The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1869-06-02


tion of the President, taken as a whole,
which, while appointing blockade, is care
/ ful to reserve the rights of sovereignty, thus
/ putting foreign Powers on their guard against
| any premature concession. After declaring
an existing insurrection in certain States, and
the obstruction of the laws for the collection
of the revenues, as the motive for action, the
President inyokes not only the law of nations,
| but the laws of the United States" and, in
further assertion of the national sovereignty,
declares rebel cruisers to be pirates. Clearly,
! the proclamation must be taken as whole,
and its different provisions so interpreted as
| TO harmonize with each other. If they can
not stand together, then it is the "blockade"
which must be modified by the national
sovereignty, and not the national sovereignty
| by the blockade. Such should have been the
Interpretation of friendly Power, especially
when 1t is considered that there are numerous
precedents of what the German authority,
Hetfter, calls "pacific blockade" or blockade
without concession of ocean belligereney, as
in the case of France, England and Russia
against Turkey, 1897; France against Mex
leo, 1879; France and Great Britain against
the Argentine Republic, lS3S-4S; Russia
against the Circassians, 1S31-S7, illustrated
by the seizure of the Ei1en, so femous in di-
plomatic history, (Hautefeuille des Droits
ct des Devoirs des Neutres). Cases like these
led Heffter to lay down the rule that "block
ade" does not necessarily constitute state
of war, (Droit international, Secs. 112, 1871,
as was assumed by the British proclamation,
even in the face of positive words by Pres
ident Lincoln, asserting the national sove-
reignty, and appealing TO the "laws of the
United States" The existence of such cases
was like a notice to the British Government
against the concession so rashly made. 1t
was an all-sufficient warning, which this
Power disregarded So far as is now known,
the whole case for England is made to stand
on the use of the word blockade by Pres
ident Lincoln. Had he used any other word,
the concession of belligerency would have
been without justification, even such as is
now imagined 1t was this word which,
with magical might, opened the gates to all
those bountiful supplies by which the hostile
expeditions were equipped against the United
States. 1t opened the gates of war. Most
appalling it is TO think that one little word,
unconsciously used by trusting President,
could be caught up by a friendly Power, and
made TO play such part
l may add that there is one other word Of
ten invoked for apology. 1t is neutrality"
which, it is said, was proclaimed between
two belligerents. Nothing could be fairer,
always provided that the neutrality" pro-
claimed did not begin with a concession to
one party, without which this party would
be powerless. Between two established ma
tions both independent, as between Russia
and France, there may be neutrality; for the
two are already equal in rights, and the proc
lamation would be precisely equal in its op-
Grafton. But where one party is an estab
lished nation and the other is nothing but an
odious combination of rebels, the proclama-
ton is most unequal in operation; for it be-
gins by q solemn investiture of rebels with
all the rights of war, saying to them, as was
once said to the yong knight, Rise; here is
a sword; use it." To call such an investi-
ture proclamation of neutrality is a misno-
mer. 1t was proclamation of equality be-
tween the National Government on the one
side and the rebels on the other, and no
plausible word can obsure this distinctive
character. Then came the building of the
pirate ships, one after another. While the
alabama was still in the ship-yard it became
apparent that she was intended for the rebels.
Our Minister at London and our Consul at
Liverpool eXerted themselves for her arrest
and detention. They were put off from
day to day On the Gath of July, 1862,
Adams " completed his evidence" accompa-
MED by an opinion from the eminent barris-
ter, Collier, afterward Solicitor General, de-
claring the duty of the British Government
to stop her. Instead of acting promptly by
the telegraph, five days were allowed to run
out, when at last too tardily the necessary
order was dispatched. Meanwhile the pirate
eLip CSNdpOu lIOm 1ifCipOOA O1 a
Here, beyond all question, was negligence
or, according to the language of Lord Broug-
ham on another occasion, "crass negli-
genee," making England justly responsible
for all that ensued
The pirate ship found refuge in an obscure
harbor of Wales, known as Moelfra Bay,
where she lay in British waters from half
past seven o'clock A. NJ, July 29th, to about
three o'clock A. NJ, July 3lst, being upwards
of thirty-six hours, and during this time she
was supplied with men from the British
steam-tug Hercules, which followed her from
These thirty-six hours were al
lowed 10 elapse without any attempt to stop
her. Here was another stage OF "crass neg
ligence." Thus was there negligence in al
lowing the steam-tug to proceed, negligence
In allowing the escape from Liverpool, and
negligence in allowing the final escape from
the British coast. Lord Russell, while trying
to yindicate his Government and repelling
the complaints of the United States, more
than once admitted that the escape of the
alabama was scandal and reproaeh,"
which, to my mind, is very like confession.
Language could not be stronger. Surely |
such an act cannot be blameless. If DANA
yes are ever awarded TO friendly Power for |
injuries received, it is difficult to see where |
they could be more strenuously claimed than |
IL a case which the first Minister of the Of |
lending Power did not hesitate to character
ze so strongly. The enlistment of the crew |
was not less obnoxious to censure than the |
building of the ship and her escape. 1t was 4
part of the transaction. The evidence is |
explicit. Not to occupy too much time, |
refer only to the affidavit of William Pass |
more, who swears that he was engaged with |
-he express understanding that the ship was |
q to fight for the Government Of the Confed-
crate States OF America" that he Joined her I
It Laird's yard at Birkenhead, near Liver
pool remained there several days; that he
ound obout thirty old man-of-war's men on
board, among whom it was swell known
hat she was going out as privateer for the
Confederate Government to fight under a
commission from jefferson Davis" In list
IF the crew now before me, there is large
number said TO be from the "royal naval re-
serve" / might add to this testimony.
The more the case is examined, the more
clearly do we discern the character of the
transaction. The dedication Of the ship to
he rebel service, from the very laying Of the
Keel and the organization OF her voyage with
England as her naval base, from which she
irew munitions of war and men, made her
departure as much hostile expedition, as If /
he had sailed forth from her Majesty's dock
ard. At a moment of profound peace be-
ween the United States and England, there
vas hostile expedition against the United
states. II was in no just sense a CONNER
.ial transaction, but an act of war. The case
: not vet complete The Alabama, whose
building was in defiance Of the law, interna-
ional and municipal. whose escape was
scandal and reproaeh." and whose enlist
nent of her crew was a fit sequel to the rest,
fter being supplied with an armament and
With rebel commander, entered upon her
areer of piracy. Mark now new stage OF
completely Constantly the pirate ship was
within reach of British cruisers, and from
ime to time within the shelter of British
,orts- For six days unmolested she enjoyed
he pleasant hospitality Of Kingston. 10 Ja-