The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-07-19
THE AMERICAN PRINCIPLES OF MARI
TIME WAR;

From the N y. Tribune.
Duiing the present war between France
and Prussia three of the principal steamship
lines connecting America with Europe will
have to suspend their trips. If Great Britain
should be drawn into the struggle, all the
steamers may be shut up in harbor. The
loss and inconvenience will not be confined
to the belligerents, but will fall heavily upon
neutrals who have no concern in the war,
and generally upon private persons. In the
operations of armies most civilized nations
respect private property when it is not ne
cessary to seize it for military reasons; but
on the sea many of the old barbarous GUS
toms of a primitive era still prevail.
The United States have always endeavored
to soften the rules of maritime law, and
during the present generation many of our
principles respecting seizures and the rights
of neutrals have been adopted by the
European nations. At the time of the Cri-
mean war France and England waived their
right to confscate an enemy's goods found
on board neutral vessels, and also neutrals'
goods not contraband of war found in
enemies vessels By the treaty of Paris in
1856, these principles were formally ratified
by Great Britain, France, Prussia, Austria,
Sardinia, Russia, and Turkey, and privateer-
ing was at the same time abolished among
the parties to the declaration. The United
States Government was asked to assent to this
agreement, and gave ready approval to
all except the privateering clause; but Mr..
Marcy, then Secretary of State, presented
counter-proposition. 'If you, he wrote,
twill make all private property exempt from
capture at sea, we will cease privateering;
but why ask us to abolish it while you main
tain and send out your great ships of war,
which are neither more nor less than priva-
teers? They go forth to do exactly the same
things as the ships that we license in time of
war to burn, plunder, and destroy" France,
Russia, and several other powers were dis
posed to accept this proposition; but Great
Britain refused, and after some time negotia-
tions were suspended
A strong feeling had meanwhile been
aroused in the United States in relation to
the right of blockade, which we contended
ought to be restricted to naval arsenals and
towns which were at the same time besieged
by an army on land-in other words, that a
blockade should be a strictly military opera
tion, and not an embargo upon trade "We
must obtain the consent of the powerful
naval nations, wrote President Buchanan to
the New York Chamber of Commerce, ''that
merchant vessels shall not be blockaded ia
port, but be suffered to pass the blockading
squadron and go out to sea-" Secretary Cass
in 1859 addressed circular to the American
representatives at the European capitals, in
structing them to negotiate for an agreement
on this basis; but again our efforts for re-
form were frustrated by the refusal of Great
Britain.
If our proposals had been adopted, France
and Prussia would have been spared the pre-
sent suspension of their ocean steam lines,
and Great Britain would have no Alabama
claims to pay. There can be no more appro-
pirate time than this to revive the subject.
In the light of the last few years experience
d. - n
fereut view of the matter, and we suggest
that General Grant should instruct Mr. Ere
linghuysen to broach the subject as soon as
! he reaches London.