Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1861-06-07
THE Law OF BuoCKapp.
Important Debate I'm the British Pariia-
nent.

bate in the British House of Lords on the 18th ult
on LINooLNis blockade of the Southern ports and
kindred subjects:
The Earl Of Ellenborough-I did not wish IN have
given public notice of my inaenton to put Question
to the Lord President with respect to the internre-
tatlon TO be got on some expressions in Her Males
ty g Proclamation, relative to the conduct of her
Majestys subjects in respect to the war in America
AS this House did not sit yesterday, however had
not the opportunity of doing so; but hope the mo-
bic Earl will be prepared at once to give the ex-
PLANTATION desire. 1t seems to me to be n matter
CT essential importance that q proclamation in
structing Her Msjestys subjects as to the conduct
they should pursue in that unhappy war should be
clear OF all doubt, and to the best degree inteeble
to every ndividual-that man should not be
obliged to 20 to his lawyer for opinion as to the
meaning of the expressions used; and further that
II ne should go t0 his lawyer there should be 10
difficulty in assigning the words their true interpre
tation.
The instructions to Her Maestys subjects relate,
first, to the law of England and then to the law of
nations. As to the law of England, it is clear
enough; there is no doubt at all with respect to the
duty imposed on Her Majesty's subjects. But as to
the law Of nations as might naturally be expected.
| there is a great degree of doubt. Her Majesty's
subjects are warned mot to break any blockade
lawfully and actually established by either of the
belligerent Powers Now, the first question
wish to put to the noble earl is in what sense we
| are to understand these expressions. We at
present under obligation to adhere to the decla
ration the subject of maritime law agreed to by
Her Maesty's Plenpotentiaries and those of other
| Powers at Paris.
That declaration bears directly on the SUBJECT of
blockades in these words:-"Blockades in order to
be binding, must be efective-that is to say, main
tanned by force sufficient really to prevent access
| to the coast of the enemy" Now, if these words
TO be understood in their strictly literal signi
cation, to establish lawful blockade would be al
most ply sieally impossible. They must receive
certain qualifications and explanations. l say I'M
possible, because there is hardly in the whole uni
verse any locality 10 which ships can remain safely
with the power of absolutely preventing access to
an enemy's coast. Blockades are carried by
| ships at SEES. They must be carried on by ships
/ at sea and under sail, because no ships Is1
carry q sufhciency of coal TO enable them to act
constantly under steam.
| No doubt it would be great facility if they
| could always act under steam; that would go far
to enable them to make the blockade effectual. But
l recoleet having heard that during the bloekades
of Toulon the ships employed in that service were
| driven to the Mediterranean and the Coast of
Africa. Such things will occur again. and, accord
/ ing to the strict meaning, blockade might have
ceased to be valid because it ceased to be really
maintained to prevent access to the enemy's coast
But apprehend the words must be understood with
necessary qualifications, arising from the circum
| stances of wind and weather. which command all
such Operations and that the real meaning is to
prevent access by establishing such a case of
blockade as to induce them to desst from attempt
| ing to do so.
But if that be the meaning of her Majesty's Nj J.
listers, confess think is very much to be regret
ted that instead of adopting totally new words, as
they have done in this proclamation. they did not
warn her Maiesty's subjects against breaking or en-
deavoring to break blockade lawfully established
| and effectively maintained. wish. then, first to
know from the noble Earl in what sense we are to
| understand the words used in the proclamation.
yiptay 40 rha or wit
the qualifications have mentioned, of the declara-
ton made by the Powers! If they do not, what
further meaning do they contain? Do they go below
or beyond the words of that declaration. And why
should the particular words there used be adop-
ted on this occasion? confess very much regret
to see so much vagueness in the expressions used as
| to ''cantraband OF war"
The Proclamation speaks of earns military stores
or Materials any article or articles considered
| and deemed to be cOntraband of war, according to
| the law or modern usage Of nations" How are
| plain men TO find out what articles have of late
been considered contraband of war by usage of ma
tons They must look through all the recent de-
| cisions of Courts of Admiralty jurisdiction, not
only in this country but in others and it is highly
probable that they will be found conflicting with
1 one another. wisE, therefore, TO know what are
the further articles not mentioned to which 1t Is In
| tended that the proclamation should apply, and
| which Her Majesty subjects are cautioned not to
| carry upon the sea.
