maritime powers had given their sanction in the treaties concluded among themselves. The few practical infractions, in time of war, of the principles thus recognized by them, have been disavowed, upon the return of peace, by new stipulations again acknowledging the existence of the rights of neutrals as set down in the maritime code. "In addition to the recognition of these rights by the European powers, one of the first acts of the United States, as a nation, was their unequivocal sanction of the principles upon which they are founded, as declared in their treaty of commerce of 1778 with the King of France. These principles were that free ships gave freedom to the merchandise, except contraband goods, which were clearly defined, and that neutrals might freely sail to and between enemies' ports, except such as were blockaded in the manner therein set forth. These principles having thus been established by universal consent, became the rule by which it was expected that the belligerents would be governed in the war which broke out about that time between France and Spain on the one hand, and Great Britain on the other. The latter power, however, having soon betrayed a disposition to deviate from them in some of the most material points, the governments which had preserved a neutral course in the contest became alarmed at the danger with which their maritime rights were threatened by the encroachments and naval supremacy of England, and the Empress of Russia, at their head, undertook to unite them in the defense of those rights. On the 28th February, 1780, she issued her celebrated declaration, containing the principles according to which the commanders of her naval armaments would be instructed to protect the neutral rights of her subjects. Those principles were as follows: "1st. Neutral vessels may freely sail from port to port, and on the coasts of the nations parties to the war. "2d. The goods belonging to the subjects of the said nations at war are, with the exception of contraband articles, free on board neutral vessels. "3d. With respect to the definition of contraband articles, the Empress adheres to the provisions of the 10th and 11th articles of her treaty of commerce with Great Britain, and extends the obligations therein contained to all the nations at war. "4th. To determine what constitutes a blockaded port, this denomination is confined to those the entrance into which is manifestly rendered dangerous in consequence of the dispositions made by the attacking power with ships stationed and sufficiently near. "5th. These principles are to serve as a rule in proceedings and judgments with respect to the legality of prizes. "This declaration was communicated to the belligerent Governments with a request that the principles it contained should be observed by them in the prosecution of the war. From France and Spain it received the most cordial and unequivocal approbation, as being founded upon the maxims of public law which had been their rule of conduct. Great Britain, without directly approving or condemning those maxims, promised that the rights of Russia would be respected agreeably to existing treaties. The declaration was likewise communicated to the other European powers, and the accession by treaties or solemn declarations of Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Holland, Austria, Portugal, and the Two Sicilies to the principles asserted by the Empress of Russia, formed the league, which, under the name of armed neutrality,' undertook to preserve inviolate the maritime rights of neutrals. "Whatever may have been the conduct of the belligerents in that war with respect to the rights of neutrals as declared by the armed neutrality, the principles asserted by the declaration of the Empress Catherine were again solemnly recognized by the treaty of peace concluded by Great Britain and France at Versailles on the 3d September, 1783. Among the several treaties thereby renewed and confirmed was that of Utrecht, in 1713, by which the same contracting parties had, nearly a century before, given the most solemn sanction to the principles of the armed neutrality, which were thus again proclaimed by the most deliberate acts both of belligerents and neutrals as forming the basis of the universal code of maritime legislation among the naval powers of the world. "Such may be said to have been the established law of nations at the period of the peace of 1783, when the United States, recognized as independent by all the powers of the earth, took their station amongst them. These principles, to which they had given their sanction in their treaties with France of 1778, were again confirmed in those of 1873 with Sweden, and 1785 with Prussia, and continued, uncontroverted by other nations, until the wars of the French Revolution broke out and became almost general in Europe in 1793. The maxims then advanced by Great Britain in her instructions to her naval commanders and in her orders in council regulating their conduct and that of her privateers with regard to neutrals, being in direct contravention of the principles set forth in the declaration of the armed neutrality and in her own treaty stipulations, compelled the European powers which had remained neutral in the contest to unite again for the protection of their just rights. It was with this view that the Emperor Paul, of Russia, appealed to these powers, and that, at his instance, making common cause in behalf of the general interest of nations, Russia, Sweden, Denmark, and Prussia united in a new league of armed neutrality, bound themselves by new treaties, reasserted the principles laid down in the declaration of 1780, and added thereto some new clauses extending still further the privileges of neutral commerce.” Mr. Van Buren, Sec. of State, to Mr. Randolph, June 18, 1830, MS. Inst. The tenth and eleventh articles of the treaty of commerce and navigation "X. Permission shall be granted to the subjects of the two contracting parties to go, come, and trade freely with those states, with which one or other of the parties shall at that time, or at any future period, be engaged in war, provided they do not carry military stores to the enemy. From this permission, however, are excepted places actually blocked up, or besieged, as well by sea as by land; but, at all other times, and with the single exception of military stores, the above-said subjects may transport to these places all sorts of commodities, as well as passengers without the least impediment. With regard to the searching of merchant ships, men of war and privateers shall behave as favourably as the reason of the war, at that time existing, can possibly permit towards the most friendly powers that shall remain neuter; observing, as far as may be, the principles and maxims of the law of nations, that are generally acknowledged. “XI. All