It
is at the same time true, that their enemies set the first example of
violating neutral rights, and continue it to this day: insomuch, that it
is declared on all hands, and particularly by the insurance companies,
and denied by none, that the British spoliations have considerably
exceeded the French during the last six months. Yet not a word of these
things is said officially to the legislature.
Still further, to give the devil his due (the French), it should be
observed that it has been said without contradiction, and the people
made to believe, that their refusal to receive our Envoys was contrary
to the law of nations, and a sufficient cause of war: whereas every
one who ever read a book on the law of nations knows, that it is an
unquestionable right in every power, to refuse to receive any minister
who is personally disagreeable. Martens, the latest and a very respected
writer, has laid it down so clearly and shortly in his 'Summary of
the Law of Nations,' B. 7. ch. 2. sect. 9. that I will transcribe the
passage verbatim. 'Section 9. Of choice in the person of the minister.
The choice of the person to be sent as minister depends of right on the
sovereign who sends him, leaving the right, however, of him to whom he
is sent, of refusing to acknowledge any one, to whom he has a personal
dislike, or who is inadmissible by the laws and usages of the country.
Pages:
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730