5) FRANREICH. Minister des Auswärtigen an den Geschäftsträger der Vereinigten Staaten in Paris. - Erwiederung auf die in der vorausgehenden Depesche gemachten Eröffnungen. (Uebersetzung.) Paris, October 29, 1823. Frankreich, 1823. Sir: Your government has expressed a desire to see the system No. LVI, 5. which France followed in the maritime operations of the last war become 29. Octbr. the universal rule of all civilized and Christian nations, and you have done me the honor to advise me, on the 13th instant, that the United States concurred, as much as it would be in their power, in the establishment of this principle: that individual property on the ocean must be sacred in times of war." You may judge, sir, by the measure which His Majesty has adopted, not to grant letters of marque to private individuals, and to favor navigation and commerce, whenever their operations are not of a hostile character, how much he wishes that circumstances would always permit him to adopt the same principles of moderation, and to expect from the other powers a similar system and a perfect reciprocity. If the trial, successfully made by France, can induce all those governments that are interested in a question so worthy of being profoundly studied, to agree upon the adoption of a general principle which, in time of war, shall place wise limits to maritime operations and be in accordance with the sentiments of humanity, His Majesty will congratulate himself still more in having given this salutary example, and in having proved that, without compromising the success of war, its scourge can be abated. Please to accept, sir, the assurance, &c. Daniel Sheldon, Esq. Chateaubriand. 6) RUSSLAND. Minister des Auswärtigen an den Gesandten der Vereinigten Staaten in St. Petersburg. auf die gemachten Eröffnungen über die von Amerika ange-. (Uebersetzung.) St. Petersburg, February 1, 1824. Russland, The undersigned, privy councillor, directing the imperial administra. No. LVI, 6. tion of foreign affairs, has made it his duty to lay before the Emperor, his 1. Febr. 1824, master, the note which Mr. Middleton, the envoy extraordinary and minister No. LVI, 6. plenipotentiary of the United States of America, sent him, to communicate Russland, 1. Febr. 1824. to him a projet of a convention by means of which the principle of the inviolability of private property might become sacred in every maritime war. About the end of the eighteenth century Russia laid the foundation of a system of an armed neutrality, which contributed essentially to prevent the misfortune of a maritime war from being aggravated by a total interruption of the relations of commerce. The cabinet of St. Petersburg saw, at that time, the greater part of the European powers highly appreciate his intentions; and it could not but be extremely grateful to the Emperor to be convinced that, even now, a State whose marine makes the most rapid advances recalls and reproduces the salutary views of his august and glorious grandmother. His Imperial Majesty thinks that he has proved on his side that not only was one of his first desires constantly that of mitigating the horrors of war, but that he willingly makes great sacrifices to save the world from this terrible scourge. The Emperor, therefore, sincerely applauds the spirit of the convention which has been proposed to him by the cabinet of Washington. If the governments if our days followed the narrow calculations of ancient policy if they only took their interests for the rule of their determinations to the convention in question — it might be perhaps objected to, that the more the private resources of a State give extent and activity to its maritime commerce, the more this commerce is exposed, in the case of a war, to the enterprises of privateers, aud that then letters of marque are the only means which remain to powers whose marine is less employed and less numerous, for restoring the equilibrium between unequal forces and for securing any compensation, but, it is repeated, these calculations will never direct the cabinets which have shown that they cannot make similar advantages the object of their desires, and which, by their known maxims, will doubtless be eager to do justice to the motives as well as to the consequences of a proposition, the hint of which does honor to the government of the United States. There is, however, one consideration, which cannot have escaped Mr. Middleton. The principle which the United States invite the Emperor to recognise and to sanction will not be of real utility, except as far as it will have a general application. Every detached convention which the cabinet of St. Petersburg might make on this account with that of Washington, would