Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1869-04-23

|
sU.u.VBR's GREAT SPEECH.
Hon. Charles Sumner, on Tuesday, April
18th, made speech in the U. s. Senate on
the Alabama treaty, giving full history of
4 the negotiations with England,-th true
ground of complaint against that country,
the extent of our losses, and the just rule
of damages, from which we make the fol-
lowing extracts:
Passing from the treaty, come now to
consider briefly, but with proper precision,
the true ground of complaint; and here
again we shall see the constant inadequacy
of the remedy now applied. 1t is with re-
luctanco that enter upon this statement,
and do it only in the discharge of duty
which cannot be postponed. Close upon
the outbreak of our troubles, Just one
month after the bombardment of Fort Sum-
ter, when the rebellion was still undevel-
oped, when the national government was
beginning those gigantic efforts which end
ed so triumphantly, the country was star
tied by the news that the British govern
ment had intervened by a proclamation
which accorded belligerent rights TO the
rebels. At the early date when this was
done the rebels were, as they remained TO
the close, without ships on the ocean, with
out prize courts or other tribunals for the
administration of ofiustice on the ocean, with
out any of those conditions which are the
essential prerequisites to such a concession;
and yet the concession was general, being
applicable to the ocean and the land, so
that by British fiat they became ocean bel
ligerents as well as land belligerents. In
the swiftness of this bestowal there was
very little consideration for a friendly pow
er nor does it appear that there was any
inquiry into those conditions-precedent on
which it must depend. Ocean belligerency
being "fact' and not "principle' can
be recognized only on evidence showing its
actual existence, according to the rule first
stated by Mr.. Canning and afterward re-
cognized by Earl Russell But no such
evidence was adduced; for it did not exist
and never has existed. Too much stress
cannot be laid upon the rule that belligeren-
cy is "fact'' and not "principle." 1t is,
perhaps, the most important contribution
to this discussion, and its original state
ment on the occasion of the Greek revolu-
ton, does honor to its author, unquestion-
ably the brightest genius ever directed to
this subject. According to this rule, bellig-
erency must be proved to exist, it must be
shown. It cannot bo imagined or OWNED
or invented it must exist as fact within
the knowledge of the world, or at least as a
fact susceptible of proof Nor can it be in
ferred on the ocean merely from its exist
ence on the land. From the beginning,
:. L.. L 4
the gathering of the waters called He seas,
the two have been separate, and the power
over one has not necessarily implied power
over the other. There is dominion of the
land and dominion of the ocean. But,
whatever power the rebels possessed on the
land, they were always without power on
the ocean. Admitting that they were bel
ligerents on the land, they were never bel
ligerents on the ocean:
The oak leviahans whose huge ribs make
Their clay creator the vain title take
Of lord of thee, and arbiter of war;
these they never possessed Such was the
"fact" that must govern the present ques
tion. The rule so simple, plain and intel
ligible, as stated by Mr.. Canning, is de-
cisive touchstone of the British concession
without support. Unfriendly in the pre-.
cipitancy with which it was launched, this
concession was more unfrendly in sub
stance. 1t was the first stage in the depre
: dations on our commerce. Had it not beer
) made, no rebel ship could have been bull
in England. Every step in her building
! would have been piracy. Nor could any
munitions of war have been furnished
The direct consequence Of this conces sioI
was to place the rebels on an equality will
l ourselves in all British markets, whethe
D of ships or munitions of war. AS thes,
were open TO the national government 81
were they open to the rebels. The ASSERTED
neutrality between the two began by thi
tremendous concession when rebels, at on
stroke, were transformed not only into bel
ligerents but into customers. 1t attributinj
! to that bad proclamation this peculiar in
l fluence, follow the authority of the Law
lords of England, who, according to au
= thentic report, announced that without
= the fitting out of a ship in England to cruis
: against the United States would have boel
an act of piracy.
> Nocandid person, who studie
| lllS tNbIllui tdi uOuDl lnhl llt rs
bellion was originally encouraged by hop
l of support from England; that it wa
strengthened at once by the concession @
=, bellgerent rights on the ocean; that it wa
b fed to the end by British supplies; that
was quickened into renewed life with ever
report from the British pirates, flamin
It anew with every burning ship; nor can
@ be doubted that without British interven
ton the rebellion would have soon sue
2, cumbed under the well directed efforts {
t. the national government. Not weeks @
n months, but years, were added in this wa
to our war, so full of the most costly sacri
flee. The subsidies which in other time
= England contributed TO continental war
were less effective than the aid and comfol
a which she contributed to the rebellion.
cannot be said too often that the naval bas
= of the rebellion was not in America, but i
d England, Mr.. Golden boldly said in III
House of Commons that England made wa
r. from her shores on the United States "wit
n an amount of damage to that country grea
1t er than in many ordinary wars" ACCORD
If ing to this testimony, the conduct of Ems
r land was war but it must not be forgotto
r that this war was carried on at our sole cos
The United States paid for a war waged b
k England upon the national unity. The sat
l. rlhce of precious life is beyond huma
compensation but there may be an AZ
!, proximate estimate of the national loss i
m money. The rebellion was suppressed at
cost of more than 81, 1000, ,OOO, 900, a consider
, able portion of which has been already paiC
10 leaving 5OO,OOO,OOO as a national debt t
burden the people. II, through British il