Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-07-25

"aN NN~Ni" S''hs hoisNiAS only CONDITIONAL |
rstr~c..oa, and this upcn conditions known |
!" We l'"eoSSh.e to be complied with. Ii has |
hccn urged that the American government
has considered otherwise, and has so de-
cla'cd II for tho regulation of the conduct of
the people oftnas country. Ifsuch is the. fact.
1t iSnot for me to lose sight of that resp, ct
which is due so'thc Scts of "a foreign governs
ment so tar as 10 question the propr;eV of "a
ny Interpretation which they may have Civ,
ee 10. such an instrument. But when the
effect ot such ar Instrument is pressed upon
me tor tue purpose Of Calling for nv decision.
must b. allowed to Interpret il for myself
and to act upon that Interpretation. And to
me IT appears, that the declaration cloyyesl
as It is with stipnla,icns known to be beyond
the reach OF all rational hope of any possible
con,piiancc, is i'll effect remuneration of any
serious purpose of repeating those DEGREES
think might invoke the authority of the
government OF the United States for denying
to this declaration the effect of an absolute
repeal, when observe that the period which
they have allowed TO the British govern
ment hr revoking our orc ers in council ex-
tenIs 10 the I'd of February-an allowance
which hardly could have been made if the
revocation on the part of France had really
taken place at the time TO which this dccla-
ration puTports 20 refer.
nthc absence at any declaration of the
| British government to such an effect, tacre
Is total faiiureef ell other evidence, Of the
| court We're at liberty 30 accept otherevidehce
as satisfactorily that the French DEGREES had
been revoked. If ] were, driven to decide
upon that evidence 70 be regularly furnished
by the government under whose authority
sit, / think l am boundto pronounce that no
| such revocation has taken place, and there
| fore that the ordersin council subsist in. per-
iect justice rs well as in complete authori-
| W.
| II is incumbent upon me, think, to take
| notice OF an objection of Or. Ecrbert's. to
the existence of the orders in ccuncil-name-
ly, that British subjects are, notwithstanding
permitted to trade with France and that a
blockade which excludes the subjects CT all
other countries from trading with ports of
the enemy, and at the same time permits an
access TO those ports to the subjects OF the
| state which imposes it is irregular, illegal
| and null. And agree to the position. that
blockade, imposed for the purpose of OBJ
tanning commercial monopoly for the pri-
vate advantage of the state which LAYS on
such blockade, is Illegal and void On the
Very principle upon which it was founded
But IN the hrst place, (though that is matter
OF inferior consideration,) / am not aware
that any such trade between the subjects of
this country and France is generally permit
ted. Licenses have been granted certainly
IN no iaconsiderable numbers but it never
has been argued that particular licenses vi
sa,e blockade. If it were material in the
present case it might be observed, that ma
ny more CT these licences had been Gran
led to foreign ships than TO British ships. to
SO from tins country to France and to return
here from thence with cargoes Butsecond-
y. what stu more clearly and generally takes
TINS matter out OF the the reach of the obiec-
non, Is the particular nature, and character
OF tins blockade Of Franco, if It is SO to be
Characterised, IL is not an original indie
pendent act of blockade, to be governed bv
me common Jules that belong simply to that
operation ofwar. 1t is in thisinstance a CONT
teractDS rehex measure, compelled by the
act OF the enemy, and as such subject too
tner conslde rations arising out of its pecnii-
arly distinctive character France declared
that the subjects of other states should have
no access to England England on that ac-
count, declared that the subjects of other
stases should have no access to France. So
Tar Unsatisfactory blockade lif blockade il
Is 70 De caiiedJ IS co-extensive with the prin-
elpie Neutrais are prohibited to trade with
france, because they are prohibited by
rance IRON trading with England. Eng
land acquire the right which it would not O.
thcrwise possess, to prohibit thatintercourse
oy virtue OF the act of France. Having so
acquired IL, IT exercises it to its full extent,
WIN entire competence of legal authority
and having so done, it is not for other conn
tries to enquire how far this country may be
aoie 70 relieve itself further from the aeeres-
sions OF that enemy. The case is settled he
tween them and itself by the principle on
Whlcn the intercourse is prohibited. IF the
convenience OF this country before this nrohi-
oi.lon required some occasional intercourse
with the enemy, no justice that is due to o.
'hcr countries requires that such an inter-
course should be suspended on account of
any prohibition imposed upon them on a
ground SO totally unconnected with the
ordinary principles of Common measure of
blockade, from which it Is thus DISTINGUISHED
by IT'S retaliatory character.
Inc last question is, are there any circum-
stances addressed to equitable copsid
GRAFTON, that can relieve the Claimants from
tue penal effects of these orders, Certain
" II any could be urged that arose from the |
OF the British government itself. thew
might be srSed with powerful and even II. |
rcs'stible effect but If they found themselves
~ the iraud OF the enemy, or in the mis- |
'p''ei1Si,siohs OF The american government |
huuGed ny the fraud of tho enemy, they !
o'uu no cam on the British government or
=, ~ illsi tribunals la the one case they
iesore ior iedress to quarter where,
lear 1t is not to be found--to the oovernrnc,t |
d inc enemy: in the other, where presume
IS to be found-to the government nf the1y |
'wn country. -.
Upon the declaration of the American 90
eInIncht, ! nave already said as much as
mss, = ,a' WIN an INC respect which am bound