by the neutral officer on board his own vessel. Exactly the same proceeding had been stipulated in the convention of 1801, and it was added, in both treaties, that if the papers so communicated should be found to be regular, no further search should take place. An exception, however, was subjoined in that of 1801, which constituted the only practical difference on the subject between the two conventions. It was not, as before, laid down absolutely, that no further search should, in any case, take place, but that none should take place "unless some valid motive of suspicion shall exist." Good faith forbade its being contended that the right, from which the belligerent had agreed to abstain, except when some valid ground of suspicion should exist, might still be indiscriminately exercised at his discretion. As the practice had before stood, the inquiry into the facts of the case preceded all conclusions to be drawn from them. The suspicion arose from the search, and the detention of the ship was its just and natural effect. As the law would stand under the convention, suspicion must precede inquiry, and very few cases were likely to occur, where any valid ground of suspicion respecting a neutral ship could bona fide exist before the search. It was then but tco manifest that, while they had, in words, established the right of visiting ships under neutral convoy, they had, in fact, so limited and circumscribed the practice, as utterly to renounce every beneficial purpose to which could, by any

possibility, be applied.1

In order to complete our view of the controversy growing out of the armed neutrality, it is only necessary to add that both in the preliminary treaty of peace between France and Great Britain signed in 1801, and in the definitive treaty concluded at Amiens in the following year, a total silence was observed respecting the disputed points of maritime law. On the rupture which took place between Great Britain and Russia in consequence of the attack upon Copenhagen and capture of the Danish fleet, the Russian Government published on the 26th October, 1807, a declaration forever annulling the maritime convention of 1801, and proclaiming "anew the principles of the armed neutrality, that monument of the wisdom of the Empress Catharine and engaging never to derogate from this system.

The British Government published, on the 18th December, an answer

'Speech delivered by Lord Grenville in the House of Lords, Nov. 13, 1801, Parliamentary History of England, vol. xxxvi, pp. 200-255. For the very lame and inconclusive replies made by other speakers, see ibid., pp. 256-263.

to this declaration proclaiming "anew the principles of maritime law, against which was directed the armed neutrality under the auspices of the Empress Catharine."

It was stated that these principles had been recognized by all the Powers of Europe who framed that league, and no one more strictly conformed to them than Russia herself under the reign of the Empress Catharine. It was the right, as well as the duty of His Majesty to maintain these principles, which he was determined to do against every confederacy with the assistance of divine Providence. The subsequent treaties of peace and of commerce between the two Powers are totally silent upon the disputed points.1

The treaties of peace signed at Paris in 1814-15, between France and the allied Powers, are equally silent upon the contested questions of maritime law.

1Martens, Manuel diplomatique sur les Droits des Neutres sur Mer, p. 69. The questions involved in the controversy, respecting the armed neutrality. became the subject of polemic discussion by various public jurists, both in belligerent and neutral countries. Among these works one of the most remarkable was the examination of the judgment of Sir W. Scott in the case of the Swedish convoy by Professor J. F. W. Schlegel published at Copenhagen in 1800. It was replied to by Dr. Croke in his remarks Schlegel's work upon the visitation of rentral vessels under convoy, London,

1801.

upon

Mr.

Declaration of the Empress of Russia regarding the Principles of Armed Neutrality, addressed to the Courts of London, Versailles and Madrid, February 28, 17801

The Empress of all the Russias has so fully manifested her sentiments of equity and moderation, and has given such evident proofs, during the course of the war that she supported against the Ottoman Porte, of the regard she has for the rights of neutrality and the liberty of universal commerce, as all Europe can witness. This conduct, as well as the principles of impartiality that she has displayed during the present war, justly inspires her with the fullest confidence, that her subjects would peaceably enjoy the fruits of their industry and the advantages belonging to a neutral nation. Experience has nevertheless proved the contrary. Neither the above-mentioned considerations, nor the regard to the rights of nations, have prevented the subjects of Her Imperial Majesty from being often molested in their navigation, and stopped in their operations, by those of the belligerent Powers.

