The Sun.
London, England, 1862-11-12 00:00:00

v
:.t4 t kvp • .-=-:..-4, g
miniTniE Li IV.
'-‘s---, -
-----
4 41. s 01.11TonL ra y evog TEe first =cling t
Juridical Socie4 this se,sion was held at their rosins,
St. Martin's•pkee, -Trafalgar_-_aquare. The Right
Hon. Lord Stanley, MT., occupied the chair.
Mr. WESTLAKE read a paper on " The Proposed
Alterations in the Law of Blockade." The learned
gentleman said the subject he had undertaken to
deal with was comprised under two heads—The
law of a.blockade as it exists, and the changes that
arc proposed to be made in it. A lawful blockade
was that which had been established according to
laws-laid- down by the majority of -the_ common-
wealth of nations. lle drew a distinction bei Wet 11
international law and, constitutional law, and statcd
that the knowledge of the former Wave very little
assistance to the constitutional lawyer. Referring
to the history of the Northern States in the 12th
and 15th centuries, it appeared that before a neutral
could be touched he must have done something to
place himself in the position of an enemy. There
were three ways in which he might infringe his
neutrality. The first was shipping goods for the
enemy, and hence neutral ships did not then cover
the
property; the second was conveying
troops articles contraband of war; and the third
eneamudy's
any attempt to relieve a place besieged by sea.
Those rules, however, were greatly modified by the
Dutch in 1584, chiefly in regard to the carriege of
enough goods on board of neutral vessels, prohibit-
ing conveyance not only of military supplies, and
such other commodities as might protract the siege,
but also goods of every kind. He then traced sub-
sequent modifications of the rules which were from
time to time established by the several nations of
Europe, extending the list of contraband articles,
and applying the blockade not only to a besieged
port, but also to an extent of coast line. A blcek-
ado to be binding must be effective, and this led
him to discuss the question of what the law ought
to be. The only escape he saw from the perplexi-
ties of the present system was to regard commer-
cial blockade as lawful only when the neutral per-
formed an un-neutral act, and thus put himself in the
place of an enemy, and it should only apply to be-
sieged places and to contraband of war, and not to
regulate commerce, as had formerly been the case.
After considerable discussion,
Lord STANLEY said it was hardly possible to deal
with a question of that importance and magnitude
in a manner that was not very fragmental. A per-
son who is leading a public life could not pledge
I himself to an opinion on this group of questions
without great consideration. He did not think
they had sufficient knowledge of the various ques-
tions involved, nor was the public mind sufficiently
formed to deal with them. If he made any remarks
he wished it to be understood that it was only for
the purposerof suggesting questions that he should
like to have solved by others. They could not
separate the question of blockade from maritime
power., In the attempt to conclude a war with
as little bloodshed as possible, it was a question
whether the interests of neutrals should be con-
sulted. NV hen neutrals were affected by a war in
which they had no interest it was a hard case, but
it_was one of those hard cases, only on a larger scale,
of the individuals in whose fields the warlike ope-
rations were carried on. To make war seldom, to
make it uncostly and as little bloody as possible,
any limitations to the power of preventing com-
merce such as those proposed would have the effect
of strengthening the weaker party against the
stronger. They would tend to equalise the forces
of the combatants, and by that means tend to pro-
tract the war. In the present day nothing has
such a tendency to put a stop to war as the inter-
ference of neutral powers. The nations were day
by day acting more upon one another—influencing
one another. All wars were now fought by general
concurrence of opinion of the surrounding powers,
and it was essential that they should be brought to
an end. When two nations—under such circum-
stances as they now saw in America—were at war,
one was entirely debarred from trade, and every
neutral power felt it. The result was that every
power not engaged in the war had a direct inte-
rest in putting a stop to it. The question was,
if they let two nations go on at war unre-
stricted in their commerce, whether neutral nations
would have so direct an interest in bringing the
war to a conclusion. They would say, " You may
go on fighting as long as you like, for you do not
injure us," and the result would be that the com-
bating powers would be weakening and exhausting
ono another, and losing their influence in the scale
of nations. It is, therefore, certain that it is the
interest of all nations which feel the effects of the
war. There was another aspect to look at it in
which it had not been noticed, probably because it
was not thought of sufficient importance. It was
that the wars were now not carried on by the whole
male population of a nation, but only by a class of
the population, therefore there was not so much
suffering as there used to be. There was a 'great
pressure upon the people for the expenses of a war ;
bat as the wars of the present time were carried on
mostly by loans, the people did not feel it so much,
and if there was not some pressure on them in an-
other way, there would be no desire on their parts
to terminate hostilities. If no trading interests
suffered by the continuance of the war, it might be
a question whether that peace party, which sooner
or later springs up in a country, would spring up
as soon, or have as much power as they had when
they did rise. There were three questions they
would have to consider in advocating the proposed
alteration—First, whether they were not equalising
the powers of the combatants, and enabling them to
continue the contest ? secondly, whether they were
not taking away the inducements to neutrals to
bring about a peace ? and thirdly, would they not
diminish the interest of the people of the belligerent
countries in asking for a cessation of hostilities P
it was one of those questions where the advantages
and disadvantages were so nearly balanced as to
prevent them rushing to a conclusion on a question
which might affect the country so seriously. There
was one thing also to be borne in mind, that what-
ever laws they might make there was no power
to enforce them. For instance, if France,
England, and Russia were engaged in a death
struggle, and each believed that their only
chance of existence was to do that which they
thought best for themselves, what power was there
to prevent them ? It was therefore for them to con-
sider whether it would be well for them to make
rules which, at the most important crisis, there was
no power to compel the observance of.

