: II. KIiillT 



>i;.\si>N> : Of. 



iiiiiiuinity at ibipa of war froui visitation Mid March WM acquiesced in 

 by the piV'.:>-<- "l our own and every other country, nor u it known to 

 bar* been contested even in peculation. But at length, in tliu conn* 

 of Uw controversy that arose respecting the right* of neutral* out i i! 

 Berlin and Milan decree* of the French emperor and our own onion in 

 council, in 1806 and 1807 [ BLOCKADE j, while notue extreme partisans 

 on the one aide contended that even merchant chip* wore nut liable to 

 March when under the convoy of a man-of-war, other* on the opposite 

 aide revived the old pretension of the English republican government 

 ':<, and maintained our right of \ i-iting and searching the ships 

 of war thenuelvw of neutral (tatea whenever we should think proper. 

 The practical application of the principle that via now specially called 

 for wa* the vuiUtion of the hip* of war of tho United State* of 

 America, for the pui i*e of recovering seamen alleged to be subject* 

 i count ry nul denerten from the liritUh aervice. An actual 

 enforcement of the new doctrine occurred iu an attack made, on the 

 SSrd of June, 1807, by the British ahip of war, Leopard, upon the 

 American frigate Chesapeake, lying off the Cape* of Virginia. On the 

 refuaal of the American captain to permit his ahip to bo visited, the 

 Leopard fired into the Cheampeako, which, being unprepared for action, 

 immediately (truck her flag. Four men were carried off, and the 

 American ship was then left. The American minuter in London was 

 directed to demand satisfaction of the British government. Nego- 

 tiations were continued for a long time without any result ; the affair 

 of the Chesapeake soon became mixed and complicated with other 

 incident*, giving rise to new claim* and counterclaims; at last the 

 American government took it* stand on new ground, objecting to the 

 march nut only of ship* of war but even of merchant vessels for 

 deserter*; it was not denied that the search of merchantmen was 

 sanctioned by the law of nations, but the exercise of the right was 

 denounced as necessarily irritating and fraught with danger, and it 

 was urged that it should on that account be dispensed with and 

 abolished. In the end war broke out between the two countries 

 in the summer of 1812; but even that did not settle any of the 

 questions that had arisen between them in connection with the right 

 of search. The treaty of peace signed at Ghent on the 24th of 

 December, 1814, contained no stipulation on that subject, which 

 was now supposed to have lost its practical importance. This question 

 was again incidentally raised between England and America in 1842. 

 In the discussion which then took place between Lord Ashburton and 

 M i . \\Ybster relative to the boundary line of the state of Maine, the 

 American minister intimated that the rule hereafter to be insisted 

 upon would be that every regularly documented American vessel 

 would be evidence that the seamen on board were American, and 

 would find their protection in the flag that was over them ; and again 

 in 1854, when, after the issuing of the declaration by the Queen of 

 England (on the 2Sth March), it was supposed to be her Majesty's 

 intention to relax the right of search, the Attorney-General stated 

 in answer to a question in the House of Commons (30th March), 

 " That it never was intended to give up, nor did the declaration give 

 up, the right of searching neutral vessels. It was impossible to give 

 up that right, and this country still maintains its right to search 

 and seize vessels which carry enemy's despatches, or articles contra- 

 band of war." But whilst England thus reserved to itself this right, 

 she waived ite exercise during the war, and on the termination of 

 hostilities, concurred with France, Austria, Russia, Prussia, Sardinia, 

 and Turkey, in establishing the principle that "free ships make free 

 goods." 



The maritime declaration appended to the Treaty of Paris comprises 

 among others the following points : 



1 . The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the exception of con- 

 traljand of war. 



2. Neutral goods, except contraband of war,ore not liable to capture 

 under the enemy's flag. 



The United States, however, refused to concur iu this declaration, 

 unless it was further conceded that enemy's goods on board eneni . 

 chant ships should be allowed the same exemption as on board neutrals. 



At present therefore it appears that the right of search, abolished so 

 far as relates to enemy'i property on board neutral ships by the Treaty 

 of Paris, subsists as to the other points in respect of which it was 

 f.nn.rly exercised, namely, the carriage of troops, hostile des) 

 and contraband of war. (Arnold on ' Marine Insurance,' vol. i. p. 078.) 