cannon, mortars, muskets, pistols, bombs, grenades, bullets, balls, fusees, flint-stones, matches, powder, saltpetre, sulphur, breastplates, pikes, swords, belts, cartouch-bags, saddles, and bridles, beyond the quantity that may be necessary for the use of the ship, or beyond what every man serving on board the ship, and every passenger, ought to have, shall be accounted ammunition or military stores; and, if found, shall be confiscated, according to law, as contraband goods or prohibited commodities; but neither the ships nor passengers, nor the other commodities found at the same time, shall be detained or hindered to prosecute their voyage." (Chalmers, I. 7.) See, as to the question of naval supplies, Fauchille, 67. See, also, as to the Armed Neutrality, 47 West. Rev. 349; 8 J. Q. Adams's 2. DECLARATION OF PARIS. $1221. "Considering that maritime law, in time of war, has long been the subject of deplorable disputes; "That the uncertainty of the law and of the duties in such a matter, gives rise to differences of opinion between neutrals and belligerents which may occasion serious difficulties, and even conflicts; "That it is consequently advantageous to establish a uniform doctrine on so important a point; "That the plenipotentiaries assembled in congress at Paris cannot better respond to the intentions by which their Governments are animated, than by seeking to introduce into international relations fixed principles in this respect; "The above-mentioned plenipotentiaries, being duly authorised, resolved to concert among themselves as to the means of attaining this object; and, having come to an agreement, have adopted the following solemn declaration: "1. Privateering is, and remains abolished. "2. The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the exception of contraband of war. "3. Neutral goods, with the exception of contraband of war, are not liable to capture under enemy's flag; “4. Blockades, in order to be binding, must be effective; that is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the coast of the enemy. "The Governments of the undersigned plenipotentiaries engage to bring the present declaration to the knowledge of the states which have not taken part in the congress of Paris, and to invite them to accede to it. Convinced that the maxims which they now proclaim cannot but be received with gratitude by the whole world, the undersigned plenipotentiaries doubt not that the efforts of their Governments to obtain the general adoption thereof, will be crowned with full success. "The present declaration is not and shall not be binding, except between those powers who have acceded, or shall accede, to it. "Done at Paris, the 16th of April, 1856." Herlstet's Map of Europe by Treaty, II, 1282. The foregoing declaration respecting maritime law was signed by the representatives of all the seven powers in the Congress of Paris, namely, Austria, France, Great Britain, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia, and Turkey. It was afterwards acceded to as follows: Anhalt-Dessau-Coethen (June 17, 1856); Argentine Confederation (Oct. 1, 1856); Baden (July 30, 1856); Bavaria (July 4, 1856); Belgium (June 6, 1856); Brazil (March 18, 1858); Bremen (June 11, 1856); Brunswick (Dec. 7, 1857); Chile (Aug. 13, 1856); Denmark (June 25, 1856); Ecuador (Dec. 6, 1856); Frankfort (June 17, 1856); Germanic Confederation (July 10, 1856); Greece (June 20, 1856); Guatemala (Aug. 30, 1856); Hamburg (July 27, 1856); Hanover (May 31. 1856); Hayti (Sept. 17, 1856); Hesse-Cassel (June 4, 1856); Hesse-Darmstadt (June 15, 1856); Lübeck (June 20, 1856); Mecklenburg-Schwerin (July 22, 1856); Mecklenburg-Strelitz (Aug. 25, 1856); Modena (July 29, 1856); Nassau (June 18, 1856); Netherlands (June 7, 1856); New Granada (July 31, 1856), subject to the ratification of the legislature); Oldenburg (June 9, 1856); Parma (Aug. 20, 1856); Peru (Oct. 5, 1857); Portugal (July 28, 1856); Roman States (June 3, 1856); Saxe-Altenburg (June 9, 1856); Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (June 22, 1856); Saxe-Meiningen (June 30, 1856); Saxe-Weimar (June 22, 1856); Saxony (June 16, 1856); Two Sicilies (May 31, 1856); Sweden and Norway (June 13, 1856); Switzerland (July 28, 1856); Tuscany (June 5, 1856); Würtemberg (June 24, 1856). (Herlstet's Map of Europe by Treaty, II. 1284.) "The Government of Uruguay has likewise given its entire assent to the four principles, subject to the ratification of the legislative power. Spain, without acceding to the declaration of April 16, on account of the first point, which relates to the abolition of privateering, has replied that she approves the other three. Mexico has made the same response." (Report of M. Walewski, min, of for. aff., to the Emperor of the French, June 12, 1858, 48 Br. & For. State Papers. 132, 133.) The reply of the United States is given below. On the proposition of Count Walewski, and recognizing that it is to the common interest to maintain the indivisibility of the four principles mentioned in the declaration signed this day, the plenipotentiaries agree that the powers which have signed it, or which shall accede thereto, shall not in future enter into any arrangement, concerning the application of the law of neutrals in time of war, which does not rest altogether upon the four principles embodied in the said declaration. "Upon an observation made by the plenipotentiaries of Russia, the congress concurred in the view that the present resolution could not have a retroactive effect nor invalidate previous conventions." Protocol No. 24, Congress of Paris, session of April 16, 1856, 46 Br. & See, generally, Stark's Abolition of Privateering and the Declaration of "Soon after the commencement of the late war in Europe this Government submitted to the consideration of all maritime nations two principles for the security of neutral commerce-one that the neutral flag should cover enemies' goods, except articles contraband of war, and the other that neutral property on board merchant vessels of belligerents should be exempt from condemnation, with the exception of contraband articles. These were not presented as new rules of international law, having been generally claimed by neutrals, though not always admitted by belligerents. One of the parties to the war (Russia) as well as several neutral powers, promptly acceded to these propositions, and the two other principal belligerents (Great Britain and France) having consented to observe them for the present occasion, a favorable opportunity seemed to be presented for obtaining a general recognition of them, both in Europe and America. "But Great Britain and France, in common with most of the states of Europe, while forbearing to reject, did not affirmatively act upon the overtures of the United States. "While the question was in this position, the representatives of Russia, France, Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, and Tur |