New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-11-18
Communicated
The Case of the Virgfnius.

! EDITOR REPUBLICANS:
As long as majority Of the American
naople are disposed to acquire Cuba there
is, perhaps, little use in reasoning about the
law of the case of the Virginius. l can
hardly refrain, however, from asking some
questions in regard to the case, with vie"
| to elicit information.
|. Is it not a gross absurdity to say, as
one journal in New Orleans has, that TINS
| case and that of the taking OF Mason ana
| SHdell from the Trent are alike The
| Trent was a peaceful passenger steamer,
proceeding on confessedly lawful voyage
| as common carrier between two peaceful,
| neutral termini See WSolsey's Int. Law,
| 3, 1874. The Virginius was tiibusterlng
vessel, bound on a confessedly unlawful
voyage, going directly with men and NUM-
lions, and with herself as possible prl-
vateer to aid a domestic insurrectlon-an
Instruction which is technically scrminal
admitted on all hands.
2. The sea is the highway of nations.
Roughly stated, each nation has about the
same rights on the open sea that each citizen
has on the street. Now, when the SpaIi Ii
authorities, VIII ether civil or naval, saw on
the high seas vessel approaching the
Cuban coast with boldly avowed unlawful
intent, had they not right to capture her
If / see burglar on the highway approach
ing my house, not only in suspicious
manner, but with tho declared intention of
breaking in can l not shoot at him. Must
wait till he actually breaks in? If shoot
him would it not be- absurd for any one to
say was murderer, on the doctrine that
the highway was public to all
3. Is it not an error to speak of the Vir-
ginius as if her capture were an insult to
our flag or an invasion of our own territory
A private vessel has, in very limited sense,
some of the attributes OF territory. But
when the use of the flag is, in the legal
view, fraud and where the object of the
voyage is confessed CRIME, however we
may admire and sympathize, what has the
United States to do with it Now, the use
of the flag BY the Virginius was an admitted
legal fraud, for the United States never J
has consented, and never could lawfully |
consent, to its use as cover tor filibus.
tering raid. If we did so consent we should |
be liable as England was for the Alabama.
The object of the voyage was confessed |
syime: for it was filibustering expedition |
TO which we all may have wished success,
but which no one could excuse on legal
grounds
+ Has the hassy severity Of the Spanish
authorities in executing the prisoners any
thing to do with the question as one of in
sernational law Have we any more right
20 Interfere with the execution of offend.
ers according to the Spanish notions OF JUS
ice than we have with ths punishment Of
in Russian
heartily wish the Cu6ans might attain
heir independence. They have ths eight
It 'esolution and earnestly hope thew
will succeed But fail to see our LEGAL
light to interfere to aid them On general
principles. and l must confess fail to see
low the case of she Eigginius operates to
i've Us special right. l may. of course.
'e wrong, and I throw out these crude }
iSas With a view to obtain information.