Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1808-04-14
fcoNTINuED.l

are diseiogaished by the distance CT their
ssussion. Decisions of the British court
Of admiralty, have SO far respected this
peculiarly as 10 sdmit want OF lntorma.
ton as a plea for going to,a blockaded port,
whsrc such plea wsuld be retnsssd q 60! g less
remore countries. Bat more than This may
fairly be claimed. "a vessel, knowing that
partjsplar blockade existed Two months
before may well copjecsufe that before.
her arrival; at the port which will require
two months more. The blockade will have
ceased aod may accordingly clear and
e:eer for such port with an honest inten.
sion, 80 case OF finding ON her approach,
she fact otherwise, not 10 astemps an ma
lawful entrance. To condemn vessels un-l
der such circumstances would be manifest
ly unlusr; aud TO restrain shem from a
distau; voyage TO por. once 10 state OF
blockade, until information of a change
xhaii have travelled a like distance, muss
produce delay and uncertainty hule shors
of an absolute prohibition of the commerce.
To require them even 20 go out OF their
course, TO seek at othtr ports, Information
on the subject, would be an unreasonable
imposition. The British government can
have little objection to this article, after
defining blockades as is agreed with Rus.
sia, aud is as here proposed !. since our
distance is of itself security against any
concert with the blockaded, for surrePsl.
sious entries, which mighs be a.semp'edby
nearer advensurers; aud since 10 the case
of b.ockades by force actually present,
preliminary Ho.icc may be required without:
impairiug their efficacy, as might be the
case with blockades, such as the preceding
article gusrds against.
The only difference between the articles
as standing 10 rho different c5lomns, con-.
sis,s in the preamble 10 that which is 10 be
ADMITTED, if che proposition of the other
should not succeed. The article is prefer.
able withohs the recital of any reason par
ticular TO the u S. because as naked SIT.
pslation, it streng hers instead of weaken
Ing general principle friendly to neasral
and pacific nations.
3 On articles 8, 9 So 10. These are arii-
Giles which are known TO have been long
wished and contemplated on ,he par. Of
Great Britain, and together with the jus
sice, ADD 10 many views the expediency OF
Great Britain herself of the articles desired
on our part, may induce her TO accede 30
the whole. The articles are 10 Substance
the same with a project offered to she Ame.
rica % Standardization 10 the year 1900, by
Mr. Liston, who appears 10 haze borrow
editfrom spending sripula.lons 10 the
convention between the u, S. and France
% the year The project was at
that rme dropped, owing perhaps IN part
% the change 10 the head OF the department
of state, between whom ane Mr.. sListon
Il had been discussed, aud principally, to
fhe difficulty of combining with it, proper
sripulations against British improvements
on the high seas. Without such 40 tqui-
valens, the project had little to recon mend
it TO the II. s. Considered by i,self. il was
cles, under some obscurity of expression,
was thought TO favor the British percussion
60 impress British seamen from American
vessels on the high seas.
Acopy of this docurnens is Enclosed, as
IL may be not without use, L. showing the
ideas of the British governments al that
time, so far at least as its minister here was
an organ Of them
The terms 10 which these articles are to
be proposed, differ bu. slightly from those
IN which they may be admitted. In she
former, the delivery snf. deserters is conhn.
sd 60 soldiers and sesneB, wishous Ieauir.
Ing s.delivery of officers, whose deeer,ion
will be from the service of their country,
bot 90 accouns of offences for which il
might somesimes be more agreeable to the
u. States TO be unbound 60 give them up
for trial aud punishment. AT the same
time this consideration oppbt NOT 20 he q