New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-02-20
THE AL4BAM1 WRONG.

Mr. Reverdy johnson, at the recent Glasgow
dinner is reported by the cable to have quoted
Lord Russell as saying that the escape OF the
Alabama from the British port was due to the
insanity of the Law Officer of the Crown
Whether the insanity which now constitutes
the apology of England for the escape OF the
Alabama was confined to the Attorney General
is a question which history may solve upon
less personal grounds than the indispositlon of
Sir John Harding. Its verdict may perhaps
convict Her Majesty's Ministers and large
number of the Lords and Commons OF Great
Britain Of having temporarily lost their senses
during the Rebellion Of the shareholders
against the American Republic.
The British Government in their latest war,
| in the Crimea, in 1854, had appealed to us that
our citizens should abstain vigorously from
| taking part in the armament of Russian priva-
teers, or any other measures opposed to the
duties of strict neutrality, and had declared
that appeal to be lin the spirit Of just reci-
"procity.r 1t had been responded to by us as
similar appeals during sixty years had been
responded to, by the most honorable and
efficient vigilance, so that English commerce
suffered no damage from a single cruiser fitted
ont in our ports and when in our trouble we
| demanded in turn the "just reciprocity" to
| which we were entitled, what was the response 7
John Bright, who more than any living man
represents the better sentiment Of the people
| of England, denounced the conduct of the En-
| glsh leaders as "much more the conduct Of
"savages than of Christians and civilized men,"
He said "There are men among your
Legislators who will build and equip corsair
"ships to pray upon the commerce of q friend
| "ly power; who will disregard the law and the
honor Of their country; who will trample on
" the proclamation Of their sovereign, and who,
for the sake of the glittering profit which
sometimes waits on crime, arc content to
"cover themselves with everlasting infamy."
When we demanded the effective interposi-
ton Of the British Government to protect our
commerce from these "corsair-ships," where
was the "just reciprocity" to which England
was pledgedY Said Mr.. Adams: 1t is very
"manifest that no disposition exists here to
"apply the power of the Government to the
Investigation of the acts complained of,
fragrant as they are, nor to the prosecution
"of offenders"
The English Ministry, as though the Law of
Nations depended on an act of Parliament,
pointed to their municipal law as limiting their
powers, and fOrbidding them to stop the sail
ing of British pirates; and with the declaration
that their statutes were thus insufficient TO
enable them to perform their international
duty of neutrality, they declined to procure the
amendment of those statutes, and in so declin-
ing they assumed the direct responsibility for
the illegal acts which they permitted. 1t has
been held to be maxim since the days of
Burlamagin "that sovereign who, knowing
the crimes of his subjects-as, for example,
" that they practice piracy on strangers-and
"being also able and obliged to hinder 1t. does
mot hinder it, renders himself criminal be-
cause he has consented to the bad action, the
commission of which he has permitted. 1t is
presumed that sovereign knows whatShis
subjects openly and frequently commit; and
" as to his power of hindering the evil, this
" likewise is always presumed, unless the
want of it be clearly proved"
In England there was no want of power, but
simply the want of will, on the part of the
Ministry and on the part of Parliament,
during that period which has been thought
by some to mark the temporary insanity, or, as
German more roughly expressed it, the moral
bankruptcy of England
Lord John wrote TO Mr.. Adams: "With refer.