Daily national Republican., 1865-10-27
...,-.l pounr |, lhe snln indrn Of lhs dnrrnO

neutral Power Is the sole judge Of the degree
TO which Il has done its duty under n code Of
its own making, for the prevention Of gross
and fragrant outrages, initiated in its own
ports by the agents Of one belligerent In CO.
operation with numbers Of its own subjects,
and perpetrated upon the commerce Of the
other on the high seas; IL il be conceded that
the neutral, upon reclamation made for the
injuries thus done by reason Of the manifest
inefhciency Of its means Of repression, which
1t has at all times the power to improve at
will, can deliberately decline to respond to
any such appeal, fall back upon the little
that IL has attempted as an excuse, and
thenceforward claim, with justice, to be re.
leased from the inevitable consequences that
must onsue from its inaction, then IL must
surely follow that the only competition be.
tween neutral Powers hereafter will be, not
which shall do the most, but which shall do
the least to fulfill its obligations Of interdic.
tion Of the industry and enterprise of its peo-
pie in promoting the conflicts that take place
between belligerents on the ocean.
II this be once recognized as good law
through the authority which the powerful in
huence Of Her Majesty's Government can
attach to it, dare not venture to foresee
how much reluctance there may be on the
part of the people whom have the honor to
represent to accept and act upon it. Hith-
erto a want of eagerness on the part of the
most adventurous and least scrupulous por.
tion Of them to promote enterprise on behalf
of any belligerent that promised personal ad-
vantage cannot be charged upon them. The
references made by your lordship to the
cases Of Spain and Portugal must have con-
vinced you Of this truth. The prospect of
impunity in such enterprises is all that is
needed. Further than this might only ven.
ture 10 suggest to your lordship to consider
which Of the nations of the world presents
on eyerySsea around the globe the most
tempting prizes, In an event no friend would
more deplore than myself, Of its being again,
as II has so often been heretofore, doomed to
be afflicted by the calamities of war D."
1t happens, however, that no such doctrine
as this has been accepted as legitimate by
the United States Government. On the con-
trary, 1t has ever endeavored to respond fair
ly to the complaints Of foreign countries, and
where the laws have been found insufficient
they were altered. This was the case with a
law passed in 1874, in consequence of the
complaints and at the special instance of Mr.
Hammond, and with another in 1897. A
third example was the law of 1888, which
mitted on the boundary of the British Prov
inces in Canada by persons in the United
States, whom the existing statutes were found
not effective to restrain or punish" This
also was the case in regard to Portugal, as
Mr.. Adams goes on to show.
Mr.. Adams next points out that the cases
spoken of by Earl Russell as proving that
the English law is sufficient were just those
in which the Government went outside of the
law. He expresses his surprise, not to say
hstonishment, at the assertion of Earl Russell
that because Great Britain had already passed
a law stringent and effective as that of
the United States, she is therefore justified
in declining any proposal to 60 on amending
it. The two acts are, however, very much
unlike. The British law omits the sections
which were originally enacted by the United
States in 1917 as temporary law on the
complaint of the Portuguese Minister, and
were made permanent in 1915" Mr.. Adams
adds: 1T is in these very sections that our
experience has shown us to reside the best
preventive force in the whole law " If they
had been in the British law he thinks that
much of which complaint is made could not
have happened, and he does not think his
Government can be blamed for wishing to
see the reciprocal legislation in this respect
more complete.
Mr.. Adams concludes his letter as follows:
'lf from painful observation in u service
extended through four years cannot in can.
dor yield my entire assent to this statement
rs applied to large and too influential pOr
tion Of her Majesty's subject if 1t has been
my misfortune to observe in the progress o.
so wonderful revolution, degree of cold
ness and apathy prevailing in many quarters
from which my cOuntrymen had every right
to expect warm and earnest sympathy: il
throughout this great trial, the severity of
which few not well versed in the nature OF
our institutions could not fully comprehend,
the voice of encouragement frpm this side of
the water has too often emitted a doubtful
sound, yet indulge the hope that the re-
suit arrived at will ultimately correct the
hasty and harsh judgments that flowed from
lack of faith and confidence in our fidelity to
righteous cause. OF the friendly disposition
In this regard of the members Of herMnjesty's :
Government, and especially Ofyour lordship,
have never permitted myselfto doubt. And
yet in the midst of the gravest ofourdifTicul-
ties, cannot forget that even your Lordship
was pleased, in an official published dispatch,
to visit with the severity of your but too
weighty censure the greatest political mea-
sure of the late lamented President that
which, in fact, opened the only practicable
way to the final attainment of the glorious
end. Under such circumstances, | pray you
not to be surprised if am compelled not to
disguise the belief that with my Govern
ment, as among my cOuntrymen at large,
there is still left a strong sense of injured
feeling, which only time and the hopes of a
better understanding in future, held out by
the conciliatory strain in your Lordship''
note, are likely to correct. Recognizing most
fully the justice and propriety of the joint
policy marked out in your concluding sen
tence, have &c.,
CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS"