New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-07-18
THE AMERICAN PRINCIPLES or MART
TIME W1R


| THE AMERICAN PRINCIPLES or MARi>
TINE WAR.
During 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 con-
fned to the beligerents, but will
fall heavily upon neutrals who have no con-
Germ in the war, and generally upon private
persons. In the operations OF armies most
civilized nations respect private property when
it is not necessary to seize it for military rea-
sons; but on the sea many of the old bar
barous customs of 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 Crimean war France and
England waived their right to cOnfiscate 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 1855 these principles were formally
ratified by Great Britain, France, Prussia, Aus
tra Sardinia, Russia, and Turkey, and prlva-
teering 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 priyateering clause; but
Mr.. Marcy, then Secretary of State, pre-
scented q countcr-proposition. " If you," he
wrote, twill make all private property exempt
from capture at sea, we will cease prlyateer-
"ing; but why ask us to abolish it while you
maintain and send out your great ships OF
"war, which are neither more nor less than
"priyateersa They go forth to do exactly the
"same thing as the ships that we license in time
"of war to burn, plumber, and destroy"
France, Russia and several other powers were
disposed to accept this proposition; but Great
Britain refused, and after some time negstia-
tons were suspended.
A strong feeling had meanwhile been aroused
in the United States in relation to the right OF
blockade, which we eontended 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 block
sde should 9e strictly military opera
ton, and not an embargo upon
trade. ave must obtain the consent
CT the powerful naval nations" wrote
President Buchanan to the New-York Cham
Der Of Commerce. "that merchant vessels shall
"not be blockaded in port, but be suffered to
"pass the blockading squadron and go out to
"sea.' Secretary Cass in 1859 addressed cir
cuar to the American representatives, at the
European capitals, Enstructing them to negotl-
ate for an Agreements on this basis; but again
our efforts for reform were. frustrated by the
refusal Of Great Britain.
If our proposals had been adopted, France
and Prrssia would have been spared the pres
ent suspension of their ocean steam lines, and
Great Britain would Lave no Alabama claims
to pay. There can be no more appropriate
time than this to revive the subject. In the
light of The last few years experience Great
Britain may be inclined to take different
view of the matter, and we suggest that Gen.
Grant should instruct Mr.. Frelinghuysen to
breach the subject as soon as he reaches Lon
don.