender ougbs
co he tried That case however, brought be the
United sates courts and justice has In tho main been
done 10 the owners OF tho vessel Then with regard 10
tho killing OF the mate, the United States government
ordered the officer who prpetrated she act TO DO tried by
court martial, and, In accordance with represen
ast,on made 10 them, consented TO have the In
Formations laid before the court amended 30 that the
noble and learned lord had good ground for sayiB
chat they refused TO do act OF Justice whom their
attrntcn was drawn to the subject IL appears TO me
shat In all these cases the right course pursue nas