which the Plenipotentiaries of Austria and Russia declared to be unforeseen and themselves to be unprovided for and without authority or power to accept or even to consider.' The proposal was for a Declaration whereof the points alone were then stated, but which was subsequently formulated as follows:

"ANNEX to Protocol No. 23.
Declaration.

The Plenipotentiaries who have signed the Treaty of Paris of 20th March, 1856, met in Conference. Considering:

That maritime law in time of war has long been the object of regrettable contestation;

That the uncertainty of the law and of duties in such a matter gives rise, between neutrals and belligerents, to divergences of opinion which may lead to serious difficulties and even to conflicts;

That it is advantageous therefore to establish a uniform doctrine on a point so important;

That the Plenipotentiaries assembled at the Congress of Paris could not better fulfil the intentions by which their Governments are animated than by seeking to introduce into international relations fixed principles in this respect:

Duly authorized, the above-mentioned Plenipotentiaries have agreed to concert together on the means

66

1 "Count Orloff (Russian Plenipotentiary), observed that "the powers with which he had been provided, having for their sole object the re-establishment of peace, he did not "hold himself to be authorized to take part in a discussion "which his instructions could not have foreseen." Count de Buol (Austria) said he was "not authorized by his instructions "to give an opinion on so important a matter." (State Papers, 1855-6, p. 128.)

of attaining this end; and having come to an agreement, have decided upon the solemn Declaration following:

1. Privateering is and remains abolished.

2. The neutral flag covers enemy's merchandise with the exception of contraband of war.

3. Neutral merchandise, with the exception of contraband of war, is not capturable under the enemy's flag.

4. Blockades, in order to be obligatory, must be effective that is to say, maintained by a force sufficient to really prevent access to the coast of the enemy.

The Governments of the Plenipotentiaries undersigned engage themselves to bring this Declaration to the knowledge of the States which have not been invited to participate in the Congress of Paris, and to invite them to accede to it.

Convinced that the maxims which they have now proclaimed can only be received with gratitude by the whole world, the undersigned Plenipotentiaries do not doubt that the efforts of their Governments to generalize their adoption will be crowned with full

success.

The present Declaration is not and will not be obligatory except between the Powers who have or who shall have acceded to it.

Done at Paris the 16th April, 1856.

(Follow the signatures.) ""

1 The French text is as follows:

"ANNEXE au Protocole No. 23.

"Les Plénipotentiaires qui ont signé le Traité de Paris du "20 Mars, 1856, réunis en Conférence. Considérant:

"Que le droit maritime, en temps de guerre, a été pendant "longtemps l'objet de contestations regrettables;

"Que l'incertitude du droit et des devoirs en pareille matière

At the next sitting of the Conference on the 16th April, 1856, the Russian and Austrian Plenipotentiaries announced that they had now received instructions and authority to sign this Declaration, and it was signed accordingly by all the members of the Conference on that day.

"donne lieu, entre les neutres et les belligérants, à des diver"gences d'opinion qui peuvent faire naître des difficultés sérieuses "et même des conflits;

"Qu'il y a avantage, par conséquent, à établir une doctrine. "uniforme sur un point aussi important;

"Que les Plénipotentiaires assemblés au Congrès de Paris ne "sauraient mieux répondre aux intentions dont leurs Gouverne"ments sont animés, qu'en cherchant à introduire dans les "rapports internationaux des principes fixes à cet égard;

66

"Dûment autorisés, les susdits Plénipotentiaires sont convenus de se concerter sur les moyens d'atteindre ce but; et "étant tombés d'accord ont arrêté la Déclaration solennelle ci'après:

66

1. La course est et demeure abolie;

"2. Le pavillon neutre couvre la marchandise ennemie, à "l'exception de la contrebande de guerre ;

"3. La marchandise neutre, à l'exception de la contrebande "de guerre, n'est pas saisissable sous pavillon ennemi;

"4. Les blocus, pour être obligatoires, doivent être effectifs, "c'est-a-dire, maintenus par une force suffisante pour interdire "réellement l'accès du littoral de l'ennemi.

