The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-11-12

oF the ~" OF nato'is, AGn unauthorized BY
any received doctrine OF legitimate block
ads.
Nais violation of thccstab,ishcd law of civ
ilizcd nations n war would nave JUSTIFIED G..
5. in e,aliatiEg iapon the enemy, b. = SINH
lar introduction tf ali commerce with France
6 with spca otacr countries rs might CO.
operate with FIance IA her system of COM
mercial hostility against G. Is.
Inc object O9G. -. was not, however, the
destruction Of dnde, bat It's preservation ur-
der such regulitians IS might be Compatible
with hcr own stqlrty, 1T the same tire that
she extended IL indulgence 10 foreign COM
mcrce, which 4tlict principles would have
e.ttit,ed her toSNtthhcld. The retaliation of
u. 3. was not therefore urged to the full ex-
tent of her right, cur prohibition of French
trade WAS notats7lG,e bat modified, ana in
return for the abaolate prohibition of the
trade wish c. b. we prohibited not the COM
MERGE with France, but all such commerce
with France as shouid(not be carried on
through G. s.
1t was evident that THIS system must prove
prejud;cial &c neutral n;tions this calami-
~ was foreseen, and deeply regretted. But
the injury to the neutral iation arose from
the aggression of France switch had COM
peiled G.. b. III her own defence to resort to
adequate retaliatory measures ofwar. The
operation on the AMERICAN Commerce Of
these precautions which the conduct of
France had rendered Indispensable to our Sc
curity, is therefore to be asribed to the un-
warrantable aggression of France, and not
to those proceedings on tie part of G. b.
which that aggression hadrendered necessa-
ry and lust.
he object of our systm was merely to
counterfeit an attempt II crush the British
trade; G.. B. underworld to permit the con-
tinent to receive as largl a portion of COM
merce as might be practicable through G.
B.. and all her subsequent regulations and
every modification of hir system by new or
ders or modes OF granting or Withholding IL
cenceS, have beer calculated for the purpose
OF encouraging the traG If neutrals through
G.. B., whenever such encouragement might
appear advantageous to the general inter
estS of commerce, and consistent with the
public safety OF the nshon.
The justification of Is Majestv's Orders in
Council, and the continuance of that defence
nave always been restN upon the existence
OF the DEGREES OF Berh and Milan, and on
the perseverance of th{ enemy in the system
Oh hostility which has $bverted the rights of
neutral commerce on he continent and it
has always been dcclarld on the part of his
Majesty governmental that whenever France
should have efectually repealed the DEGREES
OF Berlin and Milan, and should have restor-
cd neutral commerce to the condition in
which it stood previously to the PRONUNCIATION
OF those DEGREES, we shnnld immediately re-
peal our Orders in Council
France has asserted that the Decree of Ber-
lin was mcclure of just retaliation on her
part, occasional by our previous aggression,
and the Frencl government haGinslstcC that
our system OF Blockade, as it existed previ-
ousiy to the decree Of Berlin, was a manifest
violation CT TIL received law Of nations; we
must therefor, sir, refer to the articles of
the Berlin dcc,ee, TO fnd the principles of our
system OF blockade which France considers
to be new, and contrary a. the law of nations.
by the 4th ind oth articles 1t is stated as q
justification d the French Decree, that G.
b. extends h unTortihed towns and COM
" mercia! pots, 10 harbors, & (, the mouths
8 of rivers, tlbse righN OF blockade, which
q" by reason and the usage Of nations are APP
-" plicabie my TO fortified places and that
" the rights II blockade ought TO be limited
t. tortressS, really invested by a sufficient
{" force"
Il is addedin the same articles that G.. B.
" has deciard places to be N a state of Bloc
" kauc, Deice winch she mas not single
" Snip OF wa| ans. e Ell places which tie
" wh lie Britbh force would be Insufficient
. h. blockade, entire coasts and a whole En-
" pre-"
Neither tie practice Of Great Britain
nor ne iaw { nations has ever sanctioned
the rue noT aid down by France, that no
pace e1ceting fortresscs III a complete
state OF m'fsdture can be deemed lawful
iy biockaieYby sea.
II such al rule were to be admitted, it
would becfine nearly npracticable for
Great Britain TO attempt the bl ckade OF
any port oithe Continent, and our submits
sion 10 this perN ersion of che Law o. ma
tons, whIe Il would destroy one of the
principal Advantages Of our naval supe-
riorit woud sacrifice The common rights
and iEtereas Of all maritime states.
1t was e1idcnt that the blockade of MAY,
1906, was Che principal pretended JUSTIN
Cation OF TIC Decree OF Berlin, though nei-
tier the principles OH which that blockade
was founded, nor its practical operation.
@Hoided any color Cor the proceedings OF
France.
In point of date the blockade of MAY,
1906, preceded the Berlin Decree bat II
was just aud Icgai .ockdde according to
the established law OF nati,ns, because L
vas intended 20 he maintained, and was
actually maintained b. an adequate force
appointed 60 guard the whole coast desert
bed in the notification, and consequently 70
enforce the blockade.
Great Britain has never ATTEMPTED 60
dispute that il tine ordinary course Of thc
law OF nations, no blockade can be jus,ifa-
bic or valid unless IL DC supported BY an
force destined to maintain II, and
20 expose TO hazard all vessels attempting
TO crade it, operation. The blockade Of