the abandonment of a practice "so disgraceful and injurious to their country, as the point most essential to its peace, honour, and tranquillity."
Concessions made in the colonial trade.
Blockades in the colonies, and of the French ports in the Channel.
As the second ground of complaint, the alleged
violation of neutral rights by seizing and condemning
their merchantmen though engaged in
lawful commerce, involves a variety of important
considerations, which were incessantly the subjects
of dispute, it may be desirable to state the substance
of the views of the American government and
of English jurisconsults on so important a question.
England had conceded to the Americans, in the
previous war, permission to trade with the colonies
of the enemy for articles intended for their own
domestic consumption; and in case no market was
found in the United States for articles imported with
that intention, she had permitted them to re-export
those articles to any part of the world not invested
by her blockading squadrons. In 1804 certain ports
of Martinique and Guadaloupe, French colonies, were
declared to be in a state of blockade, and the siege
of Curaçoa was also converted into a blockade. In
August of the same year a rigorous blockade was
declared to be established at the entrances of the
ports of Fécamp, St. Valery, Caux, Dieppe, Treport,
the Somme, Etaples, Boulogne, Calais, Gravelines,
Dunkirk, Nieuport, and Ostend. Bonaparte at that
moment was threatening England with invasion, and
England was putting forth all her strength to repel
the attempt and to circumvent his designs. America
looked calmly on, and profited, as we have seen, by
the struggle, pushing forward her pretensions and
alleged grievances with the view of annoying as
