Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1861-06-12
.,,,ve, Of their boou. t,o,.,n,,.o, ,v,,n,, N.

ben tatives Of their bogus Govefnrnent against the
Csited state. They claim to be belligerents,
and the rights Of belhger.nts They are recog-
nired ss belligerents by foreign Powers and
when treated accordingly by the President Of the
United states, they seek protection behind the
defense that they are not belligerents but traitors
and rebels They should not be permitted to take
advantage OF their own wrong The British
Government has recog nized To. m as elligcrents;
ard now the master Of British vessel, himself a
British subject, sailing under British colors who
IL caught the act of defyiug the authority Of our
Government, makes the defense that he 10 not
treating with helligerents, but with traitors and
rcbes. He dedes the authority OF this Govern
meht, and seeks TO stultify bis own. What a
spectacle 10 presented! The subject Of a foreign
Government disputiHg the power Of the President
under the Constitution Of the United states. The
Constitution 10 an instrument for the regulation
Of our own internal affairs; and when a foreign
Power calls In question the coustitutonality Of a
public executive act, 1t is like intuding into
mans own domestic circle and interfering with
his family sffairs
IL the President vioiates the Constitution. he il
h-bie to impeachment. So far foreign powers
are concerned, II isenough for them to know that
blockade exists In point Of fact, by order Of the
Executive, aud they a. e bound to respect It.
L Mr.. G contended that he had shown that the
bloc kade was established by com etent uthority.
IL now became his duty 10 show that an actual
bloc kade was established at the ports Of Rich
mond and Norfolk, and when II became effective.
" hat Is the meaning Of an effective blockade!
Whena suficient force Is stationed at bloc kaded
PIT to render 10 dangerous to attempt to enter it,
Mr. q reviewed the evidence, and held that the
blockade was effective on the 3Oth of April last
and that the British Consul in Richmond con-
coded that 1t was effective on the ID Of MAY He
then proceeded to show that the master of the
captured vessel had notice Of the blockade He
argued that notices are OF two kinds, actual and
constructive. Constructive notice Is where notice
has been given to the Of the
nation. In that case tn law prrsumes that the
representative gives notice to all the vessels of
the neutral nation he represents IL he fails to do
So the masters OF vessels who suff-r in conse-
quence Of IL must look to him or his government
Tor indemnify, and does not excuse them before
our Government for violating the blockade He
argued that from the evidence In this case the
master had bo;h actual and constructive notice.
He then proceeded TO show that in this case the
master had violated the blockade both by sress
from the port Of Richmond and ingress to the
port OF Norfolk- Ii WAS true he did not enter the
port Of Norfolk with his vessel but having an-
chored In the vicinity OF tho bloc kaded port he
entered II in person, which Mr. G. conteuded
amounted to violation In legal contem plation.
In regard to tue penalty, he argued that both
vessel and cargo Were liable to condemnation
The general rule Of law is, that the master is in
all cases the agent OF the owner Of the vessel but
tue rule 10 different in casrs of blockade w here
there has been deviation into the blockaded
part, and the master had notice Of the bloc ade
thr deviation IL presumed to have been in the
service Of the cargo. Where the master has no.
tice or the block de, violation thereof Is pre-
sumed In law to be an act done In pursuance of
an intention formed antect IDENTIFY to the VOYAGE
add with the consent Of the owner of the cargo
ThSTefsre In such case the master is presumed
to be agent both of the Of the vessel and the
owner OF the cargo. and both must su fer the con-
sequences Of his act.
Mr. Darlington spoke about three hours and
quoted many authorities The Court reserved its
decision.