The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1902-04-08

| outy Dy lieutenant thompson, or the
Yeomanry of the British army, and act
ing under his orders. to Cape Town.
thence to Durham where his horses
| will be delivered to British officers in
uniform. where the men were not al
| lowed to go ashore unless we would
agree to sign with the recruiting of
ficer and join the British army" He
also alleged that the Milwaukee was
! commanded by army officers.
Secretary Hays lette- in answer to
that Of the governor says:
81 have received your letter of the
29th of March. and submitted it 10 the
! president, who directs me to inform you
| that he has requested an opinion from
| the attorney general in regard to the
points Of law involved in the matter
to which it refers, and las also ordered
an immediate investigation OF the facts
in the case"
The attorney generals opinion is
dated April 4th. He says:
1t seems necessary to say nothing
as to the duties and powers of the state
of Louisiana. except that they involve,
Of course, the exercise Of the usual civil
means of preserving the peace In the
improbable event Of its breach in the
manner supposed to be suggested by
Pearson. I cannot believe tnat the lat
ter contemplates taking the law into
his own hands, in defiance OF the state
and federal governments; ror does he
threaten to act without the presidents
permission, which, it is needless to say,
he will not receive. Nor can I believe
that he expects any such permission,
His object is doubtless TO bring forcibly
to the attention of the government that
he considers the proceedings OF the
British equivalent to carrying on war
upon our territory
The attorney general says that the
| principal question, and a delicate one,
is whether there has been departure
of neutrality on the part OF our gov
| eminent in this matter, and, notwith-
| standing the urgency of Pearson and
| Governor Heard thinks this govern
ment should not take any action with
| out mature consideration by the pres
| ident and his advisors.
| He submits some tentative sugges-
| tions;
First he says, 1.-The sale Of contra
band of war supplies TO a belligerent
is held by many eminent authorities to
be unlawful and something which a
| neutral nation must iorbid to it's citi-
zens, but the weight OF authority is the
4 A rr1la re 10 f,,ll
| agreed upon is that neutral nation
shall not give aid to one of the bellig-
| erents in the carrying on Of war.
| Carrying on commerce with a belliger-
| ent in the manner usual before the wal
is not giving such aid. The mere in
| creased demand for warlike articles
| and their increased quantity in the
| commerce does not make that com
| merce cease to be the same as before
the war. 1t does not seem to be set
tied that the fact that the belligeren
| government is purchaser makes tn
| neutral governments permission of the
| commerce departure from the obliga-
| ton to give no aid 10 the belligerent
| The fact that neutral merchants Civ
| aid to the belligerentS from motives OF
gain-seeking does not relieve their gov
ernment from its obligation to prevent
otherwise it would be lawful to supply
warships with coal, cannon and powder
The difficulty lies in drawing the lin
between the right Of carrying on, and
| of governmental permission TO carry
on, the commerce usual before the wa
and the obligation upon the government
and citizens of the neutral government
to give no aid to the belligcrents."
The attorney general adverts at some
length to the difficulty in disposing o.
these cases, each different from thu
other and without exact precedent, ant
he falls back upon the principle recog
niZed in international law that the pre-
| ponderant characteristics must contro
the determination. He enters into lon
citation of cases in the nature of prec
edents and says in conclusions:
, while the discussion of such matter
, have, as the Alabama CLAIMS cases
principally concerned war vessels an
g, expeditions by sea, it cannot be doubt
, cd that aid given to any army engage
r ed in actual warfare stands upon tn
same footing as aid given to a fleet S
engaged, since both equally involve
; taking part by the neutral IN further
Z ing the military operations of the belli
. gerent. Nor should the municipal law
Of England and the United States, or @
Il other countries, by principally dealin
l. | with such vessels and expeditions, oh
! scure the fact that aId can as we'll b
given to military operations of the bell
e proceedings carried on upon the neu
, | trail territory.
2 From all that has been said, thin
it may be concluded that. IN determir
ing Whether transaction OF the kin
= referred to. which in one respect
commercial in character, is yet not er
q titled to enjoy the rights belonging
commerce, but is prohibited to tn
neutral nation and its people as bein
e an aid to one of the belligerents
Y carrying on war against the other. tn
criteria are practically impossible
specify and enumerate in advance
Each case that arises must be cor
s sidered in all its circumstances and de
termined accordingly.
"In the case before us there is n
statement Of facts by you upon whfc
. to give an official opinion as to the Law
h and do not understand tnat one ha
9 been requested. A nlmber of allega
tions and some testimony have bee
sent me. and they are sufficient
\ hi ofk fx.< 1o Avct