Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1862-1865, 1863-01-15

decline the performance Of duty peculiarly incumbent
on them from any apprehension of the consequences to
l themselves Ono immediate and necessary result OF
their declining the responsibility of decision which
must have been adverse the extrayagant preensons
of the United States the Prolongation Of hosties
| to which enemies were thereby encouraged ana
which have resulted in nothing but scenes Of carnage
and devastation this continent and of misery an
suffering the other, suoh as have scarcely parallel
| in history Had those powers promptly admitted our
right to be treated all other Independent nations none
can doubt that the moral effect of such action would
have been dspel the deuson under which the United
States have persisted in their efforts to accomplish our
subiugation To the continued hesitation of the same
powers in rendering this act of simple justice towards
this Confederacy is still due the continuance Of the ca
ames which mankind suffers from the interruption OF
ts peaceful pursuits both in the old and the worlds
There are other matters in which less than Justice has
been rendered to this people BY neutral Europ aud
due advantage conferred the aggressors in wicked
war AT the inception of hoslities the inhabitants of
the Conederacy were almost exclusively agrcultursts
those of the United States to great extent mechanics
and merchants We had no commercial marine, while
| their merchant vessels covered the We were
| without navy, while they had powerful fleets The
advantage which they possessed for inictng injury
our coasts and harbors was thus counterbalanesd III
some measure by the exposure of their commerce to at
tack by private armed vessels IL was known to Europe
that within few years past the United States bad per-
emporly refused to accede to proposals for aboishing
nriyateerinp on the ground, alleged by them, that
nations owning powerful fleets would thereby obtain
due advantage those possessing inferior naval forces
Yet no sooner fragrant between the Confederacy
and the United States than the maritime powers oEurops
issued orders prohibiting either party from bringing
prizes into their ports. The prohibition, directed with
apparent impartiality against both belgerent in
reality effective against the Confederate States alone for
they alone could find hostile commerce on the ocean
Merely nominal against the United States the prohibit
ton operated with intense severity the Confederacy
by deriving of the only of maintaining, with
some approach to equality, its struggle on the ocean
against the crushing superiority OF naval force possessed
by its enemies The value and efficiency OF the weapon
which was thus wrested from our grasp by the combined
action of neutrg European powers in favor OF nation
which Processes openly its intention Of ravagng their
merce by privateerS in future war; strikugy ustra
ted by the terror inspired among the commercial classes
of the United States by single cruiser of the Confede
racy One national steamer commanded by officers and
manned by crew who debarred by the closure OF
neutral ports from the opportunity of causing captured
vessels to be condemned in their favor prize, has
suniced to double the rates of marine insurance in
Northern ports and cOnsgn to forced nacon numbers
of Northern vessels in addition to the direct damage
inflicted BY captures How difficult then, to
estimate the effects that must have been produced by
the hundreds OF private armed vessels that woud have
swept the seas in pursuit. of the commerce of
N.Y. if the means Of dsposFg OF their prizes had not
| been withheld by the acton Of nsutea Europe
But it is especially In relation TO the s0called block
ade of our coast that policy of European powers has
been so shaped the greatest injury TO the
Confederacy and to confer signal advantages on the
United States The Importance of this subject requires
some development
Prior TO the year 1885, the principles regulating this
subject were to be gathered from the writings Of emf
nent pubcists the decisions Of admiralty courts inter-
national treaties and the usages OF nations The uncer-
tainty and doubt which prevailed in reference to the
true rules Of maritime law, in time Of war; resulting
from the discordant and often conflicting principles
nounced from such varied and independent sources had
| become grlevous OWL to mankind Whether block
ade was allowable against port not invested by land as
well as By sea whether blockade valid by sea il
the investing fleet merely sufficient to reader ngress
TO the bockaded port evidently dangerous or whether
il was further required for its legality that Ii should be
sufficient "really to prevent access and numerous
other similar questions had remained doubtful and I'M
| decided.
Animated by the highly honorable desire 10 put an
end Ito differences of opinion between neutrais and
beaerente which nay occasion serious diedlties and
even conhictsn Il quote the ofcial language the hive
great powers of Europe, together with Sardinia and
Turkey, adopted in 1885, the following solemn decla-
/ ration" of principles:
/ Priyateering is and remains abolished.
| 3 The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, With the
| exception Of contraband OF war.
g. Neutral goods with the exception of contraband
of war; are liable to capture under enemys flag.
L. Bockades ia order to be binding, must be eilec-
tive; that is to say maintained by force sufficient
really 10 prevent access the coast Of the enemy.
Not ony did this solemn declaration announce the
world the principles ts Yhgh the signing powers agreed
10 conform in future wars, p4t contained clause to
which those powers gave Immediate eject, and which
provided that tho States parties to the Congress OF
Paris should be invited TO accede TO the declaration
Under this invitation every independent State in Europe
Welded its assent at least instance 10 known to me
of refusal and the United States, while declining to
assent to the proposition which prohibited prvateering
declared that the three remaining principles we're in en-
tire accordance with their views OF international
law.
No instance is kaow4 il History Of the adoption of
rules of pie law under circumstances Of like soieII
n;ty with like unaawity and pedggg the aitp OF pa
! tions with sanctity SO peculiar.
When therefore, this Conlederscy was formed and
when neutral powers while deferring action its de-
mani for admission into the family Of nations reco2niz
ed it as n belgerent power, Great Britain and France
made informal proposals about the time that their
own rights as neu;rals should be guaranteed by
cedng as bellgerents tie declaration Of principles
made by the Congress Of Paris. TIE request was ad
dressed to Of justice and therefore, net an
immediate favorable response IN the resolutions OF tue
Provisional Gongsss Of 18th August 1861 by which
all the principles of the Congress Of Paris were adopted
the guide Of our conduct during tho war, With the
sole exception of that relative to prvateerng. the
right to make use OF prvqeerS was one IN which neutral
nations had the present war, interest," was
right which the United States had refused to ABANDON
and which they remained at liberty to against u.s.
as was right of which already in actual enjoy
ment and which we could be expected 10 reuounce
Ragrdnte bel0 against adversary possessing an over
wheming superiority OF naval forces it reserved
with entire confidence that neutral nations could not fail
10 perceive that just existed for the reservation
Nor yss this confidence misplaced for the official docu
published BY the British Government usually called
"BIue Books" contain the expression OF the satisfaction
of that Government with the GcnSrct Of the officials who
conducted successfully the delicate business c2nfded to
their charge
These solemn declarations of principle this implied
agreement between the Confederacy and the powers
Just Damed have been suffered remain imperative
against tie genaces aud outrages neutral rights CON-
United by the Eited States with unceasing and progress
sing arrogance during the whole period Of the war.
Neutral Europe remained passive when tho United States
with naval force insufficient to blockade effectively the
coast of single State proclaimed paper blockade Of
thousands Of mica Of coast extending from the eapes
of the Chesapeake to those of Florida and encircng