The Breckenridge news. (Cloverport, Ky.) 1876-1955, 1898-03-30
.PRIVATEERING.
How II Would Affect Our Mer-
chant Marine.
PARIS CONVENTION OF 1856.
Why the United States Was Not a
Party to That Agreement. A
One-Sided Compact That
PARIS CONVENTION OF 1856.
DID NOT SAFEGUARD OUR INTERESTS.

ODlJeQ States seems more imminent IMAM
ever before, European newspapers are sug-
costing that the United States is In bad
company because this nation refused to
assent to the Paris convention abolishlng
privateering. Nearly all Of the maritime
nations signed this agreement, the only
exceptions besides the United States being
Mexico, Spain and Uruguay. Now the
European papers will have IL that II war
comes between the United States and
Spain we shall be made to suffer severely
for our refusal to join with the remainder
of the civilized world in prohibiting priva-
teering. They say we shall suffer from the
"piracy" Of our foes and that the war will
be carried on in a disgraceful manner on
both sides. Some of these criticisms have
been oabled TO this country and have at
traoted attention at the hands of interna-
tional lawyers here.
1t is well to remember, however, that
priyateering is an old and honorable meth
cd Of fighting and that it has produced
names that stand high upon the roll of
honor in tho achievements of Americans
upon the high seas. Our privateers never
killed or injured nonresistants, and If we
are compelled a9ain-as we probably shall
0Ob De-JO lsSu6 l6IIerh Oh InhrQuo bncTB
will be no "piracy" in tho sense in which
that word is generally understood. This
country has no necessity to go to school to
any or all the nations of Europe in order
to learn lessons in humanity We do not
fight unless Docessity-thc paramount ne
cessity of defending our honor, our right
to our proper place in the family of ma
tions-compels us to do so. And when
hat xya ho1 l.
able resources.
Further than this, study of the reasons
that led to the adoption of the Paris con.
vention and to the refusal of the United
States to agree to it, shows oonolusively
that there Is no necessity for any Ameri-
can to blush for his oountrys action.
The Paris Convention.
The Paris convention was adopted in
1866, during the Crimean war between
Russia on the one hand and England,
France and Sardinia on the other. 1t was
originated by the fear that Russia would
issue letters Of marque to the great fleets of
American merchant ships, commissioning
them to prey on English and French COM
merce.
In 1856 Lord Clarendon, British prime
minister, proposed to Mr.. Buchanan, our
W lnhb bno Oultcu Oldlbs
should agree to a treaty between France
and Great Britain, providing that "all cap
tains of privateers and their crews should
be considered as pirates, who, being sub
jects or citizens Of one of the three nations
who were neutral, should cruise against
either of the three others when belliger-
emit"
Mr.. Buchanan made a good many OBJ
jeotions to this proposition, the chief being
that what was very advisable for Great
Britain, with her huge navy, would be
very inadvisable for us with our small
navy. Privateers would in some sort, bal
ance the superiority between the two.
President Pierce, in his second annual
message TO congress said: "Should the
leading powers Of Europe concur In pro-
posing to exempt private property on tho
high seas from seizure by public armed
cruisers, as well as by privateers, the Unit
ed States will readily meet them on that
broad ground" Later an amendment to
tho Paris convention to this effect was
offered by the United States as the price Of
its adherence and was declined by the 9TH
or nations.
A One Sided Convention.
1t is evident that the European nation
themselves and not far enough to protect
the United States. When we proposed the
extension OF the principle SO as to protect
ourselves they backed out. That is all
there Is to 1t.
However, 10 is more than probable that
the Paris convention is so drawn that its
provisions can be evaded except in the
most Objectionable forms.
priVatpara ara ~ fonr claSsae-(1l naVal
officers commissioned to command private
vessels; (2) merchant vessels under civilian
officers, commissioned TO cruise against
the enemy; (3) merchant vessels cruising
without a commission; (4) vessels Of neu-
trial states, commissioned by a belligerent
TO cruise against another belligerent.
Glass l Is generally held not TO be for
hidden by tho Paris convention, and class
2 Is merely modified by 1t. In 1870, when
France and Germany were at war, the
king of Prussia invited all German ship
owners to place themselves and their ships
at the disposal of the fatherland. The
officers and crews were TO enter the navy
for tho war; wear its uniform, take an
oath TO the articles of war and cruise as an
auxiliary navy. France at once protested
TO Great Britain against this as an evasion
of the Paris convention, but Great Britain
held that 1t was not such.
Glass Is already forbidden by interna-
tional law, or II not forbidden is SO very
questionable that 1t has fallen into utter
disuse.
Glass 4 also seems TO DO prohibited In
most cases by the same law without refer
ence 20 the Paris convention.
During our war with Mexico that ooun-
try sent out agents to Europe, particularly
to Spain, with hundreds Of blank COM
missions 10 be Issued TO any one who
wanted them, constituting them prlyateers
10 prey on American commerce Secretary
Buchanan at once wrote 10 our ministers
In Europe refusing 10 recognize these COM
missions and warning those acting under
them that they would DO tried as pirates
They took the hint and abandoned tho
work.
Thus the only change wrought by the
Paris convention seems 10 be that priva-
teer captains and crews must DO sworn |
Into the service instead Of merely being
comm lssioned as such under heavy bonds /
10 observe International laws.
Besides, although not compelled there
10. Il Il reasonably certain that In case Of |
war the United States would NOT issue let