is not controled by fome particular treaty, the British cruisers have a right to feize French property on board neutral veffels, and likewife to feize goods that are neutral property on board neutral veffels, if the faid goods are contraband of war, that is, military ftores, fuch as implements of war, falt-petre, fulphur, and other fuch materials, immediately applicable to warlike purposes, and perhaps, naval flores, fit for the equipment of ships of war; though, as to this last article, there feems to be fome room for doubt. And, as a neceffary confequence of this right of feizure, without which the faid right would be nugatory and useless, our cruifers must have a right to vifit, and, in some cases, to search, the neutral veffels they fall-in-with on the high feas, in order to discover whether they have, or have not, any property liable to feizure. But, as to the manner of exercising this right, a doubt has occurred to me, which I wish your coirefpondent Sulpicius would clear-up. For, from fome weighty arguments alleged in Profeffor Schlegel's tract on this fubject, and from two of the treaties alleged in the Ap'pendix to Sulpicius's own Letters in fupport of his doctrines, it appears to me that this right of vifiting and fearching is appointed by the general law and practice of maritime nations on this fubject, to be performed in the following manner. The British armed veffel has a right to ftop the neutral merchant-ship, and to fend a boat with the Captain of the armed veffel, or his Lieutenant, and a Secretary, or Clerk, to write-down what shall be necessary to record the tranfaction, and at moft, one perfon more, that is, three perfons in all, befides the failors neceffary to the rowing of the boat, to vifit the neutral veffel; the British cruiser being all the while at fuch a distance from the neutral ship that its cannon-fhot could not reach her, to the end that no undue terror may influence the crew of the neutral fhip. These two, or three, perfons; must be admitted on

board

board the merchant-veffel, and muft require the Captain of it to produce a paffport from the King of the Country to which the neutral vessel belongs, (as, for example, the King of Denmark), teftifying, "That the owners of the neutral veffel have declared upon oath, before his cuftom-houfe officers at the port from which the fhip failed, that they and other fubjects of the faid king are the fole owners of all the property put on board the faid fhip, and that the ship is bound to fuch a particular port, to which he has a right to trade," and he must likewife produce a certificate from the chief magiftrates of the port from which the fhip failed, declaring, "That the owners of the ship had made oath, that the fhip, and all the merchandize on board it, belonged to them and other perfons, fubjects of the fame king, and not to either of the powers now at war, or to any of the subjects of either of the faid powers, and that none of the goods on board it were prohibited goods;" and when this passport and certificate have been produced to the three perfons appointed to visit the ship, they are bound to reft satisfied of the fhip's having no feizable property on board, and they have no right to break-open any chefts, or open any bales of goods, or further inquire into the lading of the fhip, in order to discover whether the declarations of the paffport and certificate are true or not; and the merchant-fhip must be permitted to pursue its voyage unmolefted. But, if no fuch paffport and certificate are produced, I prefume the cruifers may exercise their right of searching for contraband goods, according to their own discretion; and, likewise, if they fufpect fome of the goods to be enemies' property, they may detain the fhip and carry her into a British port upon fufpicion, in order to have that matter deliberately inquired-into and afcertained. This feems to be the regular manner of proceeding, authorized by the general law and practice of civilized maritime nations, with respect to neutral merchant-fhips not escorted by fhips of war.

But, when the merchant-ships are elcorted by a fhip of war, the mode of proceeding feems to be lefs certainly determined, either by practice or written documents recognizing it, fuch as Treaties of Commerce, Marine Ordinances, or Inftructions of Governments to the Captains of their fhips of war; yet, upon the whole, we may collect it to be as follows. The British ships of war that meet with a fleet of neutral merchant-fhips, escorted by a fhip of war, ought to apply to the Commander of the fhip of war to know their destination, and the nature of the goods that are on board them, instead of sending a boat with two or three perfons to vifit each of the merchant-fhips, and infpect their paffports and certificates, or other public papers: and, if the said Commander declares, "That the ships and their cargoes are entirely the property of the subjects of his sovereign, and that none of the goods are contraband, and that the proper declarations upon oath upon this fubject have been made by the shippers of the goods before the magiftrates, or custom-houfe officers, of the port in which the veffels were laden;" this Declaration of the Commander of the ship of war that escorts them ought to be received as fufficient teftimony of the ships and their cargoes being neutral, and not liable to feizure, and the faid merchant-ships ought to be permitted to pursue their voyage without further moleftation, This, at least, is the method of proceeding prefcribed for this case by the only treaty, if I recollect right, that makes mention of this cafe amongst all the treaties relating to this question that have been produced, either by Profeffor Schlegel, or Sulpicius. And it feems to be confirmed in practice by the refiftance made by Captain Dedel, a Dutch captain of a man. of war, in the year 1762, to an attempt made by an English ship, or ships of war, to vifit fome Dutch merchant-ships, which he was directed by the Dutch Admiralty to escort; and by the approbation bestowed on him by the Dutch Admiralty for having made fuch refiftance and likewife by

the

the conduct of the brave Earl of St. Vincent, in the present war (as stated by Profeffor Schlegel,) in releafing a neutral merchant-veffel, (that had been taken by one of his cruifers, as fufpected of having enemy's goods, or contraband goods, on board, when the Commander of a fhip of war of the fame nation came-up a little while after, accompanied by a large fleet of merchant-fhips of the fame nation, that he was appointed to efcort, and teftified to the Earl of St. Vincent, that the fhip which his cruisers had taken had made a part of this fleet, and had strayed from it by fome accident, that had made her be confidered by their captors as a fingle veffel and not intitled to his protection. The inftant release of this veffel by Lord St. Vincent, with an apology for the capture, as having been owing to a mistake, is furely a pretty good proof, that fuch is the privilege of merchantships, escorted by fhips of war, according to the opinions of fea-officers of the greatest Reputation and Experience. This privilege may certainly be abused, and may occafion fome inconveniences to the belligerent nations: and fo may every regulation made for the conduct of human affairs. But it must be remembered that we are not now inquiring "what the law of nations ought to be in fuch a cafe," (which would, indeed, be a moft arduous and difficult queftion,) but "what it is." And, as Great Britain has, throughout this war of neceffity and felf-defence, (which fhe did not feek, or make, but fuffered, or received, from the infolence of the French National Convention, in February, 1793, when governed by the mischievous counfels of Monfieur Briffot,) conducted herself with great moderation and regard to juftice, notwithstanding the numerous charges of a contrary spirit brought against her by the dej claimers of France, I fhould be glad to fee her perfeved in the fame temperate and honourable conduct to the the of the conteft, and, for that purpose, avoid any attempt to make

a new

a new Law of Nations on this fubject, and content herself with an adherence to that Law, (such as it now is, by the confeffion of Mr. Jefferson himself, and other persons by no means partial to Great-Britain,) with vigour and spirit, in oppofition to the wild and capricious refolutions of the variable Emperour of Ruffia. And that our Government and the nation may be truly informed "what is the prefent Law of Nations in this case, of neutral merchant-ships escorted by a ship of war,” I hope Sulpicius will fift the matter to the bottom, and give us another Letter that will clear it up to general fatisfaction.

I am your humble servant,

ARISTIDES.

F. M.