We denied his position, and appealed to the
universal practice of Europe, in proof that the principle of 'free
bottoms, free goods,' was not acknowledged as of the natural law of
nations, but only of its conventional law. And I believe we may safely
affirm, that not a single instance can be produced where any nation of
Europe, acting professedly under the law of nations alone, unrestrained
by treaty, has, either by its executive or judiciary organs, decided
on the principle of 'free bottoms, free goods.' Judging of the law of
nations by what has been practised among nations, we were authorized
to say that the contrary principle was their rule, and this but an
exception to it, introduced by special treaties in special cases only;
that having no treaty with England substituting this instead of the
ordinary rule, we had neither the right nor the disposition to go to war
for its establishment. But though we would not then, nor will we now,
engage in war to establish this principle, we are nevertheless sincerely
friendly to it. We think that the nations of Europe have originally set
out in error; that experience has proved the error oppressive to the
rights and interests of the peaceable part of mankind; that every nation
but one has acknowledged this, by consenting to the change, and that one
has consented in particular cases; that nations have a right to correct
an erroneous principle, and to establish that which is right as their
rule of action; and if they should adopt measures for effecting this in
a peaceable way, we shall wish them success, and not stand in their way
to it.
Pages:
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837