America, however, declining to accept this proposal.
Views of the Committee thereon,
America was invited to be a party to this general
international agreement, but demurred, and coupled
at first her assent to the abolition of privateering,
with the condition that private property at sea should
no longer be subject to capture. Finally, she refused
to be a party to a convention, whereby she would be
precluded from resorting to her merchant marine for
privateering purposes, in case she became a belligerent.
But this, in the opinion of the Committee, was not
surprising, as the United States had obtained the
recognition of the rights of neutrals, for which she
contended throughout a long period of hostilities,
and Great Britain had surrendered those rights without
any equivalent from her. The Committee were
therefore of opinion that our Shipowners would
thereby be placed at an immense disadvantage in
the event of a war breaking out with any important
European Power. Indeed, they went so far as
to give it as their deliberate conviction that "the
whole of our carrying trade in the event of a great
European war would be inevitably transferred to
American and other neutral bottoms."
"We must therefore," they continued, "either secure the general consent of all nations to establish the immunity of merchant ships and their cargoes from the depredations of both privateers and armed national cruisers during hostilities, or we must revert to the maintenance of our ancient rights, whereby, relying upon our maritime superiority, we may not merely hope to guard unmolested our merchant shipping in the prosecution of their business, but may capture enemy's goods in neutral ships, and thus prevent other nations from seizing
