ground of presumption is laid, that the right of the former proprietor has been legally divested in a legal, regular, and effective manner; for the presumption is, that being so carried, the vessel has been subjected to legal condemnation (b). The same presumption arises in the case of a vessel captured and carried into a neutral port; since it has been the practice of prize courts to condemn vessels lying in neutral ports (c).

But the property is not charged without a legal condemnation (d). Hence condemnations by courts without jurisdiction are invalid (e); and condemnation by consular courts of the enemy sitting in a neutral country are invalid, except as against the enemy's subjects (ƒ); though affirmed by a court having original or appellate jurisdiction (g). But a title under an invalid condemnation, or a purchase without condemnation, may be sustained by a sentence passed upon the circumstance of the original capture by a competent tribunal, before the invalid sentence has been impeached (h). The sentence of a competent tribunal, however unjustifiable or erroneous, is conclusive of title as in all foreign courts; for the grounds of the sentence cannot be examined by any court of co-ordinate jurisdiction (i). British vessels lose their character and become enemy's vessels when, after capture, they have been converted into ships of war, even though not regularly commissioned (k).

(b) The Cornelia, Edw. 244.

(c) The Henrick and Maria, 4 Rob. 63. The Comet, 5 Rob. 285. Purissima Conception, 6 Rob. 45. Kent Comm. i. 98.

(d) Nostra Segnora de los Angelos, 3 Rob. 287.

(e) The Thomas, 1 Rob. 322.

(f) The Flad Ogen, 1 Rob. 134. The Kierlighett, 3 Rob. 96.

(g) The Kierlighett, 3 Rob. 96.

(h) The Falcon, 6 Rob. 194. Williams v. Armroyd, 7 Cranch, 423.

(i) Williams v. Armroyd, 7 Cranch, 423.

(k) The Ceylon, 1 Dod. 105. L'Actif, Edw. 185. The Nostra Signora, 3 Rob. 10. The Georgina, 3 Rob. 397.

British vessels trading to an enemy's port are still liable to capture, for the order in council of the 15th of April 1854 provides that no British vessel shall, under any circumstances whatsoever, either under or by virtue of this order, or otherwise, be permitted or empowered to enter or communicate with any port or place which shall belong to or be in the possession or occupation of her Majesty's enemies.

So of allied vessels; for by the general law of European states, and especially of France and England, all trading with the public enemy, without licence of the sovereign, is interdicted (k).

(k) Valin. Comm. iii. 6, § 3, tom. 2, p. 30, ed. 1760, Rochelle. The Hoop, 1 Rob. 169.

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE RIGHT OF BLOCKADE.

EVERY belligerent has a right to blockade the ports of his enemy; but in order to render neutral vessels liable to the penalty, which attaches to a breach of blockade, there must be, first, an actual blockade imposed by competent authority; secondly, notice thereof; thirdly, a violation of the blockade. There remains to be considered, fourthly, the period during which a vessel continues to be liable to capture for a breach of blockade.

First. A blockade is an act of sovereignty, and the commander of a king's ship cannot extend it (a). But the authority of a commander in an expedition will not be affected as to any but his own government by his having acted irregularly in entering upon it without orders. However irregularly he may have acted, the subsequent adoption of his acts by government will have the effect of legitimating them, so far as the subjects of other governments are concerned. In such a case a blockade imposed by a commander could not be impeached on the ground of want of regular authority; and however irregularly he might be deemed to have acted towards his own government, he is in no manner answerable to other states; and it is not open to subjects of other states to dispute the validity of the blockade (6). A mere procla

(a) Hendrick and Maria, 1 Rob. 148.

(b) The Rolla, 6 Rob. 364.

mation that a place is invested, is insufficient to constitute a legal blockade (c); for that purpose it is necessary that the place should be invested by a competent force, so as to render it dangerous to attempt to enter it (d).

A blockade commences from the time a force is stationed to prevent communication (e). Where a vessel coming out of a blockaded port was captured by two armed ships about seven miles from the coast, it was argued, that this small number of vessels only was a proof that there was no actual blockade. But the court held, that it is not necessary that the whole blockading squadron should lie in one tier; nor is it material that a vessel has escaped the rest; that these ships appeared to have been in the exterior line; and that, if there had been only these, it would have been quite sufficient (f). So where a single frigate was employed on a blockade, where it appeared that the admiral on the station considered that ship completely adequate to the service to be performed (g). A legal blockade cannot exist where no actual blockade can be applied. Hence it does not extend to inland communication. On this ground a cargo sent by an internal canal navigation from Amsterdam to Embden with an ulterior destination to London was held not to be liable to confiscation by reason of the blockade of Amsterdam (h). If a blockade be not regularly maintained, but some unprivileged (i) ships are allowed to come out and others to go in, such a relaxation destroys the legal effect of

(i) As to what ships are privileged in coming out or going in, see section third of this chapter.

the blockade. If such ships are allowed to pass, others will have a right to infer, that the blockade is raised (k). Thus, where a master entered a port without any attempt made by the ships that were on the station to prevent him from going in, and in other cases no force had been applied for the purpose of enforcing the blockade, and permission was given to go in, it was held, that the purpose of blockade being to prevent access by force, if the ships stationed on the spot to keep up the blockade will not use their force for the purpose, it is impossible for a court of justice to say that there was a blockade actually existing (1). So, where a blockade was alleged to exist, and a vessel that had sailed out of the port in full view of the squadron that had before been employed in the blockade without being stopped, was seized some time afterwards in consequence of a subsequent notification; it was held, that there was no proof of actual blockade (m). But a temporary and forced secession of a blockading force from the accidents of winds and storms, is not sufficient to constitute a legal relaxation of a blockade (n). A blockade is to be considered as legally existing, though the winds occasionally blow off the blockading squadron. That is an accidental change, that must take place in every blockade; but the blockade is not thereby suspended, and the law considers an attempt to take advantage of such an accidental removal as an attempt to break the blockade, and as a mere fraud (o).

When a blockading squadron is driven off by adverse winds, neutrals are bound to presume that it will return, and

(k) Per Cur. The Rolla, 6 Rob. 373. (1) The Juffrow Maria Schroeder, 3 Rob. 155. 3 Rob. 158, n.

(m) The Christina Margaretha, 1 Rob. 61.

The Vrouw Barbara,

(n) Per Cur. The Juffrow Maria Schroeder, 3 Rob. 155.

(0) The Columbia, 1 Rob. 154. The Frederick Molke, 1 Rob. 86.

D