The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-06-03
PRIVATEERING LAWFUL.
Views Of Mr.. William Beach Lawrence
on the Rights Of Neutrals.
VOL u MT E ER NAvIES,
No Nation Now Holden by the Three Rules
Of the Washington Treaty.

NEWPORT, r. l., May 20, 1873
HERALD CORRESPONDENT waited upon Mr. William
Beach Lawrence at his residence Ochre Point near
this CITY, for the purpose OF securing that gentomans
views In regard 30 the complications lkcy 10 arise In
case England and Russia should become involved IN
active war, and as TO what course this governments
should pursue as regards privateering. Mr.. Law
renco received the writer very cordially but he OK
pressed no little hesitancy to giving his views for
publication, being expected 10 furnish paper on tho
Same SUBJECT for the July number OF the North Amsf
ReuieW Alter some conversation. however, tho
following coIloquy onsued;-
CoRkEspoA DEST-ln tho event OF war between
England ana Russia what position, in your opinion.
should our government tako IN regard 10 privaicer
ing9
Mr.. LAwRESog-I scarcely feel myself at liberty to
60 into the matter you propose to mo affecting tho
course the United States should in the event
Of war between England and Russia, inasmuch as !
um engaged in the preparation Of paper which !
have bsen invited to furnish to the North
Am.ericom Reuic,o | should regret to make
any casual remarks which may differ IRON
the results OF a more elaborate invcstiga-
ton. may, however, notice the error into which
our newspapers IN thor remarks about tho Cimbria
have generally faIen OF confounding with privateer
lug the purchase or chartcring oy government OF
merchant vessels, either 10 be incorporated into its
regular navy or employed volunteer force. With
this privatecrs which fitted ous capture private
property Tor the individual benefit Of th0ir owners
havo connection. In OF tho Cimbria II Is
understood that there officers of the imperial navy
Of Russia board who will have command Of the
scls II any. which that government may purchase. IL
such be tho fact what conceivable difference there
be between navy thus constituted and that which
was formed by US Tor tho blockade OF tho Southern
ports OF the United States during the war OF scccs
sion? Tho question Of privateers does not arise In
anything that Russia has done or proposes to DO.
Moreover, wo never concurrcd with other nations in
a0ando ning privatecrs, and law actually passed
during the Civil War; though not acted upon, author
izing the President to issuc at his discretion to pr
armed vessels, in all domestic or foreign wars,
commissions or letters OF marque reprIssi, and
far as the laws OF tho Uuited States concerned
privateering has always osen a legitimate pursuit
THE LAW OF PRIvArEERixG.
In Of there Is nothing IN the law of nations
which would prevent the United States in tho alb
senco oil any treaty TO tho contrary, from admit
ting privateers, like public cruisers, into our
ports; and though IL not admissible
10 establish prizc court IN neutral
country SIM Is competent there be ordinance
TO the contrary 10 bring captured vessels into
and for court sitting in the captor's country TO
condemn. mako this remark because l noticed In
Weeks
English paper which says that they must be brought
into the captor's country we'll
VOLUNTEER NAVY.
AS TO the conversion oil merchant ships into vol
unteer navy might also refer to the course OF or
many In her late with Franco. Shipowncrs wcrc
invited to their vessels to the navy, tho crews
10 Do hired by thcir owners IL not therefore ut al
necessary to suppose that II all that has been said
abous the CimbriA Is irus Rassia contemplates en-
gaging In privateering, though u may DO question
how far she Ia under any obi cations in sequence
Of tho declaration OF Paris to refrain from It, that
that declaration is not to be regarded troaty
may have occasion during tho evening to show,
has pesn saia seems to contemplate The 'actuai
existence OF war; OF no obligations OF
neutrality until there belligerents IL is
until that laws made respecting that
condition OF things become operative. In tho
tua condition Of affairs Russia Is much at liberty TO
buy merchant ships as England Is 10 buy horses IN
Vermont and New Hampshire which she is said 10 DO
dong extensively.
ThREE RULES.
There Is an erroneous impression that what are
termed "three rues OF tho Treaty OF washingto
may have some application to obligation in the
event OF a between Eusand and Ras<a. 1t may,
therefore, DO well to state that these rules to which
Russia has never been called any way to give
her assent have ceased to be operative between
the original parties England IN asserting TO them as
rules to govern the action Of tho tribunal at Geva,
expressly refused to recognize them obligatory
under tho law Of nations ns 10 any past
transaction. but It agreed that they should he
presented TO the consideration OF other Powers
view 10 thor Adoption ss part OF the law Of ma
tions. This, however. has never been DONE Tho
govern mdnts, alter protracted negotiations, wero
themselves agreed their Interpretation Of
article which particularly applied TO tho OF neu-
trail ports Tor bclngercnt purposes II IT, therefore
HeOu Al u
obligations oil tho United States In tho event OF war
between Eng md and Russia.
There rs another matter which perhaps ought to he
advertcd TO In answering your inquiries During the
turned on tho true Interpretation Of tho Euz-
llsh ne1'fay act: the , ursae''0n ~ wh,sn
cognz ,nce Of tho common law courts, though
1870 Is Ia the Court OF Admiralty our Minister
N London deemed y proper u not necessary to io
may constitute a means by which country carries
INTO effect ITS Civilizations toward othsr Powers, they
to DC regarded az nero muuicipni affair ana one
IN which bciligercnt looking to the responsibility Of
the neural country need not concern himself with
the adju caton OF the courts The same remark may
be mndc as 10 our own neutrality act 10 the Eng
sh, though there Is greater reason TO suppose mat
It's execution will be IN ormity with Inter al
law inas much as It's administration Committed 20
those tribunals which, according TO our SYSTEM take
tor Their rule the pubic law OF nations. Tho
neutrality country
answer 10 the complaints OF violation
oil obligations to belgcrents nor arc they ever proper
Safes even before the passage OF bcr neutrality act
of119i-virtuaiIy rc.cnncted IN 1sShad given to the
world true illustration Of tho duties o. neutrality ny
the orders issued IN the administrator OF General
Washington during the endorsements 10 which We
subjected by the conflicting prccnsion Of Franco
and Great Britain IN the war then existing. anu IA
winch Frplce had opposed to nor not only England
but almost all the other Powers OF Europe. Thoso
rules winch We regard virtually comprising tho
grounds Tor which we were entitled to indemnify IN
the Alabama affair provided for tue restoration to
their original owner Of the prizes where the capture
had been mado within our territorial limits, or by
cruisers illegally fitted out our ports We
have been complaining OF the Immense losses which
the United states have sustained thc transfer OF 40
large portion Of her to foreign III -
consequence OF the depredations OF tho southern
cruisers Now, allow mo to ask you, is this not an
opportunity for roparatfonf IL there be such serious
danger said TO exist OF tue injury wnicn RUSSIA
may Infct British commerce "a THIS the time
TO modify our legislation TO bring to from tho
British mercantile marine what the war OF secession
~ this particular cost usf
CoREEsrosDEST--Do you think war viii DO do.
clarcdy
Mr.. LAWRENCE whether therc will DO war or not Is
sft.I