Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1863-04-15
Mr.. Mason and the British eo,enrnent. !.

Amongst the letters recently published as having
been addressed BY Mr.. Mason to Earl Russell, oc !
ours atriticsm BY the former Of the construction
placed BY the latter upon the article on Blockades
in the Treaty Of Paris. Tho criticism is the same
as that adopted by the President in his late
to Congress. Our government seems to be COM
hlitted to this criticism. and get it is worthy Of re-
mark, that no such censure has been uttered by
France, so far as we hear, in its government or
press; or indeed by any other PARTY to the treaty.
We are not parties to the treaty, FOR two reasons;
lst we are no. recognized as such person as can
be party to any treaty and End, we do not affect
to take it as whole, aSd it was to be taken as
whole or not at all. In giving in our adhesion We
excepted the article against priYateering
However, if We are to put on appearance Of hav-
ing foreign relations it is desirable that any COIN
mitment Of this people to a.cersan construction OF
public engagements should be well considered
There reasons for believing that the present po-
slSien is not
's4ehe article in the treaty is" Blockades to be
binding must be effective; that is to say, MAN.
tanned by force sufficient really to prevent access
to the coast of the enemy" Here is asserted that
force having certain character, i. e. "suficient
really to prevent access to the coast Of the enemy"
1t is upon these words that the question turns In
a letter to Lord Lyons dated 18th February, 1862
Earl Russell gave US paraphrase Of these words,
the observation-disclosures " to create an evident
danger Of entering leaving it, and that the ships
do not voluntarily permit egress or ingress." Earl
Russell in his letter gives the exact words OF the
treaty, and adds those just given by the word or"
which clearly means in that connection, " that Is"
In either case, that IS, whether the blockade be
maintained by force Sufficient really toprevent,"
&C., or sufficient to create all evident danger"
&C., Earl Russell says "the fact that various ships
may have successfully escaped through it, las in
the particular instance referred toy will not Of itself
prevent the blockade from being an effective one by
international law" With this conclusion our guy.
ernmcnt is dissatisfied. 1t disputes first the legal
identity of the two hypothesis, connected by er;;
aud then, it denies that where blockade is main
tanned by force sufficient really to prevent a.ces
to the coast access will ever be attained. This p0
sition is assumed with perfect confidence by bath
the President and Mr.. Mason; with such confidence
indeed as to occasion defamation upon tho part of
both in grave State papers The latter says-"H
may be READILY admitted that the fact that Val ious
ships entering or leaving port have successfully
escaped hlockading squadron does not show that
there may rot have been evident danger in en-
tcring leaving 1t; but it certainly does show that
theA!ockade was not in the language OF the treaty
of Paris, maintained by force sufficient really to
prevent access to the coast of the enemy" The
President SAID" Access is really not prevented Ly
tine bockading feet to the same port, Wilmington;
for steamers continually Arriving and departing
so that tried by this test the blockade is ineffective
and invalid"
Both the President and Mr. Mason have to a very
lusty conclusion in this matter Neither reflect
bu: the Treaty of Paris meant thcv contend for
weuia have been mu Ii easier for its auth VS. VIII,
consulted t'.t"e~s much. to have said Bu.kades
be bag mnst be effective, ths, lis must really prevent
access t.. 1ns s,ass 81 "a saey Sss 70 MIXING .ssr
encc u, the object this declaration appended 70
Treaty Of Paris That obj set is decarel-hy those waa
framed the paper be the settlement of denrab!e dis
pues removal of uncertainty and of' differences
of opinion Now the "dsputeS which formerly existed
lbon h"clules not between the advocates Of p:
per b'ockades np,n the ore band and hockades PRE-
venting access" upon the other; bat between paper
nluckaes. and such We're established by urce STA
uned IF the port snd creating evident danger 10 snch
w.sIed it, 1t bctween these disputes that
:s declaration decides and decides against the former
As for the gr,ssnesS ut The ici has led gov
erunent into much defamation. cannot express il
better than by citing the following passage from the great
work t" Chitingwur,h passay. whose significance does
depcr4 on the peculiar theology of that be'k Speak
ing If tho Christian ministry, ual the Holy Scriptures
&c. as the Means Of s.lva tiuI BE- sass
Aud these means the Providence II God hath still
preserved aud preserves |, III sufficient for all
these ents say sufficient. Though thr,ueh the malice
of men. not always efecta.i FIR that thu
be sufficient for the ',,ia>sng end. and nat ct.
eciual. yuy deny. who hull that G,d gives
all len sufficient Of salvation. aud yet that all
not saved" See The Religion Of Protes,auts,' &c;
page 81
II is clear that that the President and Mr. Mason
bound as matter Of consistency. hold that GDd has
gwen ii salvation sufficient to prevent
the of all men, of all men who live in
Christian land, BECAUSE all men, all such
prevented
The error is papabe and it is additional cause of
regret uttered raGer the circumstances which
.r. b in order to g. opp ,runty OF saving it, Pres.
ident Davis an Mr.. Mas, ,ugaged in the undigni
tied course Of talking AZ persons who would acknowl
edge that they mad ,av right 10 talk IN them.
n,,r ~ 4 friend of he Ri1l bas