The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-11-08

neutral trade would be mInimlzed by
the discretion left to the courts in the
application OF the order in council and
10y the Instructions which 1t was said
would be issued to the administrative
and other authorities having to do
with the execution of the so-called
blockade measures, this government
Is now forced 10 the realization that
T. expectation which were fully set
forth IN its note OF March 80. were
based on II mi~tuntpption of the i'm
tc,i.lons of the British government.
Desiring To AVOID contros ersy and in
thc expectation that the adnninistr =
t.oi OF the order in council woull
conform to the established rules of In
tcrnatorlal law, this government has
until now reserved the question of the
actual validity of the order in conn
Gil of March II, in 80 Jar as Ii Is con-
ssdcrcd by the government Of Great
Britain to establish a blockade within
the meaning of that term tts under
stood in the law and the practice of
nations: hut in the circumstances now
developed 1t feels that 1t can no longer
permit the validity of the alleged
blockade tn reIn.in uncTlaIlengcd.
"19) The Declaration Of Paris In
/ 1856, which has been universally
recognized as correctly stating the
rule of international law as to block
ade, expressly declares that block
AIDES, In order to be binding, must be
effective: that Is to say, maintained
by force sufficient really to prevent
access to the coast OF the enemy. The
effectiveness of a blockade is mani
festly question of fact. 1t is COM
mon knowledge that the German
coasts are open TO trade with the
Scandinavian countries and that Ger
man naval vessels cruie both in the
North Sea and the Baltic and
seize and bring into German ports
neutral vessels bound for Scandina-
Wan and Danish ports. Furthermore,
from the recent placing OF cotton on
the British list Of contrahand of war,
II appears that the British Govern
ment have themselves been forced to
the conclusion that the blockade Is In
effective to prevent shipments of cot
ton from reaching their enemies, or
else that they are doubtful as to the
legality Of the form of blockade which
they have sought to maintain.
"(20l Moreover, it is an essential
principle which has been universally
iacceptad that q blockade must apply
impartially To the ships of all nations.
This was set forth in the Declaration
Of London, is found in the prize rules
Of Germany, France, and japan, and
has long been admitted as a basic
'll iHElPiH OF the Ia " Oh b4othdue MS
principle. however. is not applied In
the present British blockade for as
above indicated German ports are no.
toriously open to traffic with the ports
of Denmark, Norway and Sweden. so
strictly has this principle been en-
forced in the past that In the Cri-
mean War the judicial committee of
the privy council on appeal laid down.
that If belligerents themselves trade
t,x~tYL 1a4 of hk.
regarded as effectively bloekaded.
(The Franciska Moore +. c., So The
decision has special significance at
the present time since il is matter
OF common knowledge that Great Bril-
to IN exports and recxports large guam
titles of merchandise to Norway,
Sweden, Denmark and Holland. whose
ports. SO far as American commerce
ia concerned, she regards. as bloekad-
: ed. In fact. the British note OF Au
: gust g itself indicates that the Bril-
fish exports of many articles, such as
cotton. lubricating oil, tobacco, cocoa,
| coffee, rice, wheat, flour, barley.
, spices. tea. copra. etc. to these coun-
tries have greatly exceeded the British
exports 0f the same articles for the
corresponding period of 1914. The
note also shows that there has been
AN important British trade with these
1 countries in many other articles, such
, as machinery, beef, butter. cotton
, waste, etc.
"(2D Finally, there IS no better
/ settled principle of the law Of nations
! than that which forbids the blockade
> of neutral ports In time OF war. The
J Declaration OF London, though not
regarded as binding upon the sigma
tories because not ratified by them,
has been expressly adopted by the
. British Government without modifi-
cation as to blockade in the British
order In council of October %, 1914.
Article g of the declaration declares
= specifically that The blockading
forces must not bar access to neu-
trail ports or coasts. This Is, in the
opinion Of this Government, correct
statement of the universally accepted
law as ii exists today and as 1t ex-
listed prior to the Declaration of Lon
don The meaning of this statement
is calculated by Mr.. Renault In the
report of the drafting committee upon
the convention. in which he states:
This rule has been thought necessary
the better to protect the commercial
interests of neutral countries; 1t COM
pletes article i, according to which
q blockade must not extend beyond
the ports and coasts of the enemy,
which implies that, as 1t is an opera
ton OF war. it must not be directed
against n neutral port, In spite of the
Importance TO IN belligcrent of the part
played by that port In Supplying his nd-
versnry."
AS the conference assembled at Lon
don upon the Invitation of the British
government. II is important to recall
the instruction OF Sir Edward Grey to
the British delegates, setting out the
views of His Majesty's government.
founded on the decisions OF the Brit
ish courts" In which he says:
"A blockade must be confined to
the ports and coast Of the enemy. bu:
1t may be instituted Of one port or
of several ports or Of the whole Of
the seaboard of tn" enemy II may be
instituted to prevent tho ingress only
or ec'ess only, or moth
n. added:
"Where the ship does mot intend to
proceed to the blocLaded port, the fact
that goods board are to he sent ON
by by inland transport In no
ground for condemnation.
In support Of this announcement,
Sir Edward Grey referred 10 several
decisions Of British prize courts, among
which an early one Of ISL held that
goods shipped froIa London to i:mder