Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-11-29

gland of the neutral rights of America,
prior to the Berlin decree Of Nov. 1906,
and which, if acquiesced in, might have
giveo grounds IF complaint to France, are
the capture of American vessels laden
with colonial produce, founded on a re
newal of that pretended principle gene
rally called the rule Of 1856" the i'm |
pressment Of American seamen, compel |
led thereby to become the auxiliaries of
England against France, and proclamation
or nominal blockades, particularly that Of
the coast from the river Elbe to Brest, no.
tilted in May, 1906
Il will not be asserted, that the u. S.
ever lamely acquiesced in either of those
pretensions. 1t will not be denied, that
with respect To the two first, the most
strenuous efforts were necessarily made
to procure an alteration Of the British sys-
tenn.
1t is true, that to the nominal proclama-
ton blockades of England, the U. States
had opposed only spirited and repeated re-
monstrances, and that these had not al
WAYS been successful. But The measures
which a neutral nation may be supposed
bound 10 take, against the infractions of
its neutrality, must always bear certain
proportion TO the extent andnsure OF the
injury received and 10 the means Of oP-
position, Ii csnno, certainly be pretend-
ed that hasty resort 10 war sh. uld in
every such instance have become the du-
y-of America. Nor can The irregularities
OF England in declaring in state of
blockade, certain extent of coast, part Of
which was not, and the whole OF which
could not, even by her powe,f full Eavy, be
actually invested and blockaeled be plead
in justification of that decree, by which
France, without an efficient fleet, pretend.
10 announce the blockade of he minions
OF a power which has the iucon,est,ble
command the sea and before no pait
OF which, she can station single vessel.
The Milan decree of 1907 can still less
rest for it's defence on the supposed &c.
quiescence of the u. Safes in the British
orders of The preceding mon, hs, since those
orders. which have not certainly been &C.
quiesccd in, were nos even known in A..
merlca at the date OF the decree. And it
is proper here to add, that the French
have, particularly by the sequestration OF
certain vessels in their ports, and by burn
ing our ships on the high seas, gone even
beyond The tenor Of their own ex,raordina.
ty edicts.
The allegation OF an acquiescence i'm the
Berlin decree of Nov. 1906, by which a
lone the British government pre- ends To
Justify the orders of council, is equally
unfounded. In the note on that subject,
addressed on the 3lst of December 1906,
by The British government to the Amer-
can minister, RfIer having stated that
".hey could not believe that the enemy
would ever seriously attempt 10 enforce
such system" the following declaration
is expressly made, g. If, however, the enc
my should carry these hreats into execu.
ton and if neutral nations, contrary TO all
expectation, should acquIesce in such u
surpa,ions, his majesty might probably be
compelled, however reluctantly, to re ali.
ate in his Just defence, &c" The Two re.
quisi,es necessary in the opinion Of Great
Britain to Justify retaliation, are stated 20
be, the execution of the decree, and the &C
quiescence of neutral nations. Ye within
eight days after, and in The face of tha,
declaration, without waiting for ascertain
ing either Of those facts, The retaliatiuv
British order of January 7ih, 1907. vas
issued, which, contrary 20 he scknowledg
ed law Of nations, subjected to capture,
vessels Of The s. sailing from the por,s
of one 5eiligerent to port Of another bel
ligerenl.
The u S in the mean while, and with
out delay, had taken the necessary steps
to ascertain the manner in which The
French government intend to execute their
decree.
That decree might be construed merely
as a municipal law fo,bddug the intro
duetion of British merchandise, and The
admission Of vessels coming from Epgsnd.
Under thai aspect, ard Il confined 10 that
Object. the neutral rights &c America were
> not affected by its operation.
A belligerent may without any in
fraction of neutral rights forbid the adj
mission into his ports of any vessel
coming from the ports of his enemy.
And France had undoubtedly the same
right to exclude from her dominions
every species of British merchandise,
which the United States have exercis-
ed in forbidding the importation off
certain species. Great Britain might
be injured by such regulations but
America had no more right to com
plain Of that part ofthe decree, than
France had TO object to the A American