16 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. which, on her demand, we undertook to pay to her and her citizens all losses suffered by armed vessels fitted out in our ports.* Our conduct during this whole period received, and still receives, the commendation of all enlightened publicists. Philli- more and Ward are profuse in their praise of the justice, dignity, and intelligence, which marked the action of this government; and George Canning lost no opportunity in Parliament to urge an emulation of our example. In the debates, upon Lord Althorpe’s petition for the repeal of the Foreign Enlistment Act (Hansard’s Pari. Debates N. S., vol. 8, pp. 1019-59, Canning’s Speeches, vol. 4, pp. 152-3), he said : “It surely could not be forgotten, that, in 1794, this country complained of various breaches of neutrality (though much inferior to those now under consideration), committed on the part of subjects of the United States. What was the conduct of that nation in consequence ? Did she resent the complaint as an infringement of her independence ? Did it refuse to take such steps as would insure the immediate observance of neutrality ? Neither. In 1794, immediately after the application from the British government, the legislature of the United States passed an act, prohibiting, under heavy penalties, the engagement of American citizens in the armies of any foreign powers.f Was that the only instance of the kind? It was but last year (1818) that the United States passed an act, by which the act of 1794 was confirmed in every respect, again prohibiting the engagement of their citizens in the service of any foreign powers ; and pointing distinctly to the service of Spain or the South American provinces.” He might have added, had he spoken at a later period, that in 1838 we again, upon the request of Great Britain, called in legislative aid; this time to prevent succor to the Canadian rebellion. Again, in 1823, he said (Canning’s Speeches, vol. 5, pp. 50-1): “ If I wished for a guide in a system of neutrality, I would take that laid down by America in the days of the presidency of Washington and the secretaryship of Jefferson. Here, sir,” he added, after stating what we had done, “ I contend, is the principle on which we ought to act.” * Extract from 7th article of treaty of 1794: And whereas, certain merchants and others, his majesty’s subjects, complain that in the course of the war they have sustained loss and damage by reason of the capture of their vessels and merchandise, taken within the limits and jurisdiction of the States, and brought into the ports of the same, or taken by vessels originally armed in the ports of the said States : It is agreed, that in all eases where restitution shall not have been made agreeably to the tenor of the letter from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Hammond, of September 5th, 1793, the complaints of the parties shall be referred to the commissioners hereby appointed.” f It was because we stood by this very act, and would not permit Mr. Crampton to infringe it by recruiting for the war against Russia, that we were pressed almost to the point of hostilities in 1855.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=