have so much less effect, inasmuch as, happily, a war between Russia and North America ought to be ranked in the number of events the most distant, the most unlikely; and it is only by the agreement of all the other maritime powers that the measures pointed out can produce the effects intended. In consequence, His Imperial Majesty charges the undersigned to declare that, for his part, he fully appreciates the proceeding of the American government; that he shares in the opinions and wishes expressed in Mr. Middleton's note; and that, as soon as the powers whose consent he considers as indispensable shall have shown the same dispositions, he will not be wanting in authorizing his minister to discuss the different articles of No. LVI, 6. an act which would be a crown of glory to modern diplomacy. In executing, by the present communication, the orders of the Emperor, his master, the undersigned eagerly seizes this occasion of offering to Mr. Middleton the assurances of his most distinguished consideration. Russland, 1. Febr. 1824. H. Middleton, Envoy &c. Nesselrode. 7) VEREINIGTE STAATEN. Aus der Botschaft des Präsidenten Franklin Pierce an den Congress vom 4. Dezember 1854. Verhandlungen über das Seerecht betreffend. Vereinigte Long experience has shown that, in general, when the prin- No. EVI, 7. cipal powers of Europe are engaged in war, the rights of neutral nations are Staaten, endangered. This consideration led, in the progress of the war of our in- 4. Decbr. 1854. depedence, to the formation of the celebrated confederacy of armed neutrality, a primary object of which was, to assert the doctrine that free ships make free goods, except in the case of articles contraband of war: a doctrine which, from the very commencement of our national being, has been a cherished idea of the statesmen of this country. At one period or another, every maritime power has, by some solemn treaty stipulation, recognised that principle; and it might have been hoped that it would come to be universally received and respected as a rule of international law. But the refusal of one power prevented this, and in the next great war which ensued, that of the French revolution, it failed to be respected among the belligerent states of Europe. Notwithstanding this, the principle is generally admitted to be a sound and salutary one so much so, that, at the commencement of the existing war in Europe, Great Britain and France announced their purpose to observe it for the present; not, however, as a recognised international right, but as a mere concession for the time being. The co-operation, however, of these two powerful maritime nations in the interest of neutral rights, appeared to me to afford an occasion inviting and justifying, on the part of the United States, a renewed effort to make the doctrine in question a principle of international law, by means of special conventions between the several powers of Europe and America. Accordingly, a proposition, embracing not only the rule that free ships make free goods, except contraband articles, but also the less contested one, that neutral property other than contraband, though on board enemy's ships, shall be exempt from confiscation, has been submitted by this government to those of Europe and America. Russia acted promptly in this matter, and a convention was concluded between that country and the United States, providing for the observance of the principles announced, not only as between themselves, but also Seerecht. 11 Staaten, No. LVI, 7. as between them and all other nations which shall enter into like stipulations. Vereinigte None of the other powers have as yet taken final action on the subject. I 4. Decbr. 1854. am not aware, however, that any objection to the proposed stipulations has been made; but, on the contrary, they are acknowledged to be essential to the security of neutral commerce; and the only apparent obstacle to their general adoption is in the possibility that it may be encumbered by inadmissible conditions. The King of the Two Sicilies has expressed to our minister at Naples his readiness to concur in our proposition relative to neutral rights, and to enter into a convention on that subject. The King of Prussia entirely approves of the project of a treaty to the same effect, submitted to him, but proposes an additional article providing for the renunciation of privateering. Such an article, for most obvious reasons, is much desired by nations having naval establishments, large in proportion to their foreign commerce. If it were adopted as an international rule, the commerce of a nation having comparatively a small naval force would be very much at the mercy of its enemy in case of war with a