«> ALABAMA CLAIMS. 170 



insufliciently dlscourag-^d by any Government, are in- 

 deed fetteved by the three Ivules, as tliey were al- 

 ready, so far as morality or law conld do it, heing 

 classed by statnce witli i)iraey, pei;jnry, arson, murder, 

 and other kindred " Pleas of tlie Crown." True, there 

 is tendency of opinion in the United States, as there 

 is in Great Britain, to think that all rebellion is j)re- 

 sumptively wrong at home, and that all rebellion is 

 presumptively right every where else; but that is a 

 tlieoiy which has its inconveniences. In a word, there 

 is no possildc view of the subject in which Ji/ibu.sfr r- 

 ■i'sni is not a crime and a shame, without even the 

 moan excuse of possible but dishonor;djle benefits to 

 the United States. At all times, under all admiiiis- 

 trations, private ofjuipments in our ports, for the pur- 

 pose of hostilities against any country with which wo 

 were at peace, liave been treated as what they are, 

 criminal violations of the law of the land and of the 

 law of nations. Statesmen, jurists, and tribunals are 

 all of accord on this point. Contracts lor such equip- 

 ments are "so fraught with illegality and tur]>itude 

 as to be utterly null and void." ... " There can be no 

 question of the guilt and responsibility of a Govern- 

 ment which encourages or permits its i)rlvate citizens 

 to organize and engage in such predatoiy and unlaw- 

 ful expeditions against a State with which that Gov- 

 ernment is at peace." . . . "This i)rincij>le is univers- 

 ally acknowledged by the law of nations. It lies at 

 the foundation of all Government. It is, however, 

 more emphatically true in relation to citizens of the 

 United States." Such was the doctrine of the United 



