pecially courts of admiralty, where proceedings so often affect the rights and interests of citizens of foreign states and govern

ments.

M. d'Argaïz complains that the vessel and cargo were sold, and that loss thereby happened to the owners. But all this was inevitable, and no blame attaches on account of it to the tribunal. In cases of an allowance for salvage, if the owner be not present and ready to pay the amount, the property must necessarily be sold, that the proceeds be properly apportioned between owner and salvor. This is a daily occurrence in every court of admiralty in the world. Sufficient notice of the intended sale was given in legal form, in order that the claimants might be present, or might, if they pleased, prevent it, by paying the amount awarded for salvage, and receive their property.

The Chevalier d'Argaïz complains that Messrs. Montes and Ruiz suffered an unjust imprisonment in the United States. The undersigned cannot but think that such an allegation of injury, put forth in behalf of Messrs. Montes and Ruiz, is not a little extraordinary. These persons themselves had held in unjust and cruel confinement certain negroes who, it appeared on trial, were as free as themselves, and these negroes, finding themselves within the protection of equal laws, sought redress, by a regular appeal to those laws, for the injuries which they had suffered. The pursuit of this redress by the injured parties, it appears, subjected Messrs. Ruiz and Montes to a temporary imprisonment. In the judgment of enlightened men, they will probably be thought to have been very fortunate in escaping severer consequences.

M. d'Argaïz's note contains a paragraph of the following tenor: "The undersigned cannot in any way admit the supposition advanced by the Secretary of State, that, 'even had the negroes been at any time slaves, they would have become, by their killing and escape from lawful bondage, assassins and pirates, whose delivery to the government of Spain, not having been provided for in any stipulations of the treaty of 1795, would have been a matter of comity only, not to be demanded as a right.' The treaty of 1795, unquestionably, does not provide for the delivery of pirates or assassins, but only because the contracting parties could never have imagined that a case like the present could have occasioned doubts of any

kind, and because the point was so clear that they did not think it necessary to take it into consideration. Who can foresee the horrible consequences which may result, as well in the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico as in the Southern States of the Union, should the slaves come to learn, and there will be no want of persons to inform them, that, on murdering, killing, and flying from lawful captivity whensoever they may be in transportation from one point of the islands to another, and coming to the United States, the delivery of them, on account of their having murdered, killed, or fled, cannot be demanded as a right? The undersigned leaves to the characteristic penetration of the Secretary of State [the task of imagining] the severe, incalculable evils which may be occasioned by realizing this supposition."

The undersigned must beg leave to differ entirely from M. d'Argaïz in regard to the rule of law for delivering up criminals and fugitives from justice. Although such extradition is sometimes made, yet, in the absence of treaty stipulations, it is always matter of comity or courtesy. No government is understood to be bound by the positive law of nations to deliver up criminals, fugitives from justice, who have sought an asylum within its limits. The government of the United States has had occasion to hold intercourse on this question with England, France, Russia, Denmark, and Sweden; and it understands it to be the sentiment of all these governments, as well as the judgment of standard writers on public law, that, in the absence of provisions by treaty, the extradition of fugitive offenders is a matter resting in the option and discretion of every government.

The undersigned has thus once more gone over the circumstances of this case, and stated the view which the gov ernment of the United States has of it. He sincerely and confidently hopes that the Chevalier d'Argaïz will perceive that this government has violated none of its obligations to Spain, and done no injustice, in any manner whatever, to any Spanish subject.

The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to the Chevalier d'Argaïz assurances of his high consideration. DANIEL WEBSTER.

THE CHEVALIER D'ARGAÏZ, &c.

SOUND DUES AT ELSINORE, AND THE GER

MAN ZOLL-VEREIN.

Mr. Webster to the President of the United States.

Department of State, Washington, May 24, 1841. SIR, There are two subjects connected with the foreign commerce of the United States to which the Secretary of State considers it to be his duty to call the attention of the President at the earliest opportunity.

The first is, the collection of Sound dues, or the tax payable at Elsinore, laid by the Danish government upon the cargoes of vessels passing through the Sound, into and out from the Baltic Sea.

