Author Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1902 edition. Excerpt:...Russia imposed such a blockade from the Aegean in 18281). She could not lawfully blockade her own ports, so as to render vessels bound, say, to Odessa, liable to capture. Therefore, if this blockade of hers was recognised, as it was, as a valid one 2), the principle is established that a blockade of a strait can be set up, no matter what waters lie behind it. It does not operate as a blockade of them. Therefore Greece, say, which is not a signatory of the Treaty of London, in blockading the Dardanelles would not be,,blockading" the Black Sea ports, any more than Russia was,,blockading" them in 1828. Access to them would be cut oif, but only as it were incidentally, and because it would be physically necessary for ships proceeding thither to enter the blockaded harbour 3). I do not say that it would be practically advisable for Greece, or for North America, to take such a step! Still, I think it legal. 1) 16 Brit. State Papers, p. 1250. 2) It was objected to by Britain; but only as being contrary to Russian engagements: vide 17 Brit. State Papers, p. 375. See Atherley Jones,,,Commerce in War" (Loud. 1907), p. 137. 3) In The Gerasimo, (1857) 11 Mo0re's Privy Council Cases, p. 88, it was held that a blockade of the Sulina. mouth of the Danube could not affect exporters at Galatz, 150 miles further up the stream. But as Atherley Jones remarks (op. cit., p. 240) this does not infer a permanent exemption of Galatz from the operation of the blockade, but only means that the time allowed for egress from the blockaded port in such a case must be extended when the vessel comes from waters for which it is the sole outlet. The decision can also be supported on the ground that a blockade may validly be, and.that this blockade...