that they will condemn all the pitch and tar which they meet with." (29 Aug. 1674.) But whilst a Belligerent Power, to whose detriment a prohibited trade is carried on, may with Reason seize and confiscate articles of a certain character, although they may belong to the Subjects of a Neutral Power, if they are in the course of transport to the Enemy's country, the Law of Nations does not impose upon a Neutral Power, as such, any obligation to prevent its Subjects from embarking their property in trade with either of two Belligerent Powers.

The transport of merchandise to the ports of a Belligerent State is per se a perfectly lawful act on the part of a Neutral merchant; and it is only by reason of the accidental uses, to which certain articles of merchandise may be applied in consequence of War existing between two States, that the Right to intercept such merchandise in the course of transport on the High Seas to the ports of a Belligerent Power, and to confiscate it to its own uses, accrues to the adverse Belligerent. The right of the Neutral to transport and of the adverse Belligerent to seize,

PART II.

b

are conflicting Rights, and neither party can charge the other with a criminal act. Upon this view of the Common Law, which is sanctioned by the highest Authorities, it would be under an erroneous conception of the juridical relations which exist between Belligerent States and Neutral States, that a Belligerent Power, in the absence of special Treaty-Engagements with a Neutral Power, should hold itself entitled to complain to the latter of its not exercising its authority to restrain the trade of its Subjects with the adverse Belligerent. The Belligerent, to use the language of an eminent Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, must content himself with cutting up the Neutral Commerce, and ought to make no complaint to the Neutral Power, not even where the individual merchant rescues his vessel after capture, and escapes into his own or a friendly port.

The historical survey, which the Author has endeavoured to complete, as occasion has permitted, in the course of the following pages, establishes the material fact, that the main

Principles of Prize Law were considered nearly in the same light four hundred years ago as in the present day; and that the Rules, in which those Principles were then embodied, were framed with particular attention, and with special regard to the Practice and Usage which had anciently prevailed in such matters. We have thus the experience of ages attesting the existence of a Law, to which Belligerent Nations pay respect even in the moment of victory, and the beneficial operation of which Law has been promoted by equitable concessions, which Belligerents have wisely made from time to time, in the administration of it. The Rights of War can never be absolutely renounced by Nations, for they are Natural Rights, to which every Nation may be compelled, under circumstances of an extreme kind, to have recourse; but the exercise of those Rights can at all times be moderated, and it is by moderation in the exercise of them, that those Nations which claim to be the leaders of the civilised World in the arts of Peace, are bound to set an example to other Nations in time of War.

The Allied Powers in 1854 were not unmindful of their responsibility on this head; and the Emperor of All the Russias showed himself to be equally alive to his duty, as one of the Great Powers of Europe.

The Author would have gladly welcomed tidings of similar import, if they had been wafted across the waters of the Atlantic from a land with which Great Britain has so many ties of brotherhood and sympathy, and upon which the desolating scourge of Civil War has descended with an intensity of fury, to which Christian Europe has perhaps exhibited no parallel, unless it may be discovered in the Annals of the Thirty Years' War. That a contest of so anomalous a character, as that which is raging between the States of the North American Continent, would give rise to some intricate questions of public Law between the United States of America and the Maritime Powers of Europe, was to be expected. The institution of a Blockade of the whole Seaboard of the Confederate States, although the scale of such a Blockade may not be without pre

cedent, has been attended with consequences of a more serious character to Neutral States, by the stoppage of the domestic industry of their artisans, than have heretofore ever resulted from such an exercise of Belligerent Right; whilst the possible application of the rule of Enemy-Character attaching to Neutral vessels, by reason of their carrying Enemy's despatches, although such despatches are being conveyed to a Neutral port in Public Letterbags under the seal of a Neutral Post Office, has given rise to questions, which are not readily solved by reference to any previous Practice amongst Nations, and may require to be adjusted by Negotiation, or perhaps by express Convention.

Whilst the present volume has been passing through the Press, the Second Annotated Edition of Wheaton's Elements of International Law has appeared from the pen of Mr. William Beach Lawrence, enriched with copious notes by its learned Editor, bearing upon topics growing out of the pending hostilities on the American Continent. Mr. Lawrence has dis