The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-08-26

In contradiction OF that doctrine we now insist as
our government all through the war insisted TINS Is
not dealing In cOntNband Of Is using neutral
territory as q base OF operations. Whether there
was. or should be- no responsibility for 1t, because
entirely dnerent question. But undertake to say
matter OF fact that the doctrine OF the English
law during all an ho s%er a
the principal cruisers for naval operations
Altar, the Agrippina. the Bahama and similar yes
sels), were lawful and could not and should not be
Sir ALEXANDER CocKBURN-I would be very much
obliged II you will refer me to some authority for
that
Adams), from his knowledge OF the course OF the
correspondence, knows that do not deceive myself
In that respect 1t is this c0ntrbutory furnishing OF
armament and munitions and men which rendered
the principal cruisers efficient instruments OF all
the mischief and without which their evasiOnS
from port were of little consequence, and without
the expectation OF which they never would nave
now refer to paper that will show that have
been right In my proposition to the construction
of English law as held during the occurrence OF
In vol. iii. OF American Appendix Up. 53), in re-
port to the Board of Trade by the Commissioners of
Customs, occurs this passage:-
lordsps having. by Mr. Arbuthnots letter Of the
10Th inst transmittea US with references to Mr. Ham
rom the Foreign once wlth copies further letter
court rsspeens the Of man and N %
states sOS America s eiSds your ordsh having
n' %fat
t 0hs e we se or IN the R
Of S Ss%. + n
Sss nsl II Ss
dGss not Kingdom 70 or ra Of Her ss
near Angra Bay gart Of the Azores part OF The Pcrt
hays been Som%t
in the he aiidavit"
LORD RUssELL's COMMUNICATIONS
From Lord Russells communication OF this re-
port to the American Minister 1t will be seen
that the accepted opinion Of the govern.
ment was that such operations could not
be be nterered WITH That may be 'D Correct
view OF the Foreign Enlistment act Of Great Bri-
tain, and hence the Importance OF reducing the
obligations of neutral nation, to prevent viola
lions of international law to some settled meaning.
This was done by convention
BETWEEN THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,
and appears IN the rules OF the treaty. Under
these rules is to be maintained the incupatlon
which bring ns suhc Is
in the special argument to which am replying.
The instances Of neutral default announced under
lions. they are prescribed BY the second rule.
They are not protected as dealings In contraband
Of war. They not protected under the right OF
asylum. they are uses OF neutral ports
and waters as bases OF naval operations, and not
Rph BY as Sn
would not prevent them, and that was the limit OF
their duty under the Foreign Enlistment act, still
we come here for Judgment, whether nation is
not responsible that deals thus In the contribution
of military supplies; that suffers ship after ship to
but, on the contrary. announces, as the result OF
the deliberaton of the law officers, to the subordi.
Saes m t the the So Mr at of these ns e5nss
Ri Britain 0' and cannot & Pson!s!sea By tSs
will not be stopped. That this was the doctrine of
the English government will be seen from letter
IA a psr ns n aa A. A sS pta
sni IL really 4 Sss there been any act
sssss SysS fss ausss, % alS
sis s siss'y he sginIn
e se
the
ties Of the several british ports where may
II Home to Various Authorities with Whom
i In a to % se o9ssn and
act with View to The strict that statute
whenever it can really be shown to be ntrmsed
clear the nc in these
5 Of
band goods ships adapted Tor warlike purposes
These were instances in which complaints were
made OF these transactions and in which 1t was
answered that the British government charged it.
self with no duty Of due diligence, with duty OF
remonstrance, with no duty Of prevention or de-
tons for crimes against the Foreign Enlistment act.
What | have said Of the Shenandoah distin.
guished her nom the florda ana me s Aa t ana
THE sHENANDoAH's CAREER
she had no port of any kind and had
base Of any kind except the ports Of the single ma
ton of Great Britain But as to the Florida and the
Alabama, one 1.-THE Alabama) was supplied by tug
or steamer that took out her armament to Angra
Bay, the place Of her first resort; the other Qhe
Fiorida) was supplied py vessel sent out to Mas
sau to meet her, carrying all her armament and
munitions of war, and which she took out In tow,
transhpping her freight OF war material outside the
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ENGLAND AS A W.T.
NESS.
That Is called dealing In contraband, not pro-
scribed by the law OF nations not prescribed by
any municipal law, and not involving any duty of
Great Britain to intercept to Cd discourage or de-
General Of England, employed in the Parliamentary
discussions which attended the enactment Of the
Foreign Enlistment act OF 1919.
From this debate In Parliament 1t will be seen
what the principal law adviser or the Crown then
thought of carrying on war by commercial trans
Such an enactment he said, was required by every
have nothing 70 DO with the war wssed between two
Would see lie necessity Of snactins some penal statutes
70 a subj
jects who composed that state might take distinct
now allade to the petitions which had that evening
could observe that they had either totally misun
dersood else totally misre presented its Intended OBJ
They had stated that calculated check
commercial transactions and to inure the commercial in
terests this country II by the words Commercial
terests and numerical transactions
like adventures, he allowed that would but II it
intended 10 argue that II would diminish fair and legal
and pacific he must enter his protest against
any such doctrines. Now he maintained, that Is
actually carried against Spain by what the petit
TONERS called commercial transactions 1t the duty
check them speedily
sibe."( Note b. American Argument. sos; FIR tr. Ap-
pendice, y. 4SS)
WAR AGAINST THE UNITED STATES CARRIED ON UNDER
A SILLY PRETExT.
War against the United States maritime war,
was carried on under cover OF what was called
right of asylum and commercial transactions In
cOntraband of war. We are now under the law of
nations, by virtue of this second rule, which says
that the use Of "ports and waters as the base OF
naval operations or for the purpose OF the renewal