in the year 1780, on the occafion of the well-known treaty called the armed neutrality." Thefe pretenfions he divides into four principal articles. The firli, which is an affertion of the right which neutral fhips ought to enjoy, "of navigating from port to port, and on the coufts of nations at war," cannot, as a general principle, be denied. In the fecond article, which declares," that the effects of the faid warring powers thall be free in all neutral veffels," except contraband - merchandize, lies the chief point of the controverfy. This queftion Mr. Ward undertakes to examine, referving the other propofitions, which have been adduced on this occafion, for a feparate difcuffion. In this propofition, he includes the corollary from it, that neutrals have a right to coaft from port to port, and to trade from colony to colony, and from the colonies to the mother country, of belligerents, without being liable to search or detention, except for contraband of war.' He confiders the fubject, firft," as to the reafoning drawn from mere common fenfe, and the principles of general equity;" fecondly," as to the reasoning drawn from authority and cuftom" thirdly," as it may be collected from treaties." Each of these confiderations is discussed in a feparate fection of the work. In the first of thefe, the writer begins by clearing the queftion from the mystery in which it has been (we have no doubt defignedly) involved; he states it to be, e not whether the belligerent has a right to interfere with the neutral, but merely whether he cannot prevent the neutral from interfering with him? In other words, whether when the former extends his trade, not with but for a belligerent, not only purchases what is wanting for his own confumption, or fells his ufual peace-fupply of articles, but fells to him articles which may be easily converted into the means of annoyance, or even turns carrier for his friend, who uses the furplus ftrength which is thus afforded him against his opponent; whether in fuch case the other belligerent has no reason to be offended, and to reclaim thofe rights which the pretended neutral is difpofed to deny Upon this state of the cafe, Mr. Ward purfues the argument with ingenuity and fuccefs, though perhaps more at length than was necellary, to clear away the mifreprefentations of his adverfaries. "It is not true," he obferves, " because the rights of commerce are founded in Nature, because the sea is free to all, and because men have a right to profit of their industry, that these rights are to extend to foch an unqualified height, as never to be modified on any occafion, and even fo as to encounter and defeat the rights of others. Let us rather liften to the rational and liberal Vattel, who, fpeaking of the illegality of con traband. traband, and at the fame time of the rights of trade, fays, "the nations who renounce it in war fuffer, it is true, but füffer from neceffity: the Belligerent does not oppofe their rights, but fimply afferts his own; and if the two rights are incompatible, it is the effect alone of inevitable neceffity." After all, then, this is a common cafe, met with under every order of fociety, beyond the control of man, as he is, and founded in the nature of things. It cannot be illuftrated better than by directing our attention to a celebrated maxim of our municipal law: "Cujus eft folum ejus eft ufque ad cœlum" is, for example, founded in very true principles of juftice; but as it is palpable how eafily, if carried to its utmost extent, it might work the greatest injuftice, it is modified and rendered perfect by the addition of that other part of it, "ita ut alienum non lædat." P. 7. "In granting, therefore, the fair and reasonable enjoyment of their privileges to Neutral Nations, there muft always be added the fair and reafonable caution, that they ufe them fo as not to hurt the Belligerent; and that I may not feem to entrench myself in generals ubi fæpe verfatur error,' I would add, that they have certainly no right to use them in any one, the smallest degree of proportion, more than they did in times of peace, nor even in fo great a degree, if fuch augmented, or ordinary ufe of them bears immediate mifchief to either Belli-` gerent, "For example, they may increase their purchases to any amount in the Belligerent countries, provided their own confumption require it, and provided they remain domiciled in their own country. But if they perfift in carrying, much more, if they extend their faculty of carrying for the Belligerent, where the latter was in the habit of carrying before; and if, in confequence, he is enabled to come to the battle, and to stand the fhock of war with augmented strength, which he never would, nor could have poffeffed without it, I fee little or no difference between this and an actual loan of military affiftance. All the diftinction is, that he fubftitutes his own people in the place of taking foreigners; for every man, which the Neutral lends to his trade, enables him to furnish a man to his own hostile fleets. In other words, it enables him to meet his enemy with undiminished forces, and yet preferve entire his fources of revenue; when, if it was not for this conduct of the Neutral, either the forces