Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-11-22
Is A BLOCKADE LEGALe

Differences existed in the Cabinet and
the country in 1861 on some of the meas
ures and the course of policy which the
Government should pursue toward the Sc
cessionists. The questions presented were
in some respects novel and without prece-
dent, as was the instruction itself. Hos
tilities were precipitated within forty days
of the Inauguration. before the Administra-
ton was fully established in place, or had
time to develop its policy. The assault on
the flag at Charleston compelled immediate
action. The proclamation promptly issued
for seyenty-five thousand volunteers also
declared a blockade of the Southern
ports. There was entire unanimity
in the Cabinet on all points in the
proclamation except that of a blockade,
which was questioned IS a doubtful and
irregular proceeding; forthe conflict, wheth-
er an inSQTectiOn or rebellion, was purely
domestic civil war and not a foreign
war; and it was thought the internal dis
sensions in our own territory should be con-
fined within our own borders. A majority
of the Cabinet, therefore, preferred an en-
barge or suspension of intercourse with that
part of the country to a blockade, and MAIN
tanned it to be the true policy of the gov
eminent to close the ports and interdict
commerce with the insurgents until the re-
bellion was suppressed. 1t was claimed
that blockade was not a domestic but an
international question-legitimat and
proper as between two distinct ma
tions, but that we could not properly
blockade our own ports, though
we might shut them p,prohibit trafficfrom
abroad by law, and make its violation a
1Nf3 hot ha oof Of n
blockade of the whole rebel territory would
raise them to the level of belligerents-a
concession to the Confederate organization
virtually admitting it to be a quasi govern
ment-giving that organization a position
among nations that we would not and could
not recognize or sanction, and which would
inevitably lead to embarTaSSnents. But
the subject was in some of its aspects novel.
and the Secretary of State, though some
times rash, had not the bold and vigorous
mind to assert and maintain right princi-
pie if fraught with doubt and
difficulty, provided there was an
easier path. The blockade, he
thought, opened up way. The questions
of blockade were well settled and clearly
defined, the authority and presidents ex-
plieit, and he therefore preferred to adopt
that course, shelter himself under those
precedents, and apply international law
to a strictly national and domestic con-
troversy, rather than assert a measure
and vindicate an important principle af-
fectng national rights. Less was said in
the confusion and proceedings which came
like an avalanche at that critical moment
upon the Administration, than at a
later period. Two members of the Cab
met said they had bestowed very slight
examination upon the subject, and as it re-
lated to foreign intercourse they deferred to
the Secretary of State, who had given it
special attention, and also cited authorities
justifying an exclusion of commerce from
national ports in the equitable form of
blockade. President Lincoln inclined to
that view, and when Mr.. Seward asserted
that one great object of the blockade, in
stead of closure Of the ports was to avoid
complications which would be likely to in
volve us in a foreign war, the question was
decided. The President said we could not
afford to have two wars on our hands at
once, and blockade was ordered.-HOn.
Gideon Helles in The GdldIy for Decenl-
hpg