The right of visitation and search, however, is by no means neces- 

 sarily confined to a time of war. Its exercise has always been admitted 

 to bo equally allowed \>\ international law in time oi' p. nee, though it 

 may not commonly have then been so frequently thought to be called 

 for. Tho very question of the seizure by one country of its subjects 

 erring in the mercantile navy of another, which was one of the main 

 subject* of dispute between England and America before the breaking 

 out of actual hostilities in 1812, may arise in a time of peace as well MM 

 in a time of war, though it* importance n<> doubt in less in the former 

 than in the latter. The chief questions connected with the right of 

 March, the number nf which is greatly reduced in a time of gi 

 peace, are those relating to the trading rights of neutrals ; but even of 

 these ome remain. Of late years, however, the right of sen. 

 become principally important in reference to the trade in slaves, whieh 

 has now been declared to be illegal by most of the great maritime 

 states. The right of visitation and search, however its exercise may 1 .< 



regulated, seems to afford tho only means of ascertaining whether or 

 no a veatel has got slaves on board ; but it is evident 1 1 

 opposed, for whatever reason, to the exercise of that right in > , 

 while declaring the slave trade to be illegal, refuse to allow that ille- 

 gality to be made an excuse for tlie vi.-itati.m of suspected ships bear- 

 ing its flag. It is only by expres* stipulation that the free exercise of 

 tho right can be established. I . hich has all along bee 



most iu the attempt to suppress the slave trade, has never objected to 

 the exercise of the right of search for this, or indeed for any other 

 legitimate object; but other nations, jealous of our predominant 

 maritime power, have, nt jK-rhaps very unnaturally, been exti 

 reluctant to concede it in this particular case. Probably the best 

 illustration of these remarks is afforded by the Ashburton 'i'lc.ity, and 

 the attitude of American publicists with reference to it. By the 6th 

 article of that treaty, each party was to maintain a separate sqi 

 on the coast of Africa for five years, and the cruisers of the respective 

 nations were to detain all vessels under American colours equipped for, 

 and engaged in, the slave trade ; that if proved to be American pro- 

 perty they should be delivered to an American cruiser; and if i 

 to be Spanish, Portuguese, Brazilian, or English pr. , 

 English cruiser. In the President's message (August 11, 1842), and in 

 the discussions in the American House of Representatives, it was 

 maintained, or attempted to be maintained, that the 8th article was a 

 substitute fur visitation and search ; but Sir R. Peel emphatically 

 declared that in acting upon the treaty England hod not abandoned 

 her chum to the right of visitation ; and Lord Aberdeen's despatch, 

 re-affirming the British doctrines on this subject, recorded the 

 mination of England not to depart from the principles she had con- 

 stantly asserted. Upon this treaty, the debates in the British Houses 

 of Parliament, the expressed opinion of the British Government, and 

 the instructions to its cruisers, considerable discussions have been 

 raised, and attempts have been made by American writers (among 

 whom Mr. W. B. Laurence's recent treatise on ' Visitation and S 

 deserves special notice) to show that the doctrines of England are 

 unwarranted by law, dangerous to the welfare of other countries, and 

 intended solely to promote the attainment of universal dominion under 

 the guise of humanity; that the time has come when such doctiim -.- 

 must be energetically opposed, and that if they coil be supported by an 

 appeal to the language of treaties, then it is the duty of the States of 

 the Union to insist upon the discontinuance of those treaties. 



Some further remarks on this subject are briefly made under the 

 article SLAVE, SLA\ 



S I ) A Si i\ S, CHANGE OF. The phenomena of the seasons may be 

 divided into those which always recur every year and those which are 

 different iu different years. We have in every year the same ,- 

 flion of longer and shorter days, with a summer and winter ; while the 

 summer of one year is of a higher temperature, and accompan. 

 finer days, than that of another. The unvarying phenomena < 

 explained by what we know of the sun's (or earth's) motion ; the vary- 

 ing phenomena belong to the science of meteorology, and depend upon 

 atmospheric and other circumstances, with which we have little or no 

 acquaintance. At any given moment, the light and heat re 

 from the sun, at any given place, depend upon the altitude of that 

 body in twu ways. In the first place, the lower the sun is, the greater 

 the thickness of the portion of the atmosphere which its rays h 

 traverse before reaching the spot ; the greater then is the light and 

 heat which is lost in the passage. In the second place, the ! 

 altitude of the sun, the less the actual quantity of light and heat 

 which falls upon any given spot. If A B be the diameter of a circular 



i N 



portion of the earth's surface, and if tho sun be seen in the dii 

 u M, the light whieh falls on that circle is a cylindi r :t|i tho 



diameter r n : but it' the sun be seen vertically, or in the direction UN, 

 the cylinder of ray i its diameter, besides whieh. the i 



the first cylinder are weaker than those of the second, as bavin;.' . 

 through more of the atmosphere. Neglecting this lat 

 the quantities of light and heat received when tin ran i< at twn dif- 

 ferent altitudes are as the sines of those altitudes. Tlm< th. 

 30 being 4 and that of P0 being 1, the quantity of light whirl! falls 

 on a given spot when the sun is vertical is double of that which falls 

 when its altitude U 30. 



The earth's axis preserves its direction throughout the whole 

 yearly motion. The consequence is, that places which are distant from 

 the equator have very unequal days at ditlercnt times of the year. 

 Si \.| The accompanying figure, which is generally given In 

 nection with this subject, represents the earth in its four principal 

 positions; the sun being at 3, anil N K'ing the north pole of the earth. 

 A is at the vernal equinox, tho intersection of the equator and ecliptic 

 posse* through the sun, and days and nights are equal jill over the 