power of decided naval superiority. The bare statement of the condition in which the United States would be placed, after having surrendered the right to resort to privateers, in the event of war with a belligerent of naval supremacy, will show that this government could never listen to such a proposition. The navy of the first maritime power in Europe is at least ten times as large as that of the United States. The foreign commerce of the two countries is nearly equal, and about equally exposed to hostile depredations. In war between that power and the United States, without resort on our part to our mercantile marine, the means of our enemy to inflict injury upon our commerce would be tenfold greater than ours to retaliate. We could not extricate our country from this unequal condition, with such an enemy, unless we at once departed from our present peaceful policy, and became a great naval power. Nor would this country be better situated in war with one of the secondary naval powers. Though the naval disparity would be less, the greater extent and more exposed condition of our wide-spread commerce would give any of them a like advantage over us. The proposition to enter into engagements to forego a resort to privateers, in case this country should be forced into war with a great naval power, is not entitled to more favorable consideration than would be a proposition to agree not to accept the services of volunteers for operations on land. When the honor or the rights of our country require it to assume a hostile attitude, it confidently relies upon the patriotism of its citizens, not ordinarily devoted to the military profession, to augment the army and the navy, so as to make them fully adequate to the emergency which calls them into action. The proposal to surrender the right to employ privateers is professedly founded upon the principle, that private property of unoffending non-combatants, though enemies, should be exempt from the ravages of war; but the proposed surrender goes but little way in carrying out that principle, which equally requires that such private property should not be seized or Vereinigte molested by national ships of war. Should the leading powers of Europe No. LVI, 7. concur in proposing, as a rule of international law, to exempt private pro- Staaten, perty, upon the ocean, from seizure by public armed cruisers, as well as by 4. Decbr. 1854 privateers, the United States will readily meet them upon that broad ground. Gesandten zu Washington, den Abschluss eines Handels- und Schifffahrtsvertrages mit den Vereinigten Staaten betreffend. *) Deutsche Es dürften sich schwerlich zwei Länder finden, bei welchen die No. LVII. politischen und commerciellen Verhältnisse so durchaus auf eine enge und Centralgewalt, innige Freundschaft und Verbindung hinweisen, als zwischen den Vereinigten October 1848. Staaten und dem deutschen Bundesstaate. Es wird daher die grösste Offenheit in jeder Hinsicht deutscher Seits zu beobachten und alle Willfährigkeit zu zeigen sein, den Wünschen der Vereinigten Staaten entgegen zu kommen, so weit irgend thunlich, auch zu übereinstimmendem Verfahren gegen Dritte Bereitwilligkeit geäussert werden können. Zur Bethätigung dieser freundlichen Verhältnisse zwischen beiden Ländern, die sich als Staaten-Complexe in ähnlicher Lage befinden, wird zunächst das commercielle Band, welches sich seither auf die einzelnen deutschen Staaten bezog, aber in den Hauptresultaten dennoch ganz Deutschland umfasste, durch einen die Gesammtheit des deutschen Bundesstaats in sich schliessenden Handels- und Schifffahrts-Vertrag fest zu knüpfen sein. Schon seit dem Anfange des Monats August haben hierüber Berathungen mit dem Amerikanischen Gesandten in Deutschland, dem Major Donalson stattgefunden, welcher in Gemässheit derselben an seine Regierung in Washington berichtet hat. Die leitenden Gesichtspuncte waren dabei die folgenden: 1. Völlige Gegenseitigkeit und Gleichstellung der beiderseitigen Schifffahrt mit der eigenen, bei directer und indirecter Fahrt. *) Nach den Aufzeichnungen des Reichs-Handelsministers Duckwitz über seine Besprechungen mit dem amerikanischen Gesandten, Major Donalson, war es die Absicht, „jede Wegnahme von Handelsschiffen, sei es durch Kriegsschiffe oder durch gewöhnliche Kaper, für Seeraub zu erklären." Der Gedanke fand sowohl in Amerika, als bei dem damaligen Präsidenten der französischen Republik, Cavaignac, lebhaften Anklang. Gelegentlich sei hier auch auf die unter pos. 6 der Instruction hervortretende Idee, bei handelspolitischen Verträgen Deutschland und Oesterreich, ungeachtet ihrer getrennten Staatlichkeit, als mehr denn gewöhnlich verbündete Staaten zu behandeln, aufmerksam gemacht, |