§ THE EARL OF DERBYMy Lords I have given notice to my noble Friend the 1830 President of the Council that I would put a question to him upon a subject of considerable importance and urgency. That question may now, perhaps, be considered comparatively unnecessary, inasmuch as it was raised elsewhere in the course of yesterday, and Her Majesty's Government gave some intimation of the course they meant to pursue, but the matter is one of so much importance that I hope my noble Friend will forgive me if I ask for some explanations with respect to it in your Lordships' House. Your Lordships are aware that the unfortunate dispute which has existed for some time between the Northern and the Southern portions of the United States of America has at last resulted in what I am afraid must be considered a civil war. I am not going to ask the noble Earl any question with respect to the manner in which this country may be affected by the possible consequences of that war. I understand the Government have already come to the conclusion—of which I do not complain—that both the Northern and the Southern sections of the United States are entitled to be considered as belligerent Powers, and to have our relations with them regulated by the rules which apply to belligerent Powers. I understand further that the Government have under their consideration, and have referred to the law officers of the Crown, several important and delicate questions touching the extent and character of those belligerent rights. Upon that subject, therefore, I do not at present ask for any expression of opinion on the part of the Government; but there is one point with respect to which it is highly important they should furnish immediate information. Your Lordships are aware that among the measures adopted or threatened by the Southern Confederation is that of sending forth letters of marque and resorting to the system of privateering for the purpose of attacking the commerce, of the Northern States. Your Lordships are aware, on the other hand, that the Northern States have signified their intention to regard the issue of such letters of marque and such privateering as piracy, and to treat them as such. I do not stop to inquire how far this course of proceeding is consistent with the strong declarations made on the part of the United States at the time of the Congress of Paris, when the system of privateering was abandoned by the Powers of Europe, but when a different resolution was adopted by the United States and they alone of all 1831 the important maritime States refused to abandon that system. The point to which I wish to call the attention of your Lordships and the Government is the position in which British seamen may probably be placed in consequence of the announcements made by the Southern and the Northern States. If there is one mode of warfare which has more attractions for seamen than another it is precisely the system of privateering. Privateering is a sort of sea-poaching, and is peculiarly attractive to the more reckless and dissolute class of sailors. It combines ninny inducements—a certain amount of daring, a certain amount of risk, and considerable chances of profit—inducements which, coupled with drink, apart from any question of distress or poverty, which I believe does not form an element in more than one case out of a hundred, are precisely those that lead to poaching on land, and are also precisely those that would lure seamen into poaching by sea—or privateering. But unfortunately the maritime game-laws are of a rather stringent character, and visit offenders with nothing short of capital punishment. It is, therefore, important to those British seamen who are liable to be attracted by the various inducements of privateering that they should know upon what footing they stand with respect to their rights as British subjects. I need not say that the offence of entering upon this privateering service is an offence against the Foreign Enlistment Act; but that Act does not impose any penalty so severe as that of capital punishment, and if a British seaman who has entered one of the Southern privateers should be captured by a Northern ship of war and condemned to death—if he is entitled to claim any protection even for his life from his own Government, I cannot conceive anything more certain to involve us in most serious and embarrassing complications with the United States, or more likely to render us, almost necessarily, parties in that unhappy contest, from which I cordially join with the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Office in the earnest desire that we may continue to stand aloof. On the other hand, if a British seamen by entering a Southern privateer does forfeit his right to claim the protection of his own Government—which I apprehend he would do—it should be distinctly and publicly made known to him on the part of the Government that if he is led into such a criminal undertaking from any temptation whatever, and if he is 1832 there by exposed to the most serious consequences—even to the loss of his life by judicial sentence—in that case his blood will be on his own head, and he must not expect the slightest interference on the part of this country to save him from consequences, however deplorable, provoked by his own act. I understand that a Proclamation is about to be issued by Her Majesty's Government on the subject of privateering and of belligerent rights. I hope that in that Proclamation—or in some other way—a most distinct and emphatic warning will be given to all seamen in the service of Her Majesty as to the conditions upon which they will engage, if they choose to enter upon such hazardous enterprise—in the system of privateering. There should be no doubt left on their mind, but the fullest and plainest intimation should publicly be made to them whether, if they do engage in such a service, they will, or will not, in extremity, be entitled to expect any protection or any interference on the part of this country. I hope my noble Friend will state to your Lordships whether the Government have come to any conclusion upon this question; and, if so, whether they are prepared forthwith to issue a public and emphatic notification of the course they intend to pursue, and the consequences likely to result to British seamen from a disregard of their warning?
§ EARL GRANVILLEThe noble Earl, by the manner in which he has approached the subject, has evinced a becoming appreciation of the difficulties which may arise to ourselves from the unfortunate state of things in the United States. With respect, however, to the question of the belligerent rights of the parties now engaged in that unhappy contest, the noble Earl has not asked for any expression of opinion on the part of the Government, and, therefore, I am absolved from entering into a discussion of that most important, difficult, and delicate subject. But the noble Earl has inquired whether it is our intention to issue a Proclamation warning the subjects of Her Majesty against in any manner departing from that neutrality which Her Majesty herself is so desirous to observe. To that question, as the noble Earl has stated, an answer has already been given in "another place"—namely, that it is the intention of the Government, according to precedent, to issue a Proclamation giving such warning to all the subjects of Her Majesty. The precise wording of the Proclamation is a matter 1833 of considerable importance and difficulty, requiring some deliberation, and we have thought it right to obtain the best advice in framing it; but I may state that the Government are anxious to make it as plain and emphatic as possible.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYPerhaps the noble Earl will inform your Lordships whether, in the event of the Northern States acting upon their expressed intention to treat privateering as piracy, and British seamen being sentenced to death, it is to be distinctly understood that such persons will not be entitled to claim protection from their own country.
§ EARL GRANVILLEI should prefer not to enter into any detailed explanation until the Proclamation shall have been issued. It is plain that the natural result of such a Proclamation must be that no British seaman will be entitled to claim the official protection of his Government.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, the noble Earl had limited his observations to seamen in Her Majesty's service, when it was quite clear that he meant them to apply to any British subject taking part in privateering. Privateering of this description was piracy by the law of nations. Any interference in a foreign war, by fitting out, manning, and going on board ships to take part in the war, was a crime by our law, and it was most expedient that those parties who chose to commit the offence in this case should be left to suffer the penalty they incurred. The war in America was a most lamentable affair on all accounts, and for the sake of liberal principles, and for the sake of humanity itself, he fervently trusted that the folly which had given rise to it—possibly not confined to one side—would not be attended with the calamities which always accompanied civil war. If disruption was inevitable, he trusted the new States would form themselves without bloodshed.
§ THE EARL OF HARDWICKEwas anxious that the House should not enter too strong a protest against that which was a natural consequence of war—namely, that vessels should be fitted out by private individuals under letters of marque. That was, no doubt, privateering; but it did not by any means follow that privateering was piracy. He believed that if privateering ships were put in the hands of proper officers they were not engaged in piracy any more than men-of-war. He thought that a feeble State engaged in a war with a powerful one had a right to 1834 make use of its merchant vessels for the purpose of carrying on the contest, and there was no violation of the law of nations in such a proceeding.