These hindrances to the liberty of trade in general, and to that of Russia in particular, are of a nature to excite the attention of all neutral nations. The Empress finds herself obliged therefore to free it by all the means compatible with her dignity and the well-being of her subjects; but, before she puts this into execution, and with a sincere intention to prevent any future infringements, she thought it but just to publish to all Europe the principles she means to follow, which are the most proper to prevent any misunderstanding, or any occurrences that may occasion it. Her Imperial Majesty does it with the more confidence, as she finds these principles coincident with the primitive right of nations which every people may reclaim, and which the belligerent Powers can not invalidate without violating the laws

1 Translation. French text at Martens, Recueil de Traités, vol. 3, p. 158.

of neutrality, and without disavowing the maxims they have adopted in the different treaties and public engagements.

They are reducible to the following points:

(1) That all neutral ships may freely navigate from port to port, and on the coasts of nations at war.

(2) That the effects belonging to the subjects of the said warring Powers shall be free in all neutral vessels, except contraband merchandise.

(3) That the Empress, as to the specification of the above-mentioned merchandise, holds to what is mentioned in the 10th and 11th articles of her treaty of commerce with Great Britain, extending her obligations to all the Powers at war.

(4) That, to determine what is meant by a blockaded port, this is only to be understood of one which is so well kept in by the ships of the Power that attacks it, and which keep their places, that it is dangerous to enter into it.

(5) That these principles serve as a rule for proceedings and judg ments upon the legality of prizes.

Her Imperial Majesty, in making these points public, does not hesitate to declare, that to maintain them, and to protect the honor of her flag, the security of the trade and navigation of her subjects, she has prepared the greatest part of her maritime forces. This measure will not, however, influence the strict neutrality she does observe, and will observe so long as she is not provoked and forced to break the bounds of moderation and perfect impartiality. It will be only in this extremity that her fleet have orders to go wherever honor, interest, and need may require.

In giving this solemn assurance with the usual openness of her character, the Empress can not do other than promise herself that the belligerent Powers, convinced of the sentiments of justice and equity which animate her, will contribute towards the accomplishment of these salutary purposes, which manifestly tend to the good of all nations, and to the advantage even of those at war. In consequence of which, Her Imperial Majesty will furnish her commanding officers with instructions conformable to the above-mentioned principles, founded upon the primitive laws of people, and so often adopted in their conventions.

Russian Memoradum presented to the States-General of the Netherlands, April 3, 17801

High and Mighty Lords:

The underwritten Envoy Extraordinary from the Empress of all the Russias has the honor to communicate to you a copy of the declaration which the Empress his sovereign has made to the belligerent Powers. Your High Mightinesses may look upon this communication as a particular mark of the attention of the Empress for the republic, which is equally interested in the reasons which occasioned the declaration. He has further orders to declare to Your High Mightinesses, in the name of Her Imperial Majesty, that how desirous soever she may be on the one hand to maintain the strictest neutrality during the present war, yet Her Majesty is as determined to take the most efficacious means to support the honor of the Russian flag, the security of the trade, and the navigation of her subjects, and not suffer either to be hurt by any of the belligerent Powers; that, in order to prevent on this occasion any misunderstanding or false interpretation, she thought it necessary to specify in the declaration the limits of a free trade, and what is called contraband. That, if the definition of the former is founded upon the clearest notions of natural right, the latter is literally taken from the treaty of commerce between Russia and Great Britain, by which Her Imperial Majesty means incontestably to prove her good faith and impartiality towards each party; that she consequently apprehends that the other trading Powers will immediately come into her way of thinking relative to neutrality.

From these considerations, Her Imperial Majesty has ordered the underwritten to invite Your High Mightinesses to make a common cause with her, as such an union may serve to protect the trade and navigation, and at the same time observe a strict neutrality, and to communicate to Your High Mightinesses the regulation she has in consequence taken.

The same invitation has been made to the Courts of Copenhagen, Stockholm and Lisbon, in order that by the united endeavors of all the neutral maritime Powers, a natural system, founded on justice, might be established and legalized in favor of the trade of neutral nations, which by its real advantages might serve for a rule for future ages.

The underwritten does not doubt but your High Mightinesses will, 1 Annual Register, 1780, p. 346.