The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1869-05-20

these they never possessed Suchwa the
"fact' that must govern the present ques-
ton. The rule, SO simple, and Ineligible
as stated by Mr.. Charming, is a decisive
| touchstone of the British concession
which, when brought to it, is found to be
4 without support. Unfriendly In the pre-
cipitancy with which it was launched
this concession was more unfriendly il
substance 1t was the first stage in the
ldepredations on our commerce. Had il
not been made, no rebel ship could have
been built in England. Every step il
her building would have been piracy
Nor could any munitions of war have
been furnished. The direct consequences
of this concession was to place the rebels
on an equality with ourselves in all the
British markets, whether of ships or mu
nitions of war. AS these were open tc
the National Government, so were they
open to the rebels. The asserted neutral
ity between the two began by this ire
mendous concession when rebels, at one
stroke, were transformed not only into
belligerents but into customers. In at.
tributing to that bad proclamation this
peculiar influence, I follow the authority
of the law lords of England, who accord
ing to authentic report, announced that
without it the fitting out of a ship in
England to cruise against the United
States would have been an act of piracy.
This conclusion was clearly stated by
Lord Chelmsford, Elk Chancellor, speak
ing for himself and others, when he said:
."If the Southern Confederacy had not
been recognized as a belligerent power,
he agreed with his noble and learned
friend, lord Brougham,) that, under
these circumstances, if any Englishman
were to fit out privateer, for the pur-
pose of assisting the Southern States
against the Northern States, he would be
guilty of piracy" This conclusion is on
~ according to the analogies of law. 1t
is criminal for British subject to forge
bombs or hand grenades to be employed
in the assassination of foreign sovereign
at peace with England, as when Bernard
supplied from England the missiles used
by Orsini against the life of the French
Emperor of which is illustrated by
Lord Chief Justite Campbell, in his
charge to the jury on the trial OF Bernard
and also, bt, contemporaneous, opinions
by Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Truro, and at
an ea.ly day by Lord Ellenboro in the
case of Abel on the First Consul. That
excellent authority, Sir George Cornwallis
Lewis, gives summary drawn from all
|shese opinions, when he says: 1.-THE obi
CATION upon State CT preventing her
soil from being used as an arsenal in
which the means of an attack upon for
Feign government may be collected and
prepared for use is wholly independent OF
the form and character Of the govern.
|nents'f,t CON 'Extradition,' page 75.) AS
everw government is constrained by this
rule, SO every government is entitled to
its safeguards There can be no reason
why the life of our Republic should be
less sacred than the life of an Emperor
Tor should enjoy less protection ftom Brit
Eishj law! That England became an "ars
enel, !. for the rebels we know, but this
tcould. not have been unless the proclama
ton had prepared the way. The only
justification that | have heard for this
extraordinary concession, which unleash
ed upon our country the furies of foreign
/ war toscornmingie with the furies of re-
bellion at!hone, is that President Lincoln
undertook to- proclaim a blockade oof the
rebel portsAtaBy the use of this word
"bloekadeA the epnnession is vindicated
Had. President Lineoln proclaimed a clos
Ting of thetrebel ports there could have
lt3eeas fle such concession. This is q mere
teonicality,s,L Lawyers might call it an
aper j.iriS,, and yet on this sharp point
ENGLAND hangs lei her defence. 1t is, suffici-
ent that iii great case like the present,
fWheirel the corfel ative duties of a friendly
power are iii question, an act fronght with
! Observation-Disclosures evil canhot be vindicat-
edtsntectTfcality.!sa Iii Tits debate there
| is no room for alityton either side,
We must look atstlle substance and find a
reason In nothing short ofaoxerruling me-
cessity. siMsaEStcanntttss,b e,. Justified on a
Etechnicalitysr NOT can the rcencession OF
ocean belligereacy to arehek without "a
fport OF prizeieauEtxa .S1aeh Ass oneessiop
tI5ass war itself, must -be,ats the peril of the
3iiatiea making it, The British alssump
tipp, besides being offenssiyet from fIr09m mere
Ftechnieality, is inneonssiistent With the pro
cclaniation Of the Presidents taken rkFls as
lNhole.which, while appointing ,blo9ck
ladesiseareful1 to reserve the rights Of soy
| ereigntg, thus putting f6reign powers On
FtiieifFF II Guard against any premature cohces
ssionl fter declaring an existing insur-
lrcctionin certain states, and the obstTuc
ton of the laws for the collection sof the
revenue, as,the imotixexifor factions ii tbs
Presid' eent invoked not anlyiYther law Of
4 Observation-Disclosures the Nnited States,'
Observation-Disclosures of the lfnatienal
Observation-Disclosures ,aruisersme be
pirates Clearly the prealamatiaaei must
4tb,ei taken as a whole&.and; itsAd ifteEenttpro
tsisf0fislso interpreted as to harmonic
sitaueach Others jIfnthey5 cannot stand
together, .then itis thea'bloekade" which
\ must 3D. msdifed Ryl,thse . nationah5 sove;
4reignty not the ns5i9pal soyereignty
lhF the blockade, Such Should have been
the interpretation Of friendly power