The discussion was then adjourned, and a vote of
thanks to the noble chairman terminated the pro-
ceedings.

Captain Flackmann, a bravo Alsatian, retired
from the service, and living on his pension in the environs
of Paris, last week appeared before the Tribunal of Correc-
tional Police to answer for an offence committed by his dog
Pochard, who, while in company with his master at a cafe,
had
bitten a gentleman's leg. From the explanations given
before the Tribunal, it appeared that the captain had a pas-
sion for angling and also fur coffee, and that his dog was his
constant companion everywhere. During one of the fine
days last month the captain. accompanied by Pochard, was
enjoying his usual amusement on the banks of the Seine,
watching his float with eager eye as ho saw symptoms of a
bite, but the fish managed to take the bait without the
hook. Disappointed of his prize, he determined to make
another attempt, and looked round for his beit, a piece of
cheese, which he had laid on the bank. The cheese was
gone, and he reproached Pochard with the theft. The next
day ho lost the cheese again in the same manner, and re-
luctantly gave Pochard a thrat-hing to teach hire better
manners. On the third day the captain was again at the old
spot, and having caught a fish was going to bait again,when
he saw a rat in the act of running off with the cheese. Be-
ing at once convinced of pour Pochard's innocence, and
struck with remorse for having unjustly punished him, the
for
captain loaded with caresses, and promised to make
amends by giving him a cup of coffee in the evening,tobefond
of that beverage with plenty of sugar in t. ter
Pochard had so far adopted his master's tastes a
the captain went to his cafe, and
c)rdetred t vft
r soon finished
it. After
the dcupsin no
orf
coffee—for himself and Pochard. The la c
his share, and, wanting wore,
nose rather too near thes person sitting at the next
cup of
table. This liberty was happened to approach his
somewhat roughly resented, and
wheng remonstrated with the person,
h
ensued, anfn ollowed by a quarrel, in which
high
wCoarpdts.
Pochard took part with his master, and bit the person's
leg rather se
"rely. The injured p%rty appealed to the
a
and .the tribunal, after hearing hoth
aides, eondemned Capt. Flackmann to pay a fine of 16f.,
with 15f. damages, for the plaintiff. The captain left tbo
court vowing vengeance against all water-rats.