Sumner's Pence speech.
Mr. Sumner made a decidedly strong peace speech on the Treat affair in the Senate on Thursday last.
He throws the entire blame on
Captain Wilkes, who he excuses on the score of patriotism.
We extract a few of the reading points of the speech:
It should not be forgotten that this question was simply one of law — just as was that of a matter of trespass between individuals; the object being to determine which was eight and which was wrong.
But it cannot be forgotten that, in times past,
on this identical point of law, Great Britain persistently held an opposite ground from that which she now takes.
There are yet other points, however, on which had the ship been carried into port for adjudication, controversy must have arisen.
The three following points have been presented:
- 1.
That the seizure of the rebel emissaries, without taking the ship into port, was wrong, inasmuch as a navy officer is not entitled to substitute himself for a judicial tribunal.
- 2. That had the ship been carried into port, it would not have been liable on account of the rebel emissaries, inasmuch as neutral ships are free to carry all persons not apparently in the military and naval service of the enemy.
- 3. Are dispatches contraband of war, so as to render the ship liable to seizure?
* * * * * * * *
Mr. Sumner then took up the point which has been made, that the steam-picket having on board the emissaries, was on this account liable to capture, and rebutted it. He said that the policy of our Government, most positively declared in its diplomatic and also attested in numerous treaties, leaves no room to doubt that a neutral ship, with belligerent passengers, (not in the military or naval service,) is not liable to capture, and therefore the whole proceeding was wrong, not only because the passengers were taken from the ship, but also because the ship, however guilty, morality, was not guilty, legally in receiving such passengers on board.
* * * * * * * *
Other authorities were cited also as clearly proving that according to American principles and practice the ship was not liable to capture on account of dispatches on board.
And here against we have the concurring testimony of continental
Europe, especially of the
French Government, in the recent letter of M. Thousand.
Of course this whole discussion proceeds on the assumption that the rebels are to be regarded as belligerents, which is the character already accorded to them by
Great Britain.
It they are not regarded as belligerents, then the proceeding of
Capt. Wilkes is undoubtedly illegal and void.
To a political offender, the asylum of a foreign jurisdiction is sacred whether on shore or on sea, and the
United States has always maintained the right of asylum as firmly as it has rejected the pretension of impressment.