The law with respect to contraband of war is in a
state of constant change. 1t must change year after
year according as the manner of conducting war is
| changed. When looked into this matter six years
ago recollect TO have found in the law books of
best authority that all these changes controlled
by prevailing prnciple-vz that that is contra
! band of war which IN possession OF an enemy
would enableshm better toicarry on war. That is q
clear reasonable, and ineligible principle, and
very much regret that instead of using the words
| which find in this proclamation, Her Majesty g
| Ministers did not go back to principle which all
| can understand, and which is not affected by
changes in the smode of carrying on war. Hear,
| hear1
Earl Granville-The questions put by the noble
earl are certainly very important. feel it some~
what difficult matter to speak upon questions of in
ternational law but at the same time il IS my duty
10 give the noble earl all the information can, and
| if should happen to make mistake shall be
grateful to learned lords either side to correct
me. in order that Misrepresentation may go abroad
| on a subject of so much importance With respect
to the fl st question-what meaning is 1t to be at
| tached to the words "a blockade lawfully and &C
tually established'-I that, although the
agreement at Paris is likely TO form epoch in the
history of international law, and although it was
| concurred in by all the nations of Europe, and by
several American States, yet It does not in itself
constitute a change in international law excepting
as regards those Powers which signiied their ac-
| cep.ance of 1t.
| / believe further even with respect to those
countries which entered into that agreement with
u.s. that what took place at Paris made no change
as far as bockades, lawfully and actually establish
| ed are concerned. That question Of international
law remains exactly the same as before. with this
difference only, that mere paper bockades will not
in future be recognized. Before blockade can be
said to be lawfully and actually established it must
be announced 10 proper form and ma nner, and the
| State declaring it must Have the spot such q
force as L do not say to make it impossible, but, at
any rate to make it very difficult tor vessels TO OBJ
tain egress or ingress. The second question which
the noble earl has put to Is still more difficult to
answer in clear and satisfactory manner but,
| can only say. at all events. that the Government
| have followed the course usual on such occasions.
To a certain extent the noble earl answered his
own question: for he stated that what is contraband
| of war must vary from time TO time according TO
the character of the war which is carried There
| are certain articles which are clearly contraband
| of war, but there are certain other articles the
| character of which can be determined only by the
circumstances of the case for instance the ports
for which they are destined, and various other in
| cidents which can be properly Judged of only in
| Prize Court. The decisions of such Court unless
there has been fragrant violation of International
| law all those who have recognized the rights of
belligerens must accept. think, therefore, that
/ her Majesty's Government in adhering strictly to
precedent in this matter, took the only course which
| it was possible for her to pursue.
The Earl of Derby.-The answer of the noble
Earl is for the part entirely satisfactory do
not feel disposed to complain that the terms OF the
| proclamation are vague anu uuCeftdlu' II Is lul-
possible to introduce into proclamation of this
| description such definition Of the character of a
| blockade or of contraband of war, as would sat-
| sfy the conditions which seemed to belaid down by
| the noble Earl who first addressed the House. Nor
| do / complain of the proclamation on the ground
that the warning it gives goes beyond the necessi
ties of the case. l refer to the warning which is
given to British subjects against taking part in
privateering expeditions.
The proclamation wisely and properly informs
l = IL. NhoNn CHI Vrl1
engage in any privateering expeditions they would
have no right whatever might be the result to claim
the protection of this country against any pencil con-
sequences by which they might render themselves
| liable. | do not complain of that-quite the con-
trary but there two points upon which 1t is alb
| solutely necessary that her Majestys Government
should lose no time in coming to thorough under
standing with the Government of the United States.
The first is with regard to the question of block
ade. 1t has been stated that the Northern States
have intimated their intention of blockading the
whole of the Southern ports. Now we know per-
feey we'll that it is not in the power of the North
r. 49,. fbran fln1nc