The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-05-17
u be Gnqulrer.
RICHMOND, MAY II, 1911
THE LAW or EUROPE.

The reply of the French Emperor to the
Deputies of the Hanse Towns, lays down,
in general terms, the " fundamental laws" of
his Empire.
The DEGREES of Berlin and Milan are to
form he fu6iic code of the Ernpire-and
cease only TO have effect as 20 those natl
ons, which will defend their flag gainst the
British Orders & Blockade. Such aat,oAs
as will disregard the blockade, and nave
courage enough 10 approach all the ports
OF his Empire. according 10 the stipulati-
ons of the Treaty of Utrecht, are permitted
to hold communication with Engiand-ds 10
them, England is not block AIDED. Those. on
the contrary. which may submit to the Bril-
ash regulations, are prohibited by the French
DEGREES from all trade with England. be-
cause the flags thus submitting 20 the En-.
glish laws are considered as denationali.
zed
The DEGREES are. therefore, the funda-
mental LAWS of France--an ercention is
made in favor of those nations who NAV
resist the laws OF EnglaDd.-Stil there is
some ambiguity; for it is not explicitly said
what line OF conduct is sufficient to constj
tute resistance horu fn,- a nation must
go to defend its Sovereignty & maintain the
religion of its flag
Do WE, for instance, come within the
rule or the eEcefhon 2-Here is the whole
| equiuoque
| In August. 1910, our Non. intercourse la "
was deemed sufiCient--because M. Cham
pagny expressly says that "the Congress
| engages TO offose such of the belligerent
| powers as shall refuse to recognize the
rights of neuttals"-and that the DEGREES
OF Berlin * Milan will cease to be in force
| it being Understood that the U. S. conforma-
| bly, TO this Act, shall cause their rights To
be reshected by the English.
| 1t yel remains to be seen, how lar the
French Emperor will consider the sfirif lin
which the Non. Intercourse Law is enfor.
ced, by the supplementary law of March
| last, as corresponding with his ideas OF resie =.
lance e defence.
If, on the other hand. the French Empe
rer should vary the terms of the engagement.
as we understand them, by subjoining new
conditions to be performed on our part: that
engagement W i'll be OF Course dissolved -
Congress have not pledged themselves. by
either Of their Statutes, TO resist the In We
| OF England 6y force, or to coD7heL an :" an
proaCh to the ports of the French Emp,re, %
France, therefore. has no right 10 insist
on such measure, eon/ornia6is TO the
terms of the engagement much less TO
cancel the engagement, on the ground, that
our last law has not declared WAN agai,s,
England.
HSa'n ;~>onould France merely susfend
that engagement; and require Of us. as n
preliminary to les execution, that we. should
resist the English laws by force, the en-
gagetneht is alsoip the 7vind--becaose /, is.
at all times, dishenorable and impolitic f..
US TO form any such contract with any natl.
on whatsoever.
There is an obvious distinction, between
the U, 5. pledging themselves TO resist. in
conSeQne eof re- QUESTION to that 9 fy,cto,aJ
by France; u France accepting of a pledge
to that effect firevto Hsiy laid down by the Il.
is. In the last case; the pledge is volunta-
ny one it flows from ourselves; and the 70.
reign nation merely takes us at our word.
lin the other case, we submit to the igno'
miny OF foreign nations prescribing to us
the terms on which we claim our RICHIE
and OF binding ourselves to our good beha.
vior.
There is no doubt, that the u. s. oygbt
not TO rest satisfied with the Non.Inter
course alone, in case the French Emnero.
! should fairy camp'y with his engagement