82 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON'. 



cigu enlistment; tliey are cx])ressly forbidden Ly tlio 

 Federal Constitution. Iler laws punish an a crime 

 all violation l»v individuals of the international rifrlits 

 of foreign Powers. Iler neutrality is active, not pas- 

 sive,— preventive, as well as punitive. She has no 

 maritime relations, it is true ; but, in dealing with un- 

 lawful etpiipments or expeditions l»y land, she ob- 

 serves rules of neutrality which are api)licable, in the- 

 ory and i)ractice, erpially to equipments or expedi- 

 tions lor naval warfare. Our own temporary act of 

 1S3S, which comprehends vehicles [on landj and ves- 

 sels [on water] in the same clause of criminality, af- 

 fords comjjlete answer to those Englishmen who have 

 superficially assumed that because 8\vitzerland is not 

 a maritime Powei', she [or a statesman of hers] could 

 not competently judge the case of the Alahcona or 

 the FJovida. Diligence to execute the law, — vifdlance 

 to prevent its violation, — is the same in Switzerland 

 as in Italy or Brazil, in Great Britain or the United 

 States. And the position of Switzerland, which re- 

 quires of her the spontaneous execution of her neu- 

 trality laws, had evident eflect on the mind of IMr. 

 StuMnplli to produce those conclusions of his against 

 Great Britain, which, as we shall see in the sequel, 

 were so grossly niisajiprehended and so angrily re- 

 sented by Sir Alexander Cockburn. 



At the time when the Swiss Government invited 

 Islw StaMuptli to act as Arbitrator for Switzerland 

 under the Treaty of Washington, he had full occupa- 

 tion in public or private affairs as a member of the 

 National Council and as President of the Federal 



