A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents. Volume 4, part 2: John Tyler

by Unknown

In my message at the commencement of the present session of Congress I endeavored to state the principles which this Government supports respecting the right of search and the immunity of flags. Desirous of maintaining those principles fully, at the same time that existing obligations should be fulfilled, I have thought it most consistent with the honor and dignity of the country that it should execute its own laws and perform its own obligations by its own means and its own power. The examination or visitation of the merchant vessels of one nation by the cruisers of another for any purposes except those known and acknowledged by the law of nations, under whatever restraints or regulations it may take place, may lead to dangerous results. It is far better by other means to supersede any supposed necessity or any motive for such examination or visit. Interference with a merchant vessel by an armed cruiser is always a delicate proceeding, apt to touch the point of national honor as well as to affect the interests of individuals. It has been thought, therefore, expedient, not only in accordance with the stipulations of the treaty of Ghent, but at the same time as removing all pretext on the part of others for violating the immunities of the American flag upon the seas as they exist and are defined by the law of nations, to enter into the articles now submitted to the Senate.

The treaty which I now submit to you proposes no alteration, mitigation, or modification of the rules of the law of nations. It provides simply that each of the two Governments shall maintain on the coast of Africa a sufficient squadron to enforce, separately and respectively, the laws, rights, and obligations of the two countries for the suppression of the slave trade.

These opinions were expressed by me officially upon the occasion of making to the Senate a communication of very great importance. It is not perceived how the accuracy of this general statement can be doubted by those who are acquainted with the debates of public bodies in Europe, the productions of the press, and the other modes by which public opinion is manifested in an enlightened age. It is not to be supposed that excited attention to public and national transactions or general political discussions in Europe on subjects open to all the world are known only in consequence of private information communicated to the Government, and feeling a strong persuasion that it would be improper in the Executive to go into any discussion or argument upon such a subject with the Senate, I have no further remarks to make upon this part of the inquiry.

The third inquiry is:

What danger there was that "the laws and the obligations" of the United States in relation to the suppression of the slave trade would be "executed by others" if we do not "remove the pretext and motive for violating our flag and executing our laws."

I have already quoted from the message the entire paragraph to a part of which this portion of the inquiry is supposed to refer.

As to the danger there was that the laws and the obligations of the United States in relation to the suppression of the slave trade would be executed by others if we did not remove the pretext and motive for violating our flag and provide for executing our laws, I might say that this depends upon notorious facts and occurrences, of which the evidence has been in various forms before the country and all the branches of the Government.

When I came to occupy the Executive chair I could not be ignorant of the numerous complaints which had been made on account of alleged interruptions of American vessels engaged in lawful commerce on the coast of Africa by British cruisers on the ground of their being engaged in the slave trade. I could not be ignorant, at the same time, of the well-grounded suspicions which pervaded the country that some American vessels were engaged in that odious and unlawful traffic. There were two dangers, then, to be guarded against—the one, that this traffic would continue to be carried on in American ships, and perhaps much increased, unless some new and vigorous effort should be made for its suppression; the other, that acquiescence in the capture of American vessels, notorious slave dealers, by British cruisers might give countenance to seizures and detentions of vessels lawfully employed on light or groundless suspicions. And cases had arisen under the administration of those who preceded me well calculated to show the extent and magnitude of this latter danger; and believing that very serious consequences might in time grow out of the obvious tendency and progress of things, I felt it to be my duty to arrest that progress, to rescue the immunity of the American flag from the danger which hung over it, and to do this by recommending such a provision for the execution of our own laws as should remove all pretense for the interference of others.

Among the occurrences to which I have alluded, it may be useful to particularize one case.

The schooner Catharine, an American vessel owned by citizens of the United States, was seized on the coast of Africa by the British cruiser called the Dolphin and brought into the port of New York in the summer of 1839. Upon being brought into port, Benjamin F. Butler, esq., district attorney of the United States for the southern district of New York, appeared in the district court of the United States for that district and in the name and behalf of the United States libeled the schooner, her apparel and furniture, for a violation of the several acts of Congress passed for the suppression of the slave trade. The schooner being arrested by the usual process in such cases and possession taken of her from the hands of the British captors by officers of the United States, the cause proceeded, and by a decree of the circuit court in December, 1840, a forfeiture was pronounced. From this decree an appeal was taken, which is now pending in the Supreme Court of the United States.