The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-09-17

ment over the courts of Common law ant
| mat he Che judge) will not be so ;ndecen
As tu consider any order Of the King a,
Contrary to the law of nations s., in til
case OF the Emmanuel, Sir William Scott, il
1879 had avowed that the text Of the King,
instructions, was the ruie of his conr, of ad
m'ralty A Question has been sometimes
ingeniously made. in regard to the extent Of
that Judges nearing in the case of 1899 -
hut we hnd it now completely cleared up
by AN open gavowal that the King IL his !e-
gislator
In the case of tho orders cf 1898, the
instruction vas secret Tie i1z3-ihe ru!t,
was unpromulgated. and many I'D and ru
nous proof was given, Ey Sir William
Sc'tt, hat the text of that seer. instructi.
oA was, his rule Of adjudication
Il may be further observed, that though
these tribunals and Judges, snd Law OH
GERS ut the Court and crown, mad declared
no many strong shtugs. and even that the
Nag never gave to a judge an rider or e.
ven intimatioc, be Parliament itself. an 1908.
treated the giving such orders, Calling
them "rulea an REGULATE sns. y as a right
of the crown used before and T. be used.
without responsibility in futmre.
IL another respect. these courts serious
" huctnated and opposed themselves. II
was on the subjec' of their Jurisdiction -
e metropolitan Courts checked the VICE
courts Tor condemning vessels and careoes
not actually within their Jurisdiction is and,
district or port. they afterwards allowed
such condemnations, BY which vexation
aud destruction we're occasioned To the peu
rails. and much injury to the supplies of
the adversary 6eliiserent. y
H-Evidence Of the contradictions OF the
British Courts, as 10 the grounds Of their adiu-
locations:
In the year IVA, the lords of appeals in
pize causes. decided, that the participa
tim OF neutrais in the belligerent's colonial
trade was iazcfui, and ordered restitution of
neutral propert, taken therein,
In the present war they condemn much of
the property and many of the vessels taken
in the colonial trade of their enefaies.
These inconsis' encies and fluctuations
are he most offensive and unjust. to neu-
trails because The British license their own
vessels to carry on the trade ; and some
.timt ncutral vessels :-because they made
treaty with us, to secure the Benefits of
NEUTRAL carrying OF supplies, and commerce
to their own colonies in the East aud West
lrd,es because they open their West
INDIA ports, ~ occasional and early Con-
tinuai procia ations; and because, they
nave ten or we've free ports, among their
'" ST india Islands, omen to enc MES.
IL VIII lot ne doubted, that the opposite.
heiiigerert. whoi usr before tie B=rlin De-.
crees, saw the British colonies, effectuail
supported and supplied by those means
and Cat the sane tune) the colonies OF him
self andSe other adversary beiiigerents'
nssriV 9~conQuereG, and the rest falling in
to the hands OF Britain. partly oy the ex-
c'ns!on OF neutral Commerce, must have re
mrmoered his losses by these judicial ope-
rations of the British admiralty, in the 40
men, OF planting that conpac ed recip.o-
cation of the anterior spirit. regulations,
admjnistrations and adjud locations o. mis- bo...
and ingenious rival and enemy.
The lsish courts of admiralty have some
times alsedged, that they did not, and could
not deviatc from the law of nations, on me
authority of an order or instruction of the
King, adding, that those orders and in
struc9ons, were explanations Of the law vi
nations, or evidences OF relaxations from
the rules OF fo1de mnation 1T public law
but when they adjutge. mat the entire
commerce IN grain, With Il 70lockadsd porto,
is i,ieg innate, in contradiction OF me Rri
sish Kings declaration to the Danes, quo
ed By Count BaAnstorir and when they adj
NIT a BLOCKADE of river. one or both capes
OF which belong to neutral sovereigns, the
world will consider them as inconsistency
contribu ing to the insult. 5exation and in
jury Of neutrals, and The offensive privati-
IN OF the adversary belbgersnts, of the DC
nefits OF the usages Of war among civilized
nations.
1t appears to be matter of fair and very
serious consideration, that the language OF
the British orders in cornell often eally d.
reefs and annonces, that the case fof an
intended operation, denominated "a block
ade" or any other opera ion) shall be at.
tended or followed, by " all the measure
authorised by the law Of nations, and the
Respective treaties between his majesty and
the different neutral powers, with respect
to vessels attempting 10 violate the said
bl 1cksde, after ths notice" Nov il is cer-
tain, thapneither The prescrpgvs nor the
written law of cations, authorIses" the
conhscatDn OF neutral vessels, with neutral
cargoes of innocent goods for the act.of 90
ing from foreign ~ their own neutral ports
las Archnnge, Philadelphia, or Copenha. :.
gen, ~ 1905 AID g to fore gn, or their own
neutral ports, (as Hamburg, Altoona or
Glu -ksta J Oecasse the munici pal row err
of the king OF Great Britain was exercised
in giving the mere name of "blockade''
without color, at public law. to an arres.
tatlon Of the legitimate commerce of the
tens of millions of people who live on the
waters Of the four German rivers. and in
IN , and other, deprived neutral Countries
W"re bloody, expensive and jeopardisiug
war to have occurred between Gre at Britai in
and the injured neutrals, the opinion is sub-
'otsed, that Dir Won. Scott, in a trial on AN