New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-06-02
DEBATE ON THE QUEENS PROCLAMATION
From The London Thseg, Aayf5.

DEBATE on THE QUEENS PROCLAMATION.
From The London Tf~eg, Nayf7.
OF all the subjects discussed in forensic debating
aocieties none are such fvoIes questions of Inter
national Law. Nor i, this very difficult to account for.
The Municipal Law of every country rests either upon
The solid basis Of actual statute upon custom well
defined and repeatedly interpreted by local courts, act
Sng quite mpartiay be ween citizens equally entitled
60 their egaTd But the law Of nations vindcate
saitself such and abiding foundation. The OH
efal compact upon which some pcrsODs are disposed
TO rely, appears to be lust as adowy in1sery, ana
unsubsantial the celebrated Hypothesis OF Rosseau,
which an age greedy for a weapon 10 be used for the
destruction OF riesthOOds and missionaries, accepted
without proof aud after IL had done is work aban-
.doned without argument. Tie true foundation OF
international law Is custom, but 1t Il "a custom
which varies in different places at the time, and
in the same place ut different timer. Where Gus
com fails, recourse must be had TO Tiebt Teason-a
standard fearfully indefinite, ard which il really and
almost practically Identical with The absence Of any
Saw at all. Such the materials Of tho Law OF Ma
lions. The tribunals by which it is administered are
equslly unsatisfactory. The principles OF justice re-
q1ire that man should be judge IN bis own case
ButSa Prize Court complies with this recommend
alton. The question Is slways between the ,cap1ora
Co which the captors belong The principles OF human
nature are not suspend in favor Of Prize Courts, and
II does therefore happen, might very reasonably be
expected that the deCiUl is generally found to be III
favor Of q fiend against enemy, OF q belhgereDt
against neutral. War is not favorable 70 the calm
ress Of the judicial faculty and subtle distinctions are
multiplied TO give effect to an honest and unpefceVed
eias.
On account of these causes, which must continue
until the dream Of the poet has been realLed,-
And the battle fsgs furled
In the Parliament man, the ieOtIaion Of the world
will at once be evident that questions OF Information
ii law are about the most difficult and perpiexng that
can be raised. 1t argued, therefore, less than the
usnel acuteness of Lord Ellenbmodgh to hnd fault
with the recent proclamation pnt forth oy Tue "oVerh
ment because it is not such document as man can
consult for himself without the and OF bis lawyer, ara,
no might have added not such document as ony iaW
yer could feel quite sure that he could hate correctly
eonstrue The fault Is ia the Proclamation ITSELF
INT in the matter TO which regtef. SO far az II con-
Germs the statute Law is ineligible enough as Lord
Eenborough aduts but he conpi ms oil its obsegiIty
when dealing with oiienses under the Law Of Naons
Thu man who complained of his spectacles because
they did not enable lin TO read when no bad never
learnt his letters just as reasonable as Tue
MIN who complains OF Proclan auon Tor no1
making the law clear. The fault Is III the
law not In the Proclamation, Just AZ the fault vas Nj
the man, and not in the speeasles The procl.ma-
ton does not make the law OF England or OF ma ions,
Int simply warns all whom 1t may concern against any
breach Of it, Ii Is not by the proclamation, but by the
Law on which the Proclamation ia founded, that man
kind must guide their proceedings; aDo, MAD tDe
proclamation defined ever so strictly wDat
bloc ade that defn ton would avail nothH unt So
81 was accepted as a correct definition OF law by the
American Prize Courts To sees 70 debre what ~ toe
Law Of Nations in Royal Proclamation would De
instead Of safeguard, a snare Tor me uheSrneu
reader ence it would lead him to rely on an M
terpretation Of that law which would not be binding
on the Court before which his caee Is to be decided
we note a trace OF tlis in the
ease proposed by Mr.. Horsiall 10 Lord Palmer
ston. That question a.ks whether merchant
ships chartered by the United States Prlor 70 the
proclamation will be liable 70 its penalties. We APP
prehend whatever those liabilities may be, the Proea-
nation which is only warning not TO break The Law
of England and the Law OF Nations could 10 no Wee
alter them The answer tbat can be given TO Lord Ei-
Iepborougb is, that blockade must be, on the one
hand a great deal more than mere paper prohloi.
fiop A hen may be induced 70 believe that broad
chalk rne forms barer which she cannot pass, bit
,nsniiod have right to reouIe that before their
ural liberty be taken from them, something more SUD-
santia shall be interposed between them and the port
they desire to enter Hn e S'nsr NC, be yeOacSJ
uDless il be completely elective. Such rule would
be 20 invite perpetual breaing OF blockades since
the very fact Of successful evasion would prove con
elasticity according to the definition that II was NJ
blockade al all on the principle tia treason never
prospers becsuse rebellion when triumphant ceases tC
sill less reasonable was the complaint Of Lord Ell
.enborouoh, that the Proclamation did not enable
laip men TO find out what articles contraband Of
war Until some means can be devised OF defining
not ONLY all that has been, but all that VIII be Invented
BY the perverse ingenuity OF man. actlng upon very
the systeuaiic destruction Of bis fellOwcreatnres u
win be utterly impossible 10 point out beforehand
what ia TO be considered contfabADd OF war Ihe
rooet harmless materials, when takeh alone--the M
xredients of gunpowdcr, for instanee-whtn assocl
stsd together may produce the most deeterious com
pounds and things apparently quite uneOnnected with
war--such food and fuel, for instanee-nuy, Will
reference 10 the purpose with which they shipped
ass1me hiibly contrsband character. War is grea
sTnioder of fiction it's copdae and its rsles baseC
ren the very sternest of all and pra ieal rea
s;a. II endes be attempt TO crcumscribe 1t by meta
xhvsica definitions aud bases ITSELF instead upon th'
laws Of nature aud the possibilities open to us by th'
Siscoveries Of physical science. A topic lar NOR
worthy OF mature consideration than the question:
pFoPoeed by Lord Elenborough was The doctrine Will
regard TO priyateering, enunciated BY Lord Derby
Ths argument Of Lord Derby seems TO be that I'M
North, by declaring blockade Of The Southern ports
claims tron neutral nations the respect due 10 ITS right
ne belhgeTsnt power; and therefore, that what
ever the North may choose 10 do y it'll the chzens o.
che Southern States captured board the pIivateer
itted ou under letters Of marque from Mr.. Jefferson
Davis the North has no hight 70 treat tue belize
reta rights OF the South nulhty with regard b. ib
snbiects Of countries frow whom claims resre [ TO
La own beigcreut rights. Tue result would be tha
the North by declaring blockade Of the Souther
por4s has bound itsof not 20 execute rs pirses th
Subjects o. neutral States serving on board such piys
secrs The argument il one OF great stbtlety and re
asrnast sd sesmed TO receive confirmation fIom III.
arzuq,-,ts of subsequent speakers. / ia clear tba
Enxish A. yiecs serving on board On lmerican priya
teef are not pirates though If they chose so 70 act
the Englsh government by the procaiation seems I,
asow is Intention OF leaving Ia IN TO pirates fate
II may posbly deserve confederation whether this de
eision be- strictly adhered 10. At by rate we can
nos doubt the authoritative declan oIof the law b,
% many judges OF eminent authority wi 10 very fai
fopfeyent TIE danger appreheDded and may possibly
tbe means Of introdaciog into tbe wy commence