Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1866-06-06
THE UNITED STATES AND INTER
NATIONAL LAW.

VINO reads an American OS0N' eS~N -"
be the question asked a generation ago.
Who can get along 'eisho"s reading Amer
lean books : is the question beginning to
be asked now. In a late number Of the
London Atheneum there is a review Of
Ken,'s Commentary on International Law,
revised by DR.. Abby, Professor of Civil
Law a, Cambridge, England. In this re-
view the Atheneum says that " never has
an ancient branch Of study, after nearly
half a century Of comparative neglect,
grown more rapidly into popular esteem
than International Law within the last
few years. The late war in America
brought it home to the people Of this
country as it was never brought before"
That is something to be admitted. But
the next point is more important, namely,
tina, when in England they come to study,
they find that they have none but Ameri-
can books to study it with, scientifically.
Here are their own words on the subject:
The only scientific t~reatises in the Eng
lish tongue which cover the whole field
are the original texts Of Kent and Whea-
ton," both American writers. Now we
mus, say that this is strange, considering
il, is q branch Of science which European
authors have been writing about for GEN.
turtles, and in almost all other languages
except English. The highest philosophers
and historians have written upon it, more
or less eonnec,edly, for ages, and yet the
only scientific works in the English tongue
which cover the whole ground are two
American books. So, at least, the Athen-
q u says.
In 1856, Mr.. Marcy's FINAL proposition,
in replying TO the invitation TO the
United States 10 Join in a declaration
against privateering. was, as is wei
known, to join in a treaty excmpsing all
commercial property a, sea from seizure in
time Of war, as otherwise TO abolish priva-
teering would be 10 keep up a permanen,
navy, which we are not inclined to do
"In our opinion, it is idle TO expec, (says
the Ather9um) that the United States will
ever depart from these principles or join
in a mere declaration against privaseer-
ing" especially after the shabby ,reatmen,
of Mr.. Stewards offer in 1851 by England
and France, when they would not accept
his offer TO join the allies in this matter,
excep, on condition that ait should have
no bearing on the differences then pre-
vailing in the United States" The
question. therefore, to consider is this {:
What would be the effect upon our in
terests of the adoption Of Secretary Mar
cy's final proposition And, after much
confused discussion, it arrives at the con-
clusion that .the old wars can form no
precedent for US now. In case Of a war
with Spain, i, is idle to assert that we
should drive Spanish from the
seas. So we might, but innumerable pri-
va,eers would drive our England's) COM
merce from the seas as well, and the harm
to Spain would be just compared with
that TO England" So there of little doub,
that, in this point, at least, American
views Of International Law will sooner or
later supercede those Of Europe.
As to the priva,eer question, sit is sheer
folly to allow it to remain in the position
it now is. It is, we think, an error to
suppose that the United States would not
Join in a Congress such as we propose.
unless we FIRST settled the Alabama claims;
bu, as these CLAIMS, and our refusal 10
satisfy them, turn merely upon evidence
as 10 facts. IL might not Be wn,cise 10 accept
the proposal for arbitration" THAT pro-
posal has, we believe, not only been de-
clined on the part of England, but with
drawn on ours, now. "If our Govern
men,," continues the Athenemm, "wilfully
or indolently neglected TO put in force the
laws when there was a fair chance OF OBJ
tanning a verdict, then we are liable for
the injuries inflicted by the escaped ves-
sell" Here the .Athenetm confounds Eng
lish statute law with English international
law, as many of the public men of that
island are won't to do, as il 1, were not the
duty of England to conform hor local laws
10 her duties 20 the whole world.
The burning of merchant ships at sea,
without condemnation in fact, every
point raised by our Governments dis
caused, and we are pronounced right in
regard to it. But as to the question Of
building ships Of war, ETC.. for nations at
war, the policy for England is declared to
be in its favor, although clearly against
all principles Of. international law; and
therefore, practically, they want to make
q rule 10 permit it, only providing that
they mus be delivered in the ports Of the
nation purchasing. Such has been the
bearing Of American labors, thus far, on
international law.