Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1808-04-23

are 3rohibiteribr it from carrying the manu-
features or productions OF the countries beyone
! the Cane of Good Hope, in like manner to
s,,cs, colonies. You observe also that as the "
S. are authorised to carry from their OWL
ports the productions OF enemies COLONIES C
Eurape, they are prohibited from carrying
those productions to the southern coast OF the
Mediterranean, or beyond the Cape of Good
Hope, or TO any other enemy or neutral COLO
mics In this quarter. 80 :,
7 am persuaded that you will be satisfied
ON further consideration, chat this constfuc'
ton of the article is untounded. 1t IS NOT the
object of the article to regulate the generai
commerce of the countries, or to compromie
their claims in an: case to which the regula.
ton does not explicitly extend. The regula-
ton prescribed by it applies to case or con-
troversy between the parties, IN point OF
immediate contact, and 1t was the object the
article to adjust the controversy inthat point
IF we advert to the issue which was made up
between them, as clearly defined by the or
ders of the British government, the decisions
of the courts of admiralty under them, and
the discussions which took place between the
governments on the subject, We shall Ind
that in no view can the constructions when
YOU impute to this article, be supported,
The issue lately made up between the par
ties involved solely the question, What cir
cumstances, or acts, to be performed IN the
neutral country, were necessary to break the
continuity of the voyage from the colony OF
an enemy to its parent country or some enemy
country in Europe? This point has been set
tied. as was D e ,umed, by former decisions
of the British courts of admiralty, and expa-
nations of the British government, in a man
ner which was so far satisfactory 10 the y. >.
as to Justify belief, that II those decisions
and explanations had been adhered to, the eX-
istine Q. controversy on this subject would not
have arisen. But in 1905 the British courts
of admiralty insisted on the performance or
new acts In the u 5. or what amounted to
the same thing, extended by construction the
doctrine of former decisionl IN such a man
ner as to make the performance OF new acts,
such too as were OF nature highly onerous
and oppressive, indispensably necessary. On
this special point the parles were at issue,
and the sole object OF the article was to adj
lust by temporary arrangement, the contro.
versy on that point The rights OF the par
ties, in every 9th er instance, not within the
scope of the adjustment, were to remain, OF
course, untouched, and, IN that particular
one, TO revive, at the expiration OF the term
limited for the duration OF the article.
A coocise analysis OF The several orders
of the Bri ish government relative 10 the
trade of neutra! powers with enemy colo.
MES, will place, 10 q clear polnt Of view,
The erouud Of the controversy between the
parues, and the precise object and eject CT
he regulation proposed by The article an-
der consideration The frs order bears
date on the Oh November, 1898. II Iii.
rected tie British :iuizers to bring IN for
lawful adiodics,ion al vessels laden with
goods The produce OF any colony OF France,
OF carrying any provisions or supplies for
such colony, That der amounted, in ex,
press terms, to declaration OF war against
the neural powers, and 1t was issued IN
that sp,ril bv the British government The
polcy, how r, which dictated the order,
did not last iooS. Events sooE produced
change Of policy, and wlh il revoca.
,iop, or TO use the techoicai PHI sseoiogy
of the admiralty, re!aaat!ps of the OF
der. The second order was OF the Ssh
January, 1894 Ii directed the ctuizeTs
"to bring 10 all vessels laden with goods,
the produce of the Preach West iudsa isl.
auds, and coming directly from aoy port of
the said islands 10 any Poit 10 Europe"
This order being directory prescribed the
case in which neutral vessels engaged 10
such uade should be seized, and thereby
confned he seizure TO thar case only. No
vessel EGG ged 10 thar trade which did cot
come within the scope OF the order, could
be touched. Thus the e!iect Of the order
was 90 inhibit the direct trade Of the u.
G hAtmAen enemy colonies and Europc. in