"Les Gouvernements des Plénipotentiaires soussignés s'engagent à porter cette Déclaration à la connaissance des Etats qui n'ont pas été appelés à participer au Congrès de Paris, et à "les inviter à Ꭹ accéder.

66

"Convaincus que les maximes qu'ils viennent de proclamer "ne sauraient être accueillies qu'avec gratitude par le monde "entier, les Plénipotentiaires soussignés ne doutent pas que les "efforts de leurs Gouvernements pour en généraliser l'adoption ne soient couronnés d'un plein succès.

66

"La présente Déclaration n'est et ne sera obligatoire qu'entre "les Puissances qui y ont ou qui y auront accédé.

“Fait à Paris, le 16 Avril, 1856.

"(Suivent les signatures.)

(State Papers, 1855-56.)

CHAPTER XII.

THE DECLARATION OF PARIS UNAUTHORIZED, CONTRADICTORY, False, and no PART OF THE LAW OF NATIONS.

THE proposal, as already stated, was first mooted at the Conference on 8th April, 1856, by Count Walewski. It was so new and unexpected, and it found the Russian and Austrian plenipotentiaries so wholly unprepared for it, that they had to refer home for instructions before they could even entertain it.

It appears, however, from information given in the House of Commons on 3rd May, 1898, that a draft of the proposal was transmitted from Paris to London by either Lord Clarendon or Lord Cowley, or by both, on the 6th April—two days before it was mooted at the Conference-and that Her Majesty signified her approval to Lord Palmerston in "writing" on 8th April, the very day when it was first introduced to the Conference. It will be observed that, from the carefully-chosen and limited terms of the Attorney-General's answer,' it does not

แ

1 "DECLARATION OF PARIS.-Mr. T. Gibson Bowles (Lynn "Regis): I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General whether he can "say if the assent of Her Majesty the Queen, on 8th April, "1856, to the signature by Lords Clarendon and Cowley of "the Declaration of Paris, first proposed at the sitting of the "Paris Conference on 8th April, 1856, and signed on 16th "April, 1856, was conveyed by any, and, if so, by what docu

appear that the matter ever came before the Privy Council, or even before the Cabinet. It may fairly be inferred, therefore, that neither Privy Council nor Cabinet was cognizant of it; and that as the proposal made to the Sovereign was that of Lord Palmerston (then Prime Minister), so her approval was addressed to him alone and not to the Cabinet.1

It seems strange enough that a document of so "ment; and, if not, how it was conveyed; and whether the De"claration of Paris has ever been submitted to Her Majesty, or "been ratified by Her Majesty, subsequently to its signature on "16th April, 1856?

"The Attorney-General (Sir R. Webster, Isle of Wight): "The draft of the Declaration of Paris was received by Her "Majesty's Government on April 7th, 1856. The document was "submitted to the Queen, and Her Majesty signified her approval "to Lord Palmerston in writing on April 8th. There was no necessity to ratify the Declaration, which contains no rati"fication clause. It was laid before Parliament by command "of Her Majesty." (House of Commons, May 3rd, 1898."Hansard.)

86

1

It is difficult, if not impossible, to avoid the belief that the contrivance of the unwarranted signature of the Declaration was the act of Lord Palmerston, done without the previous knowledge and assent of his colleagues in the Cabinet. Such an act would be in no disaccord with his character and methods, as these are known to history. In August, 1851, the Queen, in her letter to Lord John Russell, had accused him of "failing in "sincerity towards the Crown"; and on 3rd February, 1852, she actually dismissed him for having, as Lord John said, “put "himself in the place of the Crown, neglected and passed by the "Crown." The act which provoked the dismissal, and this description of it, was of similar gravity with the giving of unwarranted instructions to sign the Declaration of Paris. Lord Palmerston, in defiance of the Queen, and without the previous assent of his colleagues in the Cabinet, had expressed to the French Ambassador in London (who had communicated it to Paris) his satisfaction at the success of Louis Napoleon (afterwards Napoleon III.) in the coup d'état of 2nd December, 1851. Hence his dismissal.