Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

ference by one nation in the internal government of another.

When a nation has actually come to a resolution to throw off a yoke, under which it may have groaned, and to assert its liberties, it is justifiable and meritorious in another, to afford assistance to the one which has been oppressed, and is in the act of liberating itself; but it is not warrantable for any nation beforehand, to hold out a general invitation to insurrection and revolution, by pro mising to assist every people who may wish to recover their liberty, and to defend those citizens of every country, who have been, or who may be vexed for the cause of liberty still less to commit to the generals of its armies the discretionary power of judging, when the citizens of a foreign country have been vexed for the cause of liberty by their own government.

For Vatel justly observes, as a consequence of the liberty and independence of nations, "that it does not be"long to any foreign power, to take cognizance of the "administration of the sovereign of another country, to "set himself up as a judge of his conduct, or to oblige "him to alter it."

It had a natural tendency to disturb the tranquillity of nations, and to excite every where fermentation and revolt: it therefore justified neutral powers, who were in a situation to be affected by it, in taking measures to repress the spirit by which it had been dictated.

But the principle of that decree received a more particular application to Great Britain, by some subsequent circumstances.

Among the proofs of this are two answers, which were given by the president of the national convention, at a public sitting on the 28th of November, to two dif ferent addresses; one presented by a deputation from "the society for Constitutional Information in London," the other by a deputation of English and Irish citizens

at Paris.

The following are extracts from these answers:

"The shades of Penn, of Hambden, and of Sidney, "hover over your heads; and the moment, without

A

es, in which the French will bring to the national convention of Great

principles draw towards us England, Ireland. Let the cries of friendship rough the two REPUBLICS"...." Principles g war against tyranny, which will fall under Lows of philosophy. ROYALTY in Europe is ...er destroyed or on the point of perishing, on the s of feudality: and the declaration of rights placed the side of thrones, is a devouring fire which will busume them.... Worthy REPUBLICANS," &c. Declarations of this sort, cannot but be viewed as a rect application of the principle of the decree to Great rain and as an open patronage of a revolution in vas country; a conduct which, proceeding from the ead of the body that governed France, in the presence nd on behalf of that body, was unquestionably an fence and injury to the nation to which it is related.

The decree of the 15th of November, is a further cause of offence to all the governments of Europe. By that decree" the French nation declares, that it will

treat as enemies the people, who refusing or renounc →ing liberty and equality, are desirous of preserving "their prince and privileged casts, or of entering into "an accommodation with them," &c. This decree was little short of a declaration of war against all nations having princes and privileged classes.

The formal and definitive annexation to France of the territories over which her arms had temporarily prevailed, is another violation of just and moderate principles, into which the convention was betrayed by an intemperate zeal, if not by a culpable ambition; and of a nature to justify the jealousy and ill will of every neighboring state.

The laws of nations give to a power at war, nothing more than a usufructuary or possessory right to the territories which it acquires; suspending the absolute property and dominion, till a treaty of peace, or some thing equivalent, shall have ceded or relinquished the

conquered territory to the conqueror. This rule is one of primary importance to the tranquillity and security of nations....facilitating an adjustment of their quarrels, and the preservation of ancient limits.

But France, by incorporating with herself in several instances the territories she had acquired, violated that rule, and multiplied infinitely the obstacles to peace and accommodation. The doctrine, that a nation connot consent to its own dismemberment, but in a case of extreme necessity, immediately attached itself to all the conquered territories: while the progressive augmentation of the dominions of the most powerful empire in Europe, on a principle, not of temporary possession, but of permanent acquisition, threatened the independence of all other countries, and gave to neighbouring neutral powers the justest cause of discontent and apprehension. It is a principle well agreed, and founded on substantial reasons, that whenever a particular state adopts maxims of conduct contrary to those generally established among nations, calculated to interrupt their tranquillity and to expose their safety, they may justifiably make common cause to resist and control the state which manifests a disposition so suspicious and exceptionable.

Whatever partiality may be entertained for the general object of the French revolution, it is impossible for any well informed or sober minded man, not to condemn the proceedings which have been stated, as repugnant to the rights of nations, to the true principles of liberty, to the freedom of opinion of mankind; or not to acknowledge as a consequence of this, that the justice of the war on the part of France, with regard to some of the powers with which she is engaged, is from those causes questionable enough to free the United States from all embarrassment on that score, if indeed it be at all incumbent upon them to go into the inquiry.

The policy of a defensive alliance is so essentially distinct from that of an offensive one, that it is every way important not to confound their effects. The first kind has in view the prudent object of mutual defence,

Some writers indeed of high authority affirm, that it is a tacit condition of every alliance, that one ally is not bound to assist the other in a war manifestly unjust. But this is questioned by other respectable authorities on the ground which has been stated. And though the manifest injustice of the war has been affirmed by some, to be a good cause for not executing the formal obliga tions of a treaty, I have no where seen it maintained, that the abstract justice of a war will of itself oblige a nation to do what its formal obligations do not enjoin: if this however were not the true doctrine, an impartial examination would prove that, with respect to some of the powers, France is not blameless in the circumstances which preceded and led to the war; that if she received, she also gave causes of offence, and that the justice of the war, on her side, is in those cases not a little problematical.

There are prudential reasons, which dissuade from going largely into this examination, unless it shall be rendered necessary by the future turn of the discussion. It will be sufficient here, to notice cursorily the following facts:

France committed an aggression upon Holland, in declaring the navigation of the Scheldt free, and acting apon that declaration; contrary to treaties in which she had explicitly acknowledged, and even guaranteed, the exclusive right of Holland to the use of that river; and contrary also to the doctrines of the best writers, and the established usages of nations in such cases.

She gave a general and very serious cause of alarm and umbrage by the decree of the 19th of November, 1792, whereby the convention, in the name of the French nation, declare, that they will grant fraternity and assistance to every people who wish to recover their liberty; and charge the executive power to send the necessary orders to the generals to give assistance to such people, and to defend those citizens who have been, or who may be vexed for the cause of liberty; which decree was ordered to be printed in all languages.

This very extraordinary decree amounted, exactly to what France herself had most complained of; an inter.

ference by one nation in the internal government of another.

When a nation has actually come to a resolution to throw off a yoke, under which it may have groaned, and to assert its liberties, it is justifiable and meritorious in another, to afford assistance to the one which has been oppressed, and is in the act of liberating itself; but it is not warrantable for any nation beforehand, to hold out a general invitation to insurrection and revolution, by pro mising to assist every people who may wish to recover their liberty, and to defend those citizens of every country, who have been, or who may be vexed for the cause of liberty still less to commit to the generals of its armies the discretionary power of judging, when the citizens of a foreign country have been vexed for the cause of liberty by their own government.

For Vatel justly observes, as a consequence of the li berty and independence of nations, "that it does not be"long to any foreign power, to take cognizance of the "administration of the sovereign of another country, to "set himself up as a judge of his conduct, or to oblige ❝him to alter it.”

It had a natural tendency to disturb the tranquillity of nations, and to excite every where fermentation and revolt: it therefore justified neutral powers, who were in a situation to be affected by it, in taking measures to repress the spirit by which it had been dictated.

But the principle of that decree received a more particular application to Great Britain, by some subsequent circumstances.

Among the proofs of this are two answers, which were given by the president of the national convention, at a public sitting on the 28th of November, to two dif ferent addresses; one presented by a deputation from "the society for Constitutional Information in London," the other by a deputation of English and Irish citizens at Paris.

The following are extracts from these answers:

"The shades of Penn, of Hambden, and of Sidney, "hover over your heads; and the moment, without

« ZurückWeiter »