Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1861-06-10
THE BLOCKADE AND LETTERS OF MARQUE

The proclamation OF the Qleen does not make the
law OF England or OF nations but simply all whom
i: may against any breach Of IT, Il not ty
the proclamation, but by the law which the procama
ton is founded that mankind must guide their proceed
ings and had the proclamation defined ever so strictly
What constituted blockade that d,inition would avail
nothing unless il was accepted correct definition OF
law by the American Prize Courts To seek TO define
What is the law Of nations in royal proclamation would
be- instead of a safeguard a snare for the unlearned
reader since il would lead him TO rely an Interpretation
of that law which would be binding on the court before
which bis is TO be decided We note trace Of this
error in the proposed by Mr. Horsa to Lord
P,merson. That question asks whether merchant ships
chartered by the United States prior the proclamation
will be liable to its penalties We aporehend whatever
those liabilities may be, the proclamation which is only
warning not TO break the law Of England and the law
Of nations, could in nowise alter them The answer that
can be given to Lord Ellen borough is that blockade
must be- the one hand, great deal more than mere
paper prohibition. hen may be induced to believe
that broad chalk line forms barrier which she cannot
pass, but mankind have right to require that before
their natural liberty be taken from Them something
substantial shall be in.erposed between them and
the port they desire to enter. On the other hand il
would be absurd to say that blockade shall not be re-
spected unless it be completely e ctive. Such rule
wcud be to invite a perpstuL breaking OF blockades
since the very fact Of successful evasion would prove
coDcusvely, according to the definition that it TO
blockade at all, on the same principle that
be treason
Sill less reasonable the complaint Of Lord Ellen
borough that the PROCLAMATION did not enable plain
10 hnd out what ices contraband OF war. topic
far more worthy of mature consideration than the
question propounded by Lord Elenborough was the doc
trne with r~gard to "plvateering" cnurcated by Lord
Derby. The argument of Lord Derby sams to be that
the Nor.h, by declaring a blockade Of the Southern
ports, claims from raj nations the respect due TO it,
rights beigerent power aud therefore that, what
the North may choose do with the citizens OF the
s; uhern States captured board the pvateers fitted
cu under letters of maTque from Mr.. jefferson Davis
the North has right treat the bellgerent rights OF
tGe South nuity with regard to the subjects Of
tries from whom it claims respect for its own beige
rent rights. The result would be that the North,
by declaring blockade Of the Southern ports,
has bound itself not 10 execute as pirates the sub
ects Of neutral States serving board such prvateers
The argument is Of subtley and refinement,
and seems TO receive rmaio from the arguments OF
subsequent speakers. L. il clear that English subj ec,s
serving on board American "privateer" are rot
pirates, though, if they choose TO act, the English
Governmenby the proclamation, to its nten-
ton OF leaving them to pirates fate. 1t may possibly
deserve consideration whether this decision can be
str;ty adhered TO- At any rate cannot doubt that
the authoritative declaration Of the law by so many
judges Of eminent authority will 90 very far 10 prevent
the danger apprehended and may possibly lie the means
Of Introducing into the very commencement OF dread
fu civil those principles OF humanity ard modera-
lion the operation OF which might otherwise he suspend
I'd until enforced and demonstrated by The baIbarous
logic Of reprisals.