or the revenue of the Belligerent mult inevitably be diminished!" P. 8. The remainder of this fection confifts of clear and fatisfactory answers to the reafonings (or rather the fophifmns) of Hubner and Schlegel. The definition of neutrality by the former, and his statement of its duties, 'are justly applied against the doctrines he has laboured to eftablith, and fhown to be directly adverse to the carrying trade clained by the northern powers. The fpecious argument, that the neutral does not depart from that character while he is ready to afford afliftance to both parties, is properly anfwered by the remark, that the complaint of the belligerent is not fo much of a preference thown, as of an injury done; that, at the time of the act complained of, the the affiftance is not wanted by the fuperior;" and, that “if this were so, it would hold equally good, if the indirect affiftance complained of was extended to a more direct interpofition; in the cafe, for inftance, of actual military aid." " Mr. W. alfo juftly remarks, that if this right of navigation is really fo facred and fo extenfive, that we are quietly to fee our enemy's trade (the fund and finews of maritime war) carried on under our eyes, país, as it were, through our hands, and be lodged perhaps for a time in our very ports," no reason can be affigned "why it fhould not extend to contraband, provided there is no treaty. If," fays he, the claim is fo facred a privilege that no circumftances can modify it, if it is founded upon the abfolute freedom of the fea, and the intire want of dominion" in the Belligerent," if I cannot take a bale of enemy's goods from a neutral thip, merely because he has a right to traverse the fea, where I have no authority, as hule authority have I to ftop and feize her, because the is loaded with cannon for the use of my enemy. Enher then," he contend, the reafon of the principle in queflion is falfe, or contraband of war (which Hubner admits is always feizable) must pass free." He purfucs the fame train of reafoning as to a blockaded port; which, as he obferves, is another inftance of conflicting rights, which never can be enjoyed by both claimants together." He adds a cafe, in which a neutral unavoidably fuffers fome inconvenience, namely, where his property is taken on board the thip of a Belligerent; and yet the party who feizes the fhip is juftified. The contemptible fophifm of Hubner and Schlegel, that a "neutral ship is to all intents and purposes to be confidered as neutral territory," is very fully expofed and refuted; and the fection concludes with a reply to Schlegel's obfervation, that "neutral rights are more respected in a continental than a maritime war." Mr. W. in anfwer, fhows that the obfervation is false in point of fact, but that, if true, it would not bear the conclufion built upon it." In the next divifion of this Treatise, the author reasons from authority and cuftom, and of courfe begins with the ceJebrated code of maritime law called Confolato Del Mare, the terms of which he cites; and they are exprefs, that the property of enemies may be feized on board a neutral veffel. This authority he fupports by thofe of Grotius, Bynkerhoch, and Heineccius; and he goes into ample hiftorical details, which prove that this rule of the Confolato has never been altered by any general agreement of maritime nations; that it has been generally enforced and admitted; and that the only direct oppofition to it by any power previoufly to the armed neutrality neutrality in 1780 (namely, that by the King of Pruffia) was abandoned, and the right claimed by Great Britain tacitly allowed. A variety of obfervations on the arguments of Hubner and Schlegel are here introduced. They are too prolix, and not always neceffary, but for the most part'juft; efpecially where the author reprehends them for confidering particular treaties as forming the law of nations, and uniformly ftyling it the conventional law; whereas, treaties can only bind thofe ftates who are the contracting parties. The third, and laft fection, examines the queftion" as it depends upon treaties," and here it cannot be expected that we fhould follow the learned author through the detail into which his fubject naturally leads him. Suffice it to ftate the refult; which is," that the treaties which introduce the new maxim, from 1642 to 1715, amount to twelve; that those which ftipulate either different or contrary conditions, are feven; and there are thirty-one which make no mention of the rule one way or the other." Thefe laft, the author contends, " bottom themselves upon the old law, which the countries making them had never relaxed, except by exprefs convention;" but he properly infifts that the private treaties, had they been more numerous on the fide of the neutral claims, could not have operated to repeal the general law, or furnished a criterion to decide this important question. The concluding part of the Treatise contains fevere, but juft, reflections on the fhameless inconfiftency and bad faith of the Northern Powers, who have alternately enforced and abandoned the rule in queftion, nay fometimes enforced the oppofite doctrine, juft as it fuited their temporary views of intereft or ambition. A difