The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-01-23


ICatholic M.Jehy, and that call merchandise
may be transported by them to other countries
IN war with Spain rs was allowed before TIE 6,;a
GUAR" The laa expre!lion is properly conilru.
Ied by our author to be mode of dcfcribine
the indefinite right TO trade, as If no zvar had a.
lrlisn, and consequently to enter into aay new
lchannelso of trade, which might be opened to
them" The treaty of Cog between France aud
the u. Provinces the treaty of Bre,!a i'm LOG
between the u. Provinces and England that of
1872 between France and Sweden, that of l675
between Sweden and the ". Provinces de-
cIaration made in 1916 by Spain and the u.
| Provinces confirming the treaty of 1850 the
| treaty Of 1918 between the fame provinces and
France of 1879, between Sweden and the
lame of 1879, between Fra:ce aud the United
Provinces; of 1901, between Dcnmark and the
U. Provinces of l7I6, between France and the
Hanic towns; and many others confirm the
fame doctrine: That is, they all fecurc to
the power remaining at peace, the right
OF trading In all countries al 0ny time, in all ar
tlcles not contraband, and 20 al. places not
bockaded. Such at leaf is the liquidation of all
ofthem with flight fhadc of difference but
there is not one of them which recognizes the
late Britiih ditinttioa bctweeH trade Gnut dur
ing peace and opened in time of war.
To this lift are to be ALTO added all the trea-
ties and conventions, entered into i'm the wears
u.
trality. To this lift too "of the conventional
monuments of Europe" we may add the "tef.
timony otthe only nation at once civilized and
independent in the American HeniIphere. The
U. States have or have had treaties with France
Holland, Sweden, RufEa, Spain and c. Bri-
tain, and in all of thefe except THAT with Great
Britain, they have pot;ively maintained the
principle that nentra!s may trade freely between
neutral and belligerent ports, and between one
~ lt,(rp
the fame or different jurifdftionr." The trea-
ty with C. Britain was filent. "It merely
omitted liquidation on the fuhie6t, as it did on
many others, contained i'm other treaties"
2. The lift of treaties to which G.. Britain was
party, confirms the fame opinion. The trea-
ties with Sweden in 1854, 1856, and 1901, fe-
cure the right of trading with the enemies of
the other, with the ufual exceptions of con-
traband and blockade. A treaty with Spain
in 1867, with the United Provinces in the
fame year, with Denmark in 1860, and 1870,
in the latter of which the trade of colo
nlss is for the firfttine introduced into treaties,
all contain fimiar ttipu!ations. In declaration
{, of the fame date with the marine treaty. of
Dec. /, 1914, with the u. Provinces, it is fiat
ell as the true meaning of the latter, that the
| lli;ps of either maynot only pafs and trade from
ne"fr0i Port or place to place in enuity
1oisb the other party, or from place in enmity
10 neutral place, out allO from port
place IN enmity to port place in enmity
with the other, whether the faid places belong
to one and tie fame enemy to feveral enc
mics. frongcr contradiction could not
pof'ihy exit to the Britiih doctrine. But why
mould we multiply fmiar inttances Our
author enumerates % other treaties, in which
this doctrine is not only not countenanced, but
contradieted by provlions Gmilar to thoie we
have mentioned. In the treaty with Ruilia
| OF Sly June 1901, which contributes one
OF that number, the provfon is mot explicit
In article Sd. Sea. g, it is ffipulated that the
effects on board neutral fhips fall be free, with
the exception of contraband of war and of
Fne,ny'J property; and that under the latter de-
nomination ihali not be comprifed in any cafe,
the merchandise of the produce, growth or
manufacture of the countries at svar which
houId have been acquired by the fub,eets of
the neutral power, and fhoud be tran(bortea
on their account. Can any thing be more evil
dent than that an exemption is here given to the
colonial, as well AS the eoaj2i1g trade of belIi-
gereDs nations?
| Such then Gays, our author) is the ac-
cumulated and irreiiftible teltmony borne by
G. b. in her own treaties, againh the doctrine,
aflered by her."
In fact there is one treaty only, which was
difcoyered by OUR author in his elaborate re-
fearch " for long period of time and through
vouminous collections, which formed an ex-
ception to the general MATS" This was in
| Holland. We mult refer to our author, for an
explanation of the reafons that gave birth to
this diplomatic phenomenon.