The right of Denmark to levy these dues is asserted on the ground of ancient usage, coming down from the period when that power had possession of both shores of the Belt and Sound. However questionable the right, or uncertain its origin, it has been recognized by European governments in several treaties with Denmark, some of them entered into at as early a period as the fourteenth century; and inasmuch as our treaty with that power contains a clause putting us on the same footing, in this respect, as other the most favored nations, it has been acquiesced in, or, rather, has not been denied, by us.

The treaty of 1645, between Denmark and Holland, to which a tariff of the principal articles then known in commerce, with a rule of measurement and a fixed rate of duty, was appended, together with the subsequent one between the same parties in 1701, amendatory and explanatory of the former, has been generally considered as the basis of all subsequent treaties, and among them of our own, concluded in 1826, and limited to continue ten years from its date, and further until the end of one

year after notice by either party of an intention to terminate it, and which is still in force.

Treaties have also been concluded with Denmark by Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Prussia, and Brazil, by which, with one or two exceptions in their favor, they are placed on the same footing as the United States.

There has recently been a general movement, on the part of the Northern powers of Europe, with regard to the subject of these Sound dues, which seems to afford to this government a favorable opportunity, in conjunction with them, for exerting itself to obtain some such alteration or modification of existing regulations as shall conduce to the freedom and extension of our commerce, or, at least, toward relieving it from some of the burdens now imposed, which, owing to the nature of our trade, operate, in many instances, very unequally and unjustly on it in comparison with that of other nations.

The ancient tariff of 1645, by which the payment of these dues was regulated, has never been revised, and by means of the various changes which have taken place in commerce since that period, and of the alteration in price in many articles therein included, chiefly in consequence of the settlement of America, and the introduction of her products into general commerce, it has become quite inapplicable.

It is presumed to have been the intention of the framers of that tariff to fix a duty of about one per cent. ad valorem upon the articles therein enumerated; but the change in value of many of those commodities, and the absence of any corresponding change in the duty, has, in many instances, increased the ad valorem from one per cent. to three, four, and even seven; and this generally upon those articles which form the chief exports of the United States, of South America, and the West India Islands: such as the articles of cotton, rice, raw sugar, tobacco, rum, Campeachy wood, &c.

On all articles not enumerated in this ancient tariff it is stipulated, by the treaty of 1701, that the "privileged nations," or those who have treaties with Denmark, shall pay an ad valorem of one per cent.; but the value of these articles being fixed by some rules known only to the Danish government, or at least unknown to us, this duty appears uncertain and fluctuating, and its estimate is very much left to the arbitrary discretion of the custom-house officers at Elsinore.

It has been contended by some of the public writers in Denmark, that goods of privileged nations, carried in the vessels of unprivileged nations, should not be entitled to the limitation of one per cent. ad valorem, but should be taxed one and a quarter per cent., the amount levied on the goods of unpriv ileged nations; and also, that this limitation should be confined to the direct trade; so that vessels coming from or bound to the ports of a nation not in treaty with Denmark should pay on their cargoes the additional quarter per cent.

These questions, although the former is not of so much consequence to us, who are our own carriers, are still, in connection with each other, of sufficient importance to render a decision upon them, and a final understanding, extremely desirable.

These Sound dues are, moreover, in addition to the port charges of light money, pass money, &c., which are quite equal to the rates charged at other places, and the payment of which, together with the Sound dues, often causes to vessels considerable delay at Elsinore.

The port charges, which are usual among all nations to whose ports vessels resort, are unobjectionable, except that, in this case, they are mere consequences of the imposition of the Sound dues, following necessarily upon the compulsory delay at Elsinore of vessels bound up and down the Sound with cargoes, with no intention of making any importation into any port of Denmark, and having no other occasion for delay at Elsinore than that which arises from the necessity of paying the Sound dues, and, in so doing, involuntarily subjecting themselves to these other demands.

These port duties would appear to have some reason in them, because of the equivalent; while, in fact, they are made requisite, with the exception, perhaps, of the expense of lights, by the delay necessary for the payment of the Sound dues.

The amount of our commerce with Denmark, direct, is inconsiderable, compared with that of our transactions with Russia, Sweden, and the ports of Prussia and the Germanic Association on the Baltic; but the sum annually paid to that government in Sound dues, and the consequent port charges, by our vessels alone, is estimated at something over one hundred thousand dollars.

The greater proportion of this amount is paid by the articles