New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-02-03


our assistance-6rst in 1904, when, upon her
application, we prohibited, under heavy penal
ties, the engagement OF American el'izehs Ill
the armies of belligerent Power; anu again.
about 1918, when she renewed her lhterceSslon
in our neutral legislation. In 1893, Wheh En-
gland had her rebellion in Canada' anu INC
insurgents were occupying Navy isi"hu'
| President Van Buren, sent special message 10
| Congress to say that, while the laws were SUI
| fcient to punish an infraction OF neutral'y,
they were not to prevent it, and asking q grant
Of additional power to the Executive Ior tnaV
purpose; and Lord Palmerston declared In the
House of Commons that our leading men-
| Clay, Calhoun, and others of high character
all agreed that the laws should be enforced,
and that it. as they stood, they were insufficient
stronger power should be given to the Execu-
tive When our turn came, and We hau
occasion to demand the neutrality we had
practced, no nation was more honoraOly bouhd
than England to observe toward us the inter
national fairness which from the first we had
| observed toward the nations of Europe.
| Mr.. Dana, in his edition of Wheaton, declares
that the course pursued by Washington ana
his Cabinet in sustaining neutrality ana Impair
! TALLY has received the commentator OF the
| masters of law i'll all nations; and Mr. George
! Bemis. in his clever and learned essay on
american Neutrality, its honorable past and
" expedient future quotes the tributes paid to
ia by European jurists. Ward, the author OF
the History of the Law of Nations, says that
"of the great trading nations, America Is
" almost the only one that has shown
consistency of principle" And Sir Robert
Phillmore. the author of Commentaries
/" on international Law" remarks that the con-
duct of the United States had been, under
a the most trying circumstances, marked not
=" only by perfect consistency, but by preference
" for right and duty over interest aud the ex-
'pediency of the moment" Mr.. Canning, in
the House of Commons, said =" If | wished for
ga guide in system of neutrality, should
"take that laid down by America III the days
of the Presidency Of Washington and the
SecretaIyship of Jefferson" 1t was system
not simply in theory but in practice. Take the
one month of June 1893, and compare the
honest, effective action of our infant Govern
ment in the war between France and England,
with the course of England in the matter oil
the n-cads. On the 6th of June, 1913, Gov.
Clinton Of New-York under instructions from
the President, seized, with detachment OF
militia, the French priyateer Republican,
which had been fitted out in violation OF
neutrality, and handed her over to the judicial
| authority for prosecution and, on the 25th OF
the same month, the French Minister Genet
wrote his thanks to Jefferson for the stoppage
| of vessel fitted out in Georgia to cruise
against the French. a fortnight later, in July,
on the demand of Genet an English privateer
which had bought new gun-caTiages in Phila-
delpha, was compelled to return tho carriages,
stop up her new port holes, aud leave port in
| the same outfit IA that with which she came in.
Hamilton's instructions TO Collectors which
| Sir Hugh Cairns declared embodied all the law
! of nations on the subject, when quoted in the
| Alexandra case 10 show tho obligation of En-
! Gland fo,cdrd America, were found by the Crown
! Lawyers to oyerstcp tho bounds of international
| obligation. The Attorney and Sohcitor-Gcneral
| held that they surpassed the limit of neutral
| duty 1t was gmvely contended that England's
| duty toward America was to be measured
simply by her municipal law. That law they
did not choose To amend; and thus it came to
pass that, forgetful Of Cannlng'S warning that
| England must do unto others what she had
"otlers do unto her" the Quitting of the
! iron-clads was allowed to proceed in spite of
| the protest of Nr. Adams; and, when the Ala
bama sailed on her piratical cruise, followed
by the cheers of the House of Commons, adj
yised though they were of her illegal charac-
! ter and of the order for her detention, the
remark Of Lord John RUSSELL that her escape
was scandal and reproach" to England
was truism that cannot be blOtted out by
any award of n chance Commission.
Lord John declared that the Alabama could
| only have ESCAPED by "treachery;p and he
denied the right of John Laird 4" to go to war
ON his own account" but the treachery, amid
! the plaudits of Parliament, was allowed to
pass unpublished; and Mr.. Laird's n-clad,
after Lighting the ocean with our burning
ships, and Selling those which, from motives of
| humanity, fastened to their rescue was well
| coined and honored in the English colonial
| ports, and recognized rs Confederate ship
of-war, although she had never entered Con-
| federate port nor received clearance.
BY the chivalric policy of running from
every armed vessel, and of pursuing and burn
| ing unarmed merchantmen, the Alabama, be-
sides destroying nearly ten millions worth of
property, increased assurances, interrupted
voyages, and drove our commerce from the
seas. transferring the American carrying trade
to English vessels. America has not yet re-
covered and no ono can tell when she will
recover, the commerce of which she was de-
prived by the act Of Mr. Laird, by the
official treaclery which assisted him in making
war upon America, and by the colonial au-
| thorities, which afforded facilities to the Ala
bama throughout her piratical career.
| Gen. Grant is entirely correct in declaring,
as he is reported to have done, that