Star.
London, England, 1812-07-31 00:00:00

P 7---

LAX INMLIGENCEs.

ADMIRALTY COURT, JULY Ses
AMERICANSHIPPING.
romENT. IN THE CASE OF THE SHIP SNIPE.
SCOTT pronounced the judgment of
Sir Wiettara
j the case of the American ship Snipe,
the Couttnmeants
upon which had lasted for several
argije regret that the space afforded by our co.
Lars., willenable us give but a faint sketch of the
voluminous and eloquent speech of the Learned
eidge on this occasion. He began by stating, that
'ble of the great importance of the decision ia
eastthe principle which involved several
this case,
cases of capture under the Orders in Council,
ccher_. oil of May, .1812, he had directed his
bei°Ter:tteption to the arguments, which had been
alwrgedull°6;th- great zeal and ability on both sides, and
~ prepared to give his judgment. The cap•
wiwahbolgla eon" tended, that the ship was liable to con.
orn'fia- den under the Orders in Council, she having,
teen taken on the 28th of March last, entering the
my,r of Bourdeaux ; while, on the other hand, the
cents contended, that those Orders in Council
I;deased to operate before the capture, on account
ea French Decree, bearing date the 28th of April,
gal, baring repealed the Berlin and Milan Decrees,
to which those Orders had only been retaliatory mea-
so, which the British Government were pledged
.0111 from the date of the repeal of the French
- Without feeling it necessary to dwell nii-
rely on the history of all those transactions, he
shed pate generally, that in November, 180 G, the
Ruler of France published, in the most solemn and
authentic manner, his Berlin Decree, by which all
orals, trading to those countries, were liable to
capture. In January and November, 1807, the Bri-,
'sh Government published its retaliatory orders,
twhich were nut a full and complete retaliation, but
which were founded t n principles which appeared xo
ilioconsistent with tht.se of natural justice and the
Ins of nations. This was followed by the Milan de-
creed the enemy, denationalizing all vessels which
.rwriora to our Orders in Calmed, or to be viited
by British cruisers. In April, 1809, another modi-
fication of Our retaliatory measures took place in new
Orders in Council ; and in March, 1809, America
passed a Non.intercourse Act, both against France
and this country, declaring, however, that it should
it annulled with respect to either of the Powers that
should repeal those instruments of which it com-
plained. In c ,nsequence of this, M. Champagny,
(the Duke ef Cadore) µrote a letter to General Arm-
strong, sth August, 1810, informing him th at those
Decrees were repealed, and would cease to operate
against American commerce on the Ist of Novem-
ber in that year, accompanying this notification with
the condition, "that it was to be understood that
England also should abandon her Orders in Council,
andher w principles of blockade." This notification
was considered by the American Government as a
repeal, and she, in consequence, repealed her Non-
intercourse Act as with respect to France. This ht-
er had been contended to amount to a repeal of the
Decrees Jr) the arguments on the case of th. ship
For; but in the decision of that case he had not con-
Wend it as a repeal, Since that time, on the 10th
of March, in the present year, the Duke of Baasano,
in a State Paper. published in an official manner,
yoke of the Berlin and Milan Decrees as still eibst-
ig in full force, calling them the fundamental laws
tithe French empire, and boasting of their power-
operation against the commerce and the prospe-
rity of this country. On the 21st of April, the Bri-
tish Government published a Declaration, offering
to aunul her Orders in Council from the day that the
French Government should by a subsequeht Decree,
repeal the Berlin and Milan Decrees, and en the 2(411
of May they received i‘orri.the American Minister a
Par, purporting to be a copy of a French Decree,
of that import, but bearing d.ste the 28th of April,
1811. The British Government, not recognizing the
authenticity of this document, but wishing to cones-
Bate America, did, en the 2ftd of June last, issue a
Declaration, repealing the Orders in Council from
the 20th of May. As to captures made prior to 'the
10th of May, to which class the present case belong-
ed, this Declaration was silent. It kit them to the
elect of the: prior Declaration of April, which, con-
intently with the general law of nations, rested on
the principle of retaliation. As the claimants now coq-
tideled that the Bei lin and Milan Decrees were ac-
tually repealed by the French Decree of 1811, •it
Was for them to prove that those Decrees were so re-
pealed, and that they were repealed in such a manner
as to impose an obligation on other nations to take
notice of such a repeal. This sort of evidence, which
vas only to be got in the enemy's country, was per-
fectly accessible to the claimants (if any such evi-
dent; existed), but was not accessible to the cap-
Wl'. The &ilia and Milan Dccrees had been ush-
tied into the world with the greatest solemnity, and
published in the French official papers. There was
ne one who cr uld d.,ubt their existence or authenti-
city. If those Decrees were intended to be repealed,
why were they not repealed in a manner equally •
thentic and official ? In the month of March last they ,
were, however, tfficially spoken of by the French Go-
vernment as not only bsing in existence, but as flintier-
"al laws of the Empire. It that word carried any
meaning, it must imply that the French Government
Would
not abandon those Decree's. Those Decrees
had btu promulgated to the world in the most au-
thentic and public manner ; and if there had been any
intention uf repealing them, it mielit be expected
en every principle of good faith and honest policy,
•
that the revocation vb.uld he made equally public,
Cit at least that it should be made public to all those
whom it night concern. The rule was always de-
cretnm non olligat sell pro' n ulgaisio. This instrument
should :wear in such a shape as not to falsify itself,
et arty a traud upon the face of it. 11 its promul-
gation was not a matter of notoriety, but wrapped
up is-obscurity, it ceased to be a publication. There
sno ordinary occasion in the transactions of life
which an instrument. having fraud and•falsekood
the lace of it, would be 'allowed to have any ope-
r,sation in a Cow tof Law. The letter of the Duke of
"Tut; dated the sth August, 1810, began by stating
ne at ,s authorized to declare the Berlin and Milan
mecrees at an end." These words .were general ;
but alcrwards came she. condition, 44 it being under-
Itc!itail that Omar Britain will r: peal her Orders in
nuncil and her new principles of blockade, or that
nations will cause their flag to be respect:cr."
4'44 merely promising the repeal of those De-