The Democratic press. [volume] (Ravenna, O. [Ohio]) 1868-1901, 1873-11-27
s.. From the New. York world.
RIGHTS UNDER THE a a FLA G

=.
III Avessel on the high seas. beyond theaEis-
tanee Of a marine leagne, from the shore. is re-
garded as a part Of tie territory OF the nation to
which she belongs. and is subject s1cErsioelyto
the jurisdiction of that natisa.'-Ar. Webster to
lord AsA6Urtoh, AU0ustt. 1s4s.''
-isssEyefy merchant vessel on the seas is
rightfully considered as a part ofkss territory
Of the country to which she belongs.'-Nr. Ee57
stsr to Lord AaA0arton, 1uQtst 8. 1884,
is.Fhis Government can never concede to any
foreign government the power Of Invading its
territory. either to arrest the persons ordestroy
the property of those who may have violated the
municipallaws Of such foreign government, or
have disregafded their obligations arising M
der the law Of nations, - President Taa B&reH's
Message. 1882 .s-.ss-.-5 -..-......-
In. judging of the affair of the Vir-
ginius, it is necessary to discriminate
between two things which public feel
ing is very apt to confound. What
we oweGf we owe anything) to the
struggling CHbans, is a very distinct
question from what our Government
owes to its; own. dignity, to the honor
of its nag, and to its rights on the
ocean. In the former the great body
of the American people feel but aslan-
guild interests the latter. is q subject
which may justly arouse all our ma
tionaf sensibiIity.. 1t case like that
which now occupies public attention,
we mnstileaveathe 9Cuban cause and
its sympathizerss quite out of consid-.
Grafton, and consider the question of
national rights on its own separate
merits. The quick sense of injury
and that prompt assertion of the ma.
tional dignity which our Government
always manifested in former times, at
every infringement of our maritime
rights, was the best guarantee OF the
safety of citizens and property enti-
tied to the protection of our national
Aag., 81 ,,sn.e-i..ef.te @.ss4 3esss IS
The fundamental standpoint. of all
correct reasoning on subjects of this
class, lis the great and uniisputed
principle of international lawg that
the deck of regularly gdocunented
merchant vessel is q part of the terri-
tory of the country whose flag if law
fully carries, and is equally invioiable
with its soil except so far as ekeep4
tions are created by the same interna-
tional code. These exceptions are two,
one of them operating in war, the
other being alike operative both in
war and in peace. In time of war
merchant vessels are subject to the
belligerent right of search to prevent
their carrying contraband articles to
an enemy ofiones of the belligerents.
In time OF peace they are subjec un-
der certain Limitations, to the local
jurisdiction of a nation into whose
harbors they may enter, or on whose
coast they may be found within the
distancelo of a marine league from the
shore. These, are the only exceptions
to the rule which makes merchant
vessel as inviolable as any part ofthe
territory of the nation to which it be-
longs. 4ssfb - b1aEa6.a sae iL91i aaiqzi
It may perhaps be said that pirates
form another exception. But we, took
care to guard the foregoing statement
by limiting it to regularly document
ed vessels eatitled to bear a national
hag.os4t is clear that the question of
piracy bears no relation to. the case of
the Virginius.f It is, true that the ar
ticles in the HaYanna papers describe
her as q pirate, and we may interpret
these descriptions as an implied con-
fession that the Spanish authorities
had no authority to make the capture
on any other theory. But, most assur-
eddy, the Virgihius was not q pirate.
A pirate, as defined By public law, is
'Ean enemy of the human race" -(bostis
hataadni geneTis). "A pirate scours the
seas for plumber, and makes no dis
in the nationality of the
vessels it attacks for purposes of rob-
berry. If the Virginius was pirate,
an English or a French man-of-war
had the same right to capture her as
q Spanish. But Il this thing had been
done by France or England, our Cow
ernment would not have tolerated it
for an instant. The pretence of pira-
cy is too absurd for serious discussion.
But on any sother hypothesis, the
Cuban authorities, had no. right to
mcddle with her except within q mar
inc league of their own coast. The
traffic in arms is as lawful as any 9TH
er traffic. subject to sthe risk of the !
owners il they carrygthen to places
where they are fairly liable to seizure
by the rules of International law. A
nation at war may intnrcept them any
where on the. high seas 8 natien at
peace has no right to seize them ex-
cept in places within its own munich
pal Jurisdiction. aOf course the Vir- |
ginius, after a chase aof light ehours,
was not taken ,Within a marine league /
of the coast of Cuba. ...,.4.,sf 49,.
The idea has been suggested that IL |
she were first sighted in Cuban waters |
she could be pursued to any distance /
and lawfully captured. Spanish |
Government may, perhaps, set up this |
plea; but 1t would not become our |
Government to admit it. Our vessels |
being3 in law, a part of our national |
territory, and equally inEiolable, a
Spanish ship of war has no more right |
to chase and capture them on the
ocean than it would have to chase |
them into the harboro rof Pensacola and |
capture them there. The celebrated |
case of the Caroline affords q peril |
nent illustration of the principle. The |
Caroline was seized by the British |
near the American shore ofthe, Mag |
ara River, set on fire, and sent over |
the Falls. That outrage set the country
in blaze. 1t was conceded, that she |
was, in the service of the Canadian |
s'patriots" it was conceded that the |
British had O perfect right, to capture
and destroy hero the Canada side Of
the river but ourGoveTnmeHtp regard |
ed it as an intole erable outrage to its
that the Caroline was
and captured within our own |
jurisdiction. Our vessels at sea stand |
on the same footing in this respect as
our territory and our own waters, and
1t concerns the national honorand the
safety of our citizens that their lnvio-
liability should be maintained with the |
same spirit. The true dootrine was
with proper vigors in Rresi-
dent Van Ruren's message from which |
we have placed an extract at the head
of this article. isqalat s.lg ~
Questions analogous to this have |
been repeatedly discussed between |
our Government aud those of foreign |
Whena for example both
were making efforts to
suppress the African slave-trade, and |
were maintaining squadrons on the |
coast of Africa for that purpose, Great |
Britain claimed the right to visit our |