Star.
London, England, 1811-06-15 00:00:00

. , . . . 4
i•jr the' purpOse'of Calling for my deciiirn, fmner be Tetnind to presume that no sit saustacuon is Iclt.-,-1
allowed to interpret it-for myself. and to aCt upon With respectto the.demand a warning. the oeciefs4
that interpretation. Ard to melt appears, that the themselves are full warning. They are the most ter. ,
tteclaration; clogged as it is with stipulations known mel admonitions, that could be given—and !Le ing
-to tie beyond the reach of all rational hope nt any : given and imrevoked, they require noitthiidiatyntice.
possrole compliance. is in e'Txt a renunciation of any : On the grounds of the present evidence, I there-
serions purpose of repealing those derrees. I think I fore see no reason to hold the'clainiants disehisrted;
inightinvAe the authority of the Government of the : but I do not proceed to an ultimate decision upon
Vnited Stites for detlying to this French declaration their interests, till I see the effect of that additiottal
the effect of an absolute repeal, when I observe that evidence which is prbmised to be produced upon the
the period which they have allowed to the British fact of the French retrictation of their decrees, said
6 Goveritinent for revoking our Orders in Coinicil t-x. to have been very recently received from Pails by
• tends' to the 2cl of February—an allowance which. the American Charge d'Affaires in this Country.--.
'could hardly have been mad..., if the revocation on the Having no official !means of communication with.
'which
trance had really taken place at the time- to Foreign Ministers, I Abell hope ton
*leftrecte the intor-
: Which that declaration purports to refer. 1 r iation in a regular Mower, thro he transmis-
In.itl' le absence of any declaration of the British i stott of the BritisleOffices.of State.
Gewetnrnent to such an effect, there is a total failure • Final adjudication suspended.
of elf other evidence, (if the Court were at liberty to FRIDAY, JUNE 14.
.accept other evidence as satisfactor ) that the French This being the first day of Trinity Term, the Lord
decrees had Jieen revriked. - If I Were driven to (le- Chattcellor, accompanied by the other Judges, pro-
ii-je upon that evidence, independent of all evidence. ceeded in the usual state to Westminster Hall, and
to tie regularly furnished by the Gbvernment tinder I opened their respective Courts. In the .
*ltOite authority 1 sit, I think lam bound to pro. • . • COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
. ' '

No motion of importance occurred during the:day.—
Mr. Campbell made the customary report of thentim.
hers, and state of health, of the convicts on board the
Hulks, and at the different stations •at Portsmouth,
Sheerness, Fort Cumberland, &c.- 'l'ke rest of shu
day was occupied in Justification of Bail, and motions
of course.

