Britain was multiplied by two; the trade of France was divided by three.

As the trade of Great Britain increased during the war, so too did her shipping, the figures for which are as follows:

I have been unable, after various attempts in official and other quarters, to obtain any figures as to French ships and tonnage for these years; but there can be no doubt that, with the decline of her trade and her exclusion from the seas, her shipping declined even more than in a corresponding degree.

CHAPTER XI.

BRITISH MARITIME RIGHTS: THEIR LONG DEfence, SUBSEQUENT WAIVER, AND FINAL SURRENDer.

THE right to capture enemy's property on the high seas, in whatever bottoms it might be found, was never so much as questioned until the end of the eighteenth century. The question had, indeed, been raised in 1752 by Prussia, but had been at once and so completely answered that the King of Prussia instantly withdrew his contention.

But in 1780 a serious attempt was made to introduce the new rule that enemy's property should not be liable to capture in a neutral vessel unless it were contraband of war-that is, of such a nature and having such a destination as to be adapted for direct and immediate employment in warlike operations. This attempt was made by the Empress Catherine of Russia, and was supported by the Armed Neutrality, whereby she united Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Germany, Holland, France, Spain, Portugal, Naples, and the American Colonies in armed support of the new doctrine. The new doctrine was avowedly directed against England, and the Armed Neutrality was intended to crush England. But England stood firm against all; and on the French revolutionary war breaking out the Armed Neutrality fell to pieces, and Russia herself again reverted to the old rule

in a treaty with England which solemnly reasserted the original law.

In 1800 a second Armed Neutrality was formed, with the same object as its predecessor; but the next year this object was again abandoned, and again Russia subscribed to the original law in the Convention of St. Petersburg of June, 1801.

The attempts made to change the original law, suggested in 1752,actually made in 1780, renewed in 1800, and finally abandoned in 1801, were, as has been said, all directed against England. For England had become great and powerful by undeviating adherence to the original common Law of Nations and by the exercise of the right it gave, and still gives, to capture her enemy's property wherever she found it on the high seas. Possessing Possessing as she did the naval supremacy essential to the full exercise of this right, it was found to give her so tremendous a power of acting on the resources of any other nation, that those nations whose power is on the land alone, have always had for an object, not indeed to deny the right— for that would have involved the denial of the right of capture on land, which would have affected themselves-but so to limit it as to render it of no avail. This they proposed to do by affirming the new doctrine "the neutral flag covers the cargo," and by denying the right to capture enemy's property when found in a neutral vessel. But, as we have seen, the attempts in this direction had failed because of the insistence of England upon the right attacked; the armed attempt to overcome England had been defeated by the exercise of the very right itself; and in 1801 things were restored to their origina condition.

THE MYSTERIOUS WAIVER OF HER MARITIME RIGHTS BY GREAT BRITAIN IN 1854; AND THEIR STILL MORE MYSTERIOUS AND UNAUTHORIZED SURRENDER IN 1856.

And so they remained for another half century, when a series of events took place which the future historian of this country will scarce be able to believe, and which at this day no living man can either justify or comprehend.

In February, 1854 (the war with Russia, which was declared on the 28th of the following month, being then imminent) Lord Clarendon, then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, had no difficulty or doubt in assuring those who desired to know, that England would act on the law as it was and exercise the rights thereby given. On the 16th February, 1854, in reply to a despatch from M. Lousada, Lord Clarendon directed him to be informed that the produce and property of the enemy was "lawful prize of war," and that "its being laden on board a neutral ship will not protect the property; "1 while on the 25th of March, 1854, he wrote to a deputation of merchants "if it "[Russian produce] should still remain enemy's

property, notwithstanding that it is shipped from "a neutral port and in a neutral ship it will be con"demned whatever may be its destination." "

Yet the French Government has revealed the astounding fact that while the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was thus declaring in London what would be done, the British Ambassador in Paris was at the same time (on the 14th March) declaring that he had received instructions 1 State Papers, 1853-1854, p. 106. 2 Times Newspaper, March, 1854.

to communicate a declaration of his Government that this same thing would not be done, and that "the neutral flag should cover the enemy's mer"chandise." 1 And on the 28th March, 1854, a notification without any signature or other marks of authority whatever was published in the London Gazette to the effect that the Government of Great Britain had determined to "waive" during the war the right of commissioning Privateers and of seizing enemy's goods (except contraband of war) in neutral vessels.2

Thus within three days of an official declaration signed by the Secretary of State, that the right of seizing enemy's goods in neutral vessels would be exercised, the public were informed by a notification that it would not be exercised. This is a chapter in history which loudly calls for explanation.3

But there is far more than this which needs explanation.

THE ASSUMED SURRENDER OF THE RIGHT BY LORDS CLARENDON AND COWLEY.

The rights which had been "waived" in 1854, at the beginning of the war, were again brought under consideration in the Conference of 1856 at the end of it. On the 8th April, 1856, nineteen days after the Treaty of Peace had been signed, a proposal was made by Count Walewski, the French, and was supported by Lord Clarendon, the first English plenipotentiary, 1 British Neutrality Laws Commission Report.

2 State Papers, 1855-1856, p. 36.

3 The notification in question was embodied and reproduced and for the first time invested with a semblance of authority by the Order in Council subsequently made at Windsor on 15th April, 1854.