The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1869-06-09


, act the decline even in part" Such Is the
various testimony, all tending to one eonclu-
, sion. This is what have 10 say for the pres
ent on s,dfi0aai losses through the destruction
of commerce. These are large enough; but
there is another chapter, where they are
larger far. refer, of course, To the national
losses caused by the prolongafion of the war
and traceahle directly to England No can
did person, who studies this eventfnl period,
can doubt that the rebellion was originally
encouraged by hope of support from Eng
land; that il was strengthened at once by the
concession of belligerent rights on the ocean;
that il was led TO the end by British supplies;
that it was quickened into renewed life with
every report from the British pirates, flaming
anew with every burning ship; nor can it be
doubted that without British Intervention
the rebellion would have soon succumbed
under the well-directed efforts Of the Nation
al Government Not weeks or months, but
years, were added in this way TO our war, so
full of the most costly sacrifice. The subsi-
dies which in other times England contrib
uted TO continental wars were less effective
than the aid and comfort which she contrib
uted to the rebellion. II cannot be said too
often that the ndudi bdSS Of the rebellion was
not in America, but in England. Mr.. Cob
den boldly said in the House of Commons
that England made war from her shores on
the United States with an amount of dam
. AEN " luAk COuulil Ill1lN
ordinary wars According to this testi-
m0ny, the conduct of England was war; but
it must not be forgotten that this war was
carried on at our sole cost. The United
States paid for war waged by England on
the national unity The sacrifice of precious
life is beyond human compensation but
there may be an approximate estimate of the
national loss in money. The rebellion was
suppressed at cost of more than four thou
sand million dollars, considerable portion
I of which has been already paid, leaving twen-
ty-nve hundred millions as national debt 10
burden the people. If, through British in
tervention, The war WIS doubled in duration,
or in any way extended, as cannot be doubted
then is England justly responsible for the ad
ditional expenditure to which our country is
doomed; and, whatever may be the final set
tlemsnt of these great accounts, such must
l be the judgment in any chancery which con-
suits the simple equity Of the case. This
plain statement, without one word of exag-
I geRtion OF aggnyatiOn, is enough TO exhibit
the magnitude Of the national losses, wheth-
I er from the destruction of our commerce or
the prolongation of the war. They stand
before us mountain nhigh, with base broad
as the nation, and a mass stupenduous as the
rebellion itself. Ii will be for wise states
manship to determine how this fearful aeeu-
mutation, like Pelion upon 0ssa, shall be
removed out of sight, so that it shall no
longer oyershadow the two countries.
THE RULE OF DAMAGES.
Perhaps ought to anticipate an objection
| from the other side to the effect that these
] national losses, whether from the destruction
| of our commerce or the prolongation of the
/ war, are indirect and remote, SO as not to be
just cause of claim. This is expressed at
the common law by the rule that damages
must be for the natural and proximate cOnse-
/ quences Of an act" q Greenledf, En-, p.
/ 2l0) To this excuse the answer Is explicit
| The damages suffered by the United States
are two fOld-individual and national-being
/ in each case direct and prOximate, although
/ in the one case individuals suffered, and in
| the other case the nation. 1t is easy to see
that there may be occasions where, over-top-
[ ping all individual damages, are damages
suffered by the nation, so that reparation to
I individuals would be insufficient; nor eau
/ the claim of the nation be questioned simply
because il is large, or because the evidence
/ with regard to il is different from that in the
case of an individual In each case the dam
I age must be proved by the best possible evil
deuce, and this is all that law or reason can
| require. In the case of the nation, the evil
/ dence Is historic; and this is enough. Impair
1 tial history will record the national losses
from British Intervention, and it is only rea-
sonable that the evidence of these losses
/ should not be excluded from Judgment Be-
U
no nation ever before received such injury
| from friendly POwer-this can be no reason
/ why the case should not be considered on the
/ evidence. Even the rule of the common law
I furnishes no impeachment; for our damages
are the natural consequence of what was
done But the rule of the Roman law, which
is the rule of International law, is broader
than the common law The measure of dam
ages, according TO the Digest, is, "whatever
may have been lost or might have been gain
ed" qa,datiAn mini dbeSt qltdRfamqHe EueraTi
Dotlti: and this same rule seems to prevail in
the French law, borrowed from the Roman
law. This rule opens the door 10 ample re-
paration for all damages, whether individual
or national. There Is another rule of the
common law, in harmony with strict justice,
which is applicable to the case. find it in
the law relating to RuiSdaees, which provides
that there must be two distinct proceedings,
I first, in behalf of individuals, and secondly,
| in behalf of the community. Obviously, re-
paratiOn to individuals does not supersede
| reparation to the community. The proceed
| ings in the one case is by action at law, aud
/ in the other by Indictment The reason as
| signed by Blackstone for the latter is 'be-
cause the damages being common to all the
| Kings subjects no one can assign his partic-
ular proportion of it. g Black. Com, D.
2l9) But this is the very case with regard
to damages sustained by the nation. A fami-
tion, which is precisely in point:
"No person, natural or corporate, can have
an action for public nuisance, or punish il;
but only the King, in his public capacity Of
supreme governor and pater JG1ailids Of the
kingdom. Yet this rule admits of one ex-
eeptiOn where private party suffers some
extraordinary damage beyond the rest of the
Kings subjects. ."-IOBsliR's Ldlc Dict, art,
Nuisance.
Applying this rule to the present case, the
way is clear. Every British pirate was pub
| lie nuisance. involving the British Govern
ment, which must respond in damages, not
only to the individuals who have suffered,
but also to the national Government, acting
as pdter .tdBilids for the common good of all
| the people. Thus by an analogy of the COM
mon law, in the case of public nuisance,
also BY the strict rule Of the Roman law,
| which enters so largely into International
law, and even By the rule oftbe common law
relating to damages, all losses, whether indi-
yidu1l or national, are the just subject Of
claim. II is not who say this; it is the law.
The colossal sum total may be seen, not only
in the losses Of individuals, but in those ma
tional losses, caused By the destruction Of
our commerce and the prolongation of the
war, all Of which may be traced directly to
England;
Hind ab uno
CorpOre, ct ex una pendebat origine belum.
Three times Is this liability fixed; first, by
the concession of ocean belIigerency, open
| ing to the rebels ship yards, foundries and
manufactures, and giving to them q flag on
the ocean; secondly, By The organization of
hostile expeditions, which, by admissions in
Parliament, were nothing less than pirztieal
war on the United States, with England as