The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-12-23

very words the acts permitted or suffered BY the
British government. .You have been carrying on
war from these shores against tha United States, I"
damage on the country Rrea.ef than would have
been produced by many ordinary wars"
% a.
In the latter period d the OF the French revo-
luton Great Britain was compelled to strain every
Napoleon. In such straits, BY . sort OF
war In disguise, she trespasscd on the
United States TO the result at length Of solemn war
between the two nations; but neither In the events
which preceded that war nor IN the events OF tne
hands OF Great Britain than we did by the late re-
DellOn by the and, direct indirect which she al
1orded TO the Confederate nsurgent States for while
cruisers sent out from Great Britain, aud our mill,
tary service was mainly occupied IN watching ana
counter working the blockade runners fitted out III
Great Britain by the oficla agents oil the Insurgents,
on the land 1t was In ike manner the munitions
or war and the wealth drawn by the insurgents
from Great Britain which enabled them to with
stand year after year. the arms Of the United STATES
In the midst OF all tins remonsrances OF the govern.
ment OF the United States were prompt earnest and
persistent Our Minister In London appealed to the
International amity OF the British governments. lie
lty. he invoked the aid OF the municipal laws OF
Great Britain. Ample proofs OF the wrongs CON-
United were submitted TO the Queens government.
Indeed, these wrongs were open, notorious,
perpetrated In the face OF day-the sub
ject Of debate and boast even in the
themselves by alleged defects IN the municipal law
OF the country Learned counsel either advised that
the wrongs committed did not constitute violations
OF the municipal law or else gave sanction TO artful
devices OF deceit TO cover up such violations OF law
ahd, strange to say, the courts OF England or Of
month after month with judicial technicalltles OF
statute CONSTRUCTIONS In this respect, while the
Queens government ITSELF including the omnipotent
Parliament, which might nave settled these questions
IN one hour by appropriate legislation sat with folded
arms, as II unmndu OF its International Obligations,
and suffered ship after ship to be constructed IN its
ports to wage war on the United States. We hoId
that the international duty or the Queens govern
the municipal laws OF England. 1t was a sovereign
duty, attaching to Great Britain as a sovereign
power. The municipal law was but means OF re-
pressing or puulshng individual wrongdoers. The
law Of nations was the true and proper rule Of duty
for the government III the municipal laws were de-
fective that was domestic inconvenience OF con
Germ only to the local government and for II to
remedy or not, by suitable legislation, as 1t pleased
But no sovereign power can righfully plead the de-
rect or It's own dOmesClc;penal statutes as justca-
ton or extenuation OF an International wrong done
TO another sovereign power.
nent had become apparent the government or the
United States earnestly enrreate0 the Queens Minis
tiers to provide the required remedy 1t would have
been easy to DO by proper act Of Parliament But
this the Queens government refused. The United
States, at an early day III their history mad set the
example OF REFRESHING violations of ne utrallty 60
the prejudice OF Great Britain by their own
authority, and in the discharge Of their own
national duty without waiting for the assistance
such statutes for their own convenience and as an
attesaton OF their good faith toward other nations;
ceived IN such cases we enacted new ones to meet
the case, not dccming that such legislation de-
rogatory to our public dignity but on the contrary
conceivinR that III SO doing We best consulted the
highest dictates OF national dignity selrespect and
public honor, and II Great Britain had SO under
stood her national duty on this occasion she would
have done much to save the countries from the
present controversy and all It's possible conse.
quences. Once before IN its Intercourse with
tha nnvrfC
into the error OF assuming that municipa laws con-
stitute the measure OF International rights and ob-
cations. That Is to say, when official agents Of the
british government attempted to enlist military re-
cruits in the central counties OF Prussia the United
States and elsewhere Tor service against Russia
the hypothesis that II the prohibitions OF MUNICIPAL
law could be evaded that would suffice overlooking
the paramount considerations OF the respect due 70
the sovereign rights OF the neutral Power 80 on the
present occasion the queens Ministers seem to
nave committed the error OF assuming that they
needed not to look beyond their own local laws ex-
ecuted Tor their own domestic convenience, ana
might under cover VI the deficiencies OIL that law
disregard their sovereign duties toward another
Nor was 1t in our Judgment any adequate excuse
for the queens Ministers, who profess extreme ten-
derness OF private rights OR apprehension OF actions
Tor damages III case OF any attempt to arrest the
many ships which either IN England scotland
were with ostentaton publicly being constructed
to cruise against the United States. Surely that
was an imaginary difficulty, or II real one 1t pre-
scented the election between a serious complication
or relations with the United States and the hazard
OF legal conflict with John Laird and Charles
Kuhn Prlolcau. But the government Of the United
States has never been able to see the force or this
alleged difficulty The common law OF England Is the
common law OF the United States In botn countries
and certainly IN England, revenue seizures are made
daily and ships prevented from going to sea on
much less cause OF suspicion than attached to the
suspected ship OF the ConIederates In both coun-
tries and not less In England, the previous order OF
the government for lts subsequent approval covers
the acts Of the subordinate oficers. Ia both coun
tries or If not In England assnredIy in the United
states, under municipal laws, In this be-
half substantially the same the government
finds no difficulty in arrestlng ships charged
with actual or intended violations Of the
states. signal examples OF this occur IN the history
or the United states. Tnus, during the great war
with affidavits flied by the British Consul at New
York charging that the bark Maury was being
far less evidence than the American Consul at Liver
pool exhibited against the Alabama the bark Maury
was arrested wtnm an hour BY telegraphic order
from Washington. Other examples or the decision
and promptltude in maintenance Of sovereign
rights and In discharge OF the neutral duties
Of the United States have occurred, as II
wen known, under both the Last and the
present administrations; nay, at every period IN
our history the government OF the United States has
not been content with preventing the departure OF
ships lifted out IN violation OF neutrality, and with
putting stop 70 military recruitnents aud expedi
tl0ns or the same nature but has further manifested
It's good faith In Its respect for Its own sovereignty
and laws by prosecuting crlmlnaiy the guilty par.
ties. Examples OF this occur IN the early stages Of
the war Of the French revoutiOn on the occasion OF
the instruction Of the Spanish American Conti-
mental provinces. and OF the revolutionary
movements In the Spanish American repub-
lies, and on various other occasions, nclud-
ing the existing insurrectton IN Cuba. But
although sucn acts OF violation OF law were frequent
In Great Britain and susceptible oil complete techn
cal proof VIGOROUSLY haunted directly IN the face Of
the world, vanished over, II at ALL win the sha
lowest pretexLs OF deception, YET no efficient step
appears TO have been taken by the British govern
ment to enforce the execution OF Its municipal laws
or TO vindcatetne majesty OF It's outraged sovereign
power, and the government Of the United states
cannot believe 1t would conceive itself wanting IN
respect for Great Britain TO mpute that the Queens
ties that the local administration is thus reduced to
such state OF legal impotence as to deprive the gov
eminent OF capacity 20 uphold Its sovereignty against
local wr0ngd0ers or ies neutrality as regards
other sovereign Powers II, indeed 1t were so the
causes OF reclamation on the part OF the United
States would only be the more positive and sure for
the law OF nations assumes that each government u
capable Of discharging its International obligations;
and, perchance n 1t be not, then the absence OF
sucn capaDity is itself specific ground OF respon-
slDility Tor consequences. But the Queens govern
mt ha IN afIynI plr will