Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-04-01

~ ShSuoCu, thae Is, against |
trade along the belligerent coasts. If,
the orders be unlawful, therefore the
blockade must be so and if the or
ders be repealed as a violation of
neutral trade, In compliance with the
act Of Congress, the obligation to re-
peal the blockade as a like violation
cannot be contested. This blockade
OF May, 1906, is in violation of the
principles laid down by all authors on
the subject of blockades. 1t is in vio-
lation of the principles laid down in
all treaties which attempted to define
blockade. 1t is in violation of the
principles contended for by every adj
ministration under the American 60
vernment, from the period of Wash
ington to the present time. The COR
respondence under General Wash
ington's administration, between the
Secretary of State and Mr.. Hammond,
may be referred to for the principles
asserted under that administration.
In the correspondence before us we
have the principles as laid down by
Gen. Marshall and Mr.. King. To
these / will refer:
Mr.. K. then read the following ex-
tracts of letters from MIR. King and
MIR. Marshall
From Mr.. KING.
Seven or eight of our vessels,
laden with valuable cargoes, have been
lately captured, and are still detained
tor adjudication these vessels were
met In their voyages to and from the
Dutch ports, declared to be blocka.
ded. Several notes have passed be.
tween lord Granville and me upon
this subject; with the view, on nv
part, of establishing more limited
and reasonable Interpretation of the
law of blockade, than is attempted to
be enforced by the English govern
ment. Nearly one hundred Danish,
Russian and other neutral ships, have
within few months, been in like
manner intercepted, going to and re-
turning from the United Provinces.
Many of them, as well as some of
ours, arrived in the Texel, in the
course of the las. winter the severi-
ty of which Obliged the English feet
10 return TO their ports, leaving few
frigatss only to make shcrtcruises off
the Texel, as the season would al
low.
My object has been to prove, that
10 this situation of the investing feet.
there can be no effective blockade
which, in my opinion, cannot be said
to exist, without a competent force.
stationed and present at or near the
entrance of the blockaded port.n
Extract of a letter from Mr.. King 70
Lord Grenville, dated, Downing
street,
LONDON, May %, 1899.
{" 1t seems scarcely necessary to OBJ.
serve, that the presence of compe-
tent force is essential to constitute a
blockade and although it is usual
for the belligerent to give notice to
neutral nations when he Institutes
blockade, it is not customary to give
any notice of its discontinuance and
that consequently the presence of the
blockading force is the natural critic:
rion by which the neutral is enabled
tos~ascertain the existence Of the
bloc kade in like manner as the ac-
tual investment of a besieged place is
the only evidence by which we decide
whether the siege is continued or raj
sed. A siege may be commenced,
raised, recommended and raised again,
but its existence at any precise time,
must always depend upon the fact of
the presence of an investing army.
This Interpretation of the law of
blockade is of peculiar importance to
nations situated at great distance
from each other, and between whom
a considerable length of time is neces-
sary to send and receive information
Extract of letter from Mr.. Mar
shall Secretary of State to Mr..
King, dated Sept. 90, 1900.
"The right to conhscate vessels
bound to blockaded port, has been
unreasoDably extended to cases not
coming within the rule, as heretofore
adopted.
{" On principle, it might well be
-