. .
nisunce-thet no such revocation has taken place, and
therefore that the Orders in Council subsist in perfect
justice, mai-ell as io complete authority: ' .
It is incumbent ern me, I think, to take notice of
en objection of Dr. Her3sert.e, to the ixittenee of the
Orders in 'Councilertiaineely, thee Banish objects are,
notwithstanding, perenitted teleade with France, and
_ehai a blenkade whkb ex eludeethetubjeetinf *II other
' ‘chitntrfiefrobe trading Vitia-ports of the enemy, arid
at ibe eame.time peinaieSeny access to those ports to
the eubjects Of ile State• which imposes it, is sleep-
ier, illegal, and null. And I agree to-the position,
• that a blockade, imposed for tleeptirPies'• of obtain.
Orr a commercial monopoly for the private advert.-
- • 4 that State which leys on 'etch blockade, is il-
-1 and void on the very principle upon sv'e;ch it is
~ tn.ded. Dot. in the first *place, (..letugh that is a
Metter of inferior considenitioe), I :.•.m not aware that
any such trade between the subjects of this country
aft i trance is generally permitted.... LiCences have
kik ii granted, certainly, in no ineousider .ble num-
teat ; but it -never has been aeetred that particular
licences would vitiate a b.ockade. If it were mate-
ri I isethe present case, it Might be observed, 'that
ett ny more
.of. these lieettees had. boen granted te fo-
re.gti ships thanio British ships, to go from this coon
try to Ft....cc and to return here from thence with
e:ttecies. • But, secondly, what still more clearly and •
nerally takes this matter Out of the reach of the ob.
&op., is the-particular nature and character of this
blo
ckade Of France, if it is so to be charactetized.
I; Is het an original, independent act of blockade, to
bi-: governed by. the conirnon rules that belong simply
• se that operation of war. It is in this instance a coen-
',l-acting reflex measure, compelled by the act of the
'veiny, and as such subject to other consideratiees
sfeiing out of its peculiarly distinctive charecter.--
' (ranee declared that the subjects of other States
should have no access to England ; England, on that
sficount, declared that the • subjects of other States
ihonld 'have no access to Frailer. So fir this retalia-
tory lenieleide (if blockade it is to be celled) is coex-
tensive with the princ:ple. Neutrals are prohibited to
trade wiih France, because they are prohibited by
Mita- front trading with , England. Engl and ac-
tivates:the right, which it would not otherwise possess
eh ptehibit that intercourse, by virtue of the act of
?ranee. Heating so arqiiited it, it exercises it to its
fblietrent, with entire tompetetree of legal 7intlu
eind having. so done, it is notefiir other conntries to en-
quite how far this country may be able to'relieve it-
stif ftrrthet fi em the aggressions of that enemy. The
case is settled between them and itself by the rind-
. Ole on which the intercourse is prohibited. .
•If the convenience of this country before this prohi-
bition required. some occesiosial intercourse with the
enemy; no justice that is due to other countries re-
quires that such an intercourse should be su-pended
01 account of any prohibition imposed upon them, on
a ground so totally- unconnected with the ordinary
Prieciples of a common tae 'sure of blockade, from
which ii is taus distinguished by its retaliatory cha-
racter. Tire last question is, are there any circum-
stances addrtsed to equitable consideration that can
relieve the claimants front the penal effects of these
Orders ? Certainly, if any could be urged that arose
from the conduct of the British Government itself,'
they might be urged with a powerful• and even irre- ,
sistible effect—but if they found themselves in thee,
fraud of the enemy, orin the misapprehensions of the
American Government induced by *the fraud of the
them, they found tin claim'on the British Govern-
aunt or On British tribunals. In the one case they
inust resort for redress to a quarter where, I fear, it
is not to be found—to the Government of the enemy.
In the other, where, I presume, it is to be found—to
• the Government of thew Owe country.
Upon the declaration of the 'American Government
I have alneady said as much as consists with the tee
spect which I am boned to pay to the.declaration'ef
a foreign Government professedly neutral. The cos-
tom-louses of that country, sty the claimants, cleared
us cot for France publicly, and without reserve. They
did so, but they left the claimants to pursue all requi...
site measures for their own security, in expectation I
presume, that they would inform themselves, by legal
inquiry, whether the blockade continued to exist, if
its continuance was uncertain. That it was perfectly.
uncertain in their own apprehensions,' is clearfmm
the tenor of these letters of iasttuctions to the different
masters of these vessels.
In these letters, which are numerous, all. is proble-
matical between' hope and fear—a contest between
the desire of setting first to a tempting market on
the one side, and the possible hazard of British cap-
titre en the other I, and it is to be regretted, that the
• earetuess of mercantile peculation has 'prevailed
over the sense of danger. In such a state of mind,
acting siren citcumstincet, the party must thulere
stand that he takes the chance of events—of ad.e
Vantage, if the eventewhich he hopes •for has taken,,
, plate,stad. Of loss if it has nit. It is his•owe advee'
tore, and he must takeprO or loss as the evesit may:
ehrovieitiern. He Cannot take die adiantagewitke
uutubelasetrd of losi,thleis by resorting to British
rite in the Channel, where- certain infortnetioti but
be. obtained, vii' tliftrtrth of-which allyifostects of
loss oe profit may safely be sospeade,dte'llti-
• yish-Osiverninent no resisansibility can be anted:
Tbeiesiteite fetesbou'b iebolie as socin as they Were. a..
sessir at ga itititioitietref the Needs sieltate.

. • CONSISTORY COURT, JUNE_
JEVFEWS, fi.kelhf Cad FORSTER o vonsTert.
• This was a suit of nullity of marriage, institute .1 on
the part of Elizabeth Forster, tlie,wife,.against Au-
gustus tscsar rooter, her husband, by reason of mj-
noritV.. It appeared that the parties mere mulled at
Portsea, on the 7th of September, 11303. and that they
cohabited tdgether as man and wife for tive years,
when a separation took plas,e, and the suit in question
wag brought, on the ground alledged by the %!•illy
being a-minor at the time, and the nut -consenr Of her
father. In support of tlri allegation, the evidetiCe of
the father .and mother of the party was produced,
likewise the rr gistry of herbaptism an ..1 marriage. which
r went to prove that she was little more than Hi years
of age when the.marriage was solemnized.
The Court (I..iir Wri. Scow) after hearing the Ad-
vocates on both sides, was clearly of opinion that the
patty. had proved her case, and that she was entitled
to the remedy prayed, and pronounced for the same
accorduigly.

i, .''' .