The New York herald., 1863-02-05

Tho Assumed Raising or the blockade s'
/ Ohartcsson.
The news which we published yesterday Of
the successful raid Of the rebel iron -clads
against our blockading force at Charleston is
80 far as the number and value Of the federal
vessels destroyed are concerned, Of but very
little moment. The moral effect of the reverse
however, Is very great. 1t is a humiliation 10
our navy that will be made the most Of by those
hostile to US. and that could never have oc-
Cured if ordinary foresight end vigilance had
been observed.
But it Is not merely In relation to this po'nt
that we regard this affair as very serious dis
aster. 1t is the principle of international law
involved in itthat imparts to Il its gravity. We
do not believe that 1t in reality affects the legal
and permanent character Of the blockade; but
there is no doubt that it is intended to raise
that issue with us. The simultaneous and tenn
porarily successful efforts made at Galveston
and Charleston to break the blockade, the pro-
clamations issued by the rebel commanders at
both places, formally declaring the consumma-
tion OF the fact, and the endorsement by the
foreign consuls Of their proceedings, oil 60 to
show preconcerted plan, undertaken either
with or without an understanding with the
European governments, but, in either oase,
pregnant with trouble to US. If any doubt
existed on this point it would be re-
moved by the declarations of the rebel
journals. The Richmond Dispatch states that
formal notice of the raising of the block
ade at Charleston had. been given by the
rebel Secretary Of State to the British and
French consuls in Richmond, and that, by the
strictrule Of international law, sixty days notice
must be given before It con be re-established.
II this were so it would materially alter the
character and probable duration Of the war.
Two months unobstructed commercial inter-
course with Europe would place the South,
both in regard to finances and war supplies, in
position infinitely stronger than that which it
occupies at present. 1t would inflse fresh life
and vigor into it's military and naval operations,
and render it, with its united sentiment, impos-
sible to conquer
We have no apprehension that the rebels will
be able to establish legal grounds for what they
claim. We have looked carefully through all
the International authorities extracts from
which will be found in another column-and
we can find nothing which, taken in conjunc-
tioa with the real facts of the case, would 60 to
show legal raising of the blockade. Neither
Ortolan nor Hautefeuille-the two standard
writers on International law-contain anything
which would 60 to prove that its temporary
disturbance, without freedom Of access and
exit shown, would constitute such an Interrupt
ton of it as would require the two months
notice claimed by the rebels as necessary to its
re-establishment. On the contrary, 1t will be
found, by passage which we quote from the
latter writer, that express limits are set to the
iamunities Of neutral vessels profting by such
disturbance, thereby showing that the resump-
ton Of the blockade is, within reasonable time,
at the option of the besiegng feet 1t is true that
the letter of Lord John Russell confirming the
efficiency of the blockade, when, in February,
1861, the question was officially brought before
him, may be made the foundation of quibble
in this regard. He says that, assuming that the
blockade is duly notified, and also that num-
ber Of ships are stationed and remain at the en-
trance Of port sufficient really to prevent
access to it, or create an evident danger in
leaving it, and that these ships do not volun-
tarily prevent egress or ingress, the fact that
various ships may have successfully escaped
through it will not of lfprevent the blockade
from being an effective one by international
law" It will be sought to show that no por-
ton of our blookading force at Charleston
remained" at the entrance to that port after
the affair in question, and that there was con-
sequently no danger to neutral vessels in either
entering or leaving it. In tLis view we can
understand the stress laid by tho rebels on the
alleged fact that at a distance of five miles
beyond the usual anchorage Of the blockaders
nothing was to be seen of them. For this state
ment, however, we have nothing but their own
authority. If neutral vessel had attempted
either to enter or leave the port it is question
quickly manifested their presence.
Apart from the dscrcdit attaching to this
unfortunate affair, the question involved in
il Is, as we have before observed, very
important one. All international authorities
concede that the temporary withdrawal OF
blockading force does not per Sc constitute
the raising of blockade. 1t is very essential
that we should learn whether its being driven
temporarily" to some distance beyond Its
usual moorings is to be regarded in different
| light. This, however, cannot be ascertained
until we hear from the European governments
| interested in the decision of the point.
The worst that can befall us, supposing that
decision to be adverse, will be, according to
rebel statements, raising Of the blockade at
Charleston for sixty days In the meanwhile
we can settle the question for ourselves by as
saulting that hotbed Of rebellion with such q
force as will insure its speedy capture.
The LARGEST Roox IN THE WoRLD.-The
people Of New England are giving General