Year: 1861

One of our contemporaries says -" Mason
and Slidell were not private persons they
were public functoGaries of the sort wbicl
we have riqht to arrest in their passage
Our government can not take this ground
without recognizing the Confederate states
as belligerent power. SO long as we main
tain that they are not belligerent power, ana
that there is nothing in them but rebellion,
consistency will forbid us to justify what was
done by Capt. Wilkes on the ground that Tue
men seized were "pubic tunctionaries OF the
sort we have right TO arrest on their pas
sage" We are cut off from treating those
men as anything more or less than rebel ring
leaders, who, however obnoxious to our gov
ernment can not be arrested on board a
neutral vessel at sea without violation OF
International law This view Of the Trent
case is demanded of us by consistency, while
we persist in denying that the JEFF, Davis
organization should not be treated in any par
ticuar as a 'belligerent power"


When our government changes its policy
toward the rebel organization so far as to de-
eide that in some respects, or in any respect
whatever, it must be treated as belligerent
power, we shall insist on having it begin the
manifestation of such change by arranging
an exchange of prisoners and making formal
declaration that rebel privateersmen will not
be hung as pirates. 1t is far more our duty to
be concerned for the welfare of our men now
held in the south as prisoners OF war, than to
retain possession of Sldell and Mason, and
they should have the first benefit of any ad.
mission by our government that the conteder-
ate government may be treated as "beliger-
ent." If there is to be such an admission in
our treatment of this Trent case, we insist
that it should be made with the utmost frank
ness, and allowed to regulate cur policy in
regard TO prisoners of war.


England complains, it is said, that Captain
Wilkes not only visited the Trent, but also
usurped the functions of an admiralty court,
by deciding that Mason and Slidel were "con-
traband," and therefore subject to seizure.
Perhaps our government will substantially
concur in this opinion, and perhaps not. We
shall know at the proper time, if the course oi
the English government allows room for nego-
tiation. Great Britain recognizes our southern
oonspirators as belIigerent power BY meet
ing her on her own ground and arguing the
question on the assumption quoted at the be.
ginning of this article, we shall practically do
so too. This question between US and Great
Britain will not lead to war, we presume, but
it may occasion the settlement of some points
not Immediately connected with it,


We do not mean to say that our government
should not meet the question on the ground
taken by Great Britain. Our aim is to show
how much is involved in doing So We pre-
sume our government will take up the case
and argue it on the ground that practically
assumes the JEFF. Davis organization to be a
belgerent power within the meaning of inter-
national law. Ii this is done, will it be unrea-
sonable to ask for our soldiers now held in the
south as prisoners of war the benefit of the
assumption The Trent case can be settled
very easily, unless the course OF Great Britain
should be so peremptory and dominee.ing as
to make negotiation impossible. The com
Pidinl Is uiat our proceedings nave ueeh Hies'
ular,-that the contraband question has not
been properly adjudicated. If our gov
ernment dissents from this view of the
case, it will be easy and honorable
to call in disnterested parties and submit the
question to arbitration, each government en-
gaging to abide the result By taking this
course a doubtful question will be settled in
such way as to establish rule for the
future. If England means war at any rate,
we shall soon know it, But self respect
requires us to be just and reasonable, and not
begin to fight until it is certain that we
are compelled to choose between war and a
sacrifice of national honor.