New-York tribune., 1902-12-14
II "P4CIFTC BLOCKADE. .
Obligation of a Third Posce1- an Its
Observance
To the Editor of The Tribune.

OUStT IUfJ6.
| To the Editor of The Tribune
Sir: The establishment Of the so-called pa
J cihc blockade" of the Venezuelan coast-which
| In fact quickly ceased to be pacific-requires
some determination of the obligations Of a third
| power in its observance. Among the blockades
of the century thus characterized by the parties
instituting them may be mentioned the follow
| ing: That of 1927 by Great Britain, France
and Russia, Of the coasts Of Greece. occupied
| by Turkish troops; that of 1881 by France. or
the Tagus: that of 1888 by Great Britain and
France of ports of Holland; that Of 1856 by
Great Britain, of New-Grenada (Colomoa)'
that of 1888. by France of Mexico: that Of 1855
10 by France of La Plata: that of 1S45-'4S, by
Great Britain and France, of La Plata; that OF
1850. by Great Britain, of Greek ports; that OF
1862. by Great Britain of Rio Janeiro; that OF
1879, by Chill, Of the coast of Bolivia; that OF
iSS4, by France, of parts of Formosa; that OF
1856. by Great Britain, Austria. Germany, Italy
and Russia of Greece and that of 1897, by the
principal powers of Europe. of Crete. The
causes given in justification are various-in
1877. to force the Sultan to accept their media
ton; in 1888. TO compel Holland to recognize
the separation of Belgium and 1867 to secure
indemnity for the pillaging of an English vessel
wrecked the Brazilian coast. While the IN
stitution of such a blockade is not consloered
as constituting in itself act of war, the re-
suits so closely allied and the resentment
Of the country thus blockaded so natural that
the cause that would not justify the latter would
hardly justify the former. OF the question OF
justification each nation is its own judge
In the blockade of the Mexican ports in 1888.
which was soon followed by a declaration Of
war by that country France took the excep-
tional ground that vessels of third powers en-
tering the blockade might be 'confiscated That
course with scarcely an exception, has peen
condemned by writers on international law. Al
the time of the blockade of La Plata, in 1876
by Great Britain and France, Lord Paimerston
said in Parliament that unless war existed the
government had no right to prevent not only
vessels of third powers. but also British mer-
chant vessels from communicating with the
ports. 1t in accordance with that view
that the blockade of Greece in 1850 was main
tanned by the British Government. So also in
the blockade of 1886. the powers authorized the
detention of Greek vessels only, and Of vessels
flying the flag of Greece those carrying cargoes
in whole in part the property of foreigners
shipped before the notification were excepted
This rule departed from in 1897 in the
blockade of Crete. The blockade was made ap-
plicable not only to all ships under the flag OF
Greece but to vessels of the six powers or of
neutral if the cargo was destined for the
Greek troops the interior of the island
An interesting discussion took place in 1884
between Earl Granville and NJ. Waddington.
French Ambassador at London relative to the
blockade of Formosa. The French, although
wishing TO regard the affair as local, or
pacific blockade" extended the right OF capture
TO ships of third nation. On this Earl Gran
Vile remarked in a communication OF Nov. 26
1884: The contention Of the French Govern
ment that pacific blockade confers on the
blockadng power the right to capture ana con-
for hFpa
such blockade is opposed the opinions of the |
most eminent statesmen and jurists OF France |
and to the decision of its tribunals. and it is in
conflict with well established principles of inter-
national law On the failure of the French |
Government to recognize this pacific character |
of the blockade the execution of the Foreign |
Enlistment Act was ordered and the French |
fleet was deprived of the use OF the coaing sta |
ton at Hong Kong except on beiligerent terms. |
Subsequent to this in 1887. the Institute OF |
Law expressed the opinion that a |
blockade of this character effective against |
the blockaded party only. While this view was |
not accepted in 1897 in the blockade of Crete |
by the European powers. the United States |
Department of State did not commit itself to the
departure therefrom. Mr.. Sherman, in his reply.
on March &c 1897 TO the notification of the |
blockade said: II confne myself to taking note |
Of the communc; tfon, not conceding the right /
to make such bio ade as that referred to in
your communication, and reserving the consider
alton of all international rights and of any ques
ton which may in any way affect the commerce
or interest of the United States In the present
Venezuelan case therefore, there seems to be no
precedent requiring the United States to recog-
nize the validity of the pacific blockade"
against vessels flying the American flag.
washington, D. c., Dec. 13, 1902. s. B. c. |