Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 17 (of 20)Sumner, Charles
History
Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 17 (of 20)
Sumner, Charles
Slavery -- United States; Speeches, addresses, etc., American
I have no disposition to go into this subject at length. There is,
however, one other remark that the Senator from Wisconsin made to which
I shall be justified in replying. He alludes to the case of the Hornet,
and the proceedings against that vessel.[190] It is not for me now
to vindicate those proceedings. They may have been proper under the
statute, or may not; but it is very clear to me that the cases of the
Hornet and the Spanish gun-boats are plainly distinguishable, and, if
the Senate will pardon me one moment, I will make the distinction, I
think, perfectly apparent. We all know that two or three or four or a
dozen persons may levy war against the Government, may levy war against
the king. A traitor levies war against the king. The king, when he
proceeds against the traitor, does not levy war. He simply proceeds
in the exercise of his executive functions in order to establish
his authority. And in the spirit of this illustration I am disposed
to believe that the United States were perfectly justifiable, even
under this statute, in arresting the Hornet; but they would not be
justifiable in arresting the Spanish gun-boats. The Hornet was levying
war against Spain, and therefore subject to arrest. The gun-boats are
levying no war, simply because the insurrection against which they are
to be used has not reached the condition of war.
MR. CARPENTER. Will the Senator allow me to ask one other
question?
MR. SUMNER. Certainly.
MR. CARPENTER. What I want to know is this: whether the
condition of neutrality does not necessarily depend upon the
fact that war is progressing between two parties? Can there
be any neutrality, unless there is a contest of arms going
on between two somebodies? Now, if it be a violation of our
Neutrality Act for one of those bodies to come in and fit out
vessels in the United States, is it not equally so for the
other?--or is our pretence of neutrality a falsehood, a cheat,
and a delusion?
MR. SUMNER. Mr. President, I do not regard it as a question of
neutrality. Until the belligerence of these people is recognized, they
are not of themselves a power, they are not a people. Therefore there
can be no neutrality on the part of our Government between Spain and
her revolted subjects, until they come up to the condition of a people.
They have not reached that point; and therefore I submit that there is
at this moment no question of neutrality, and that the argument of the
Senator in that respect was inapplicable. When the belligerence of the
insurgents is recognized there will be a case for neutrality, and not
before.
ADMISSION OF VIRGINIA TO REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS.
SPEECHES IN THE SENATE, JANUARY 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 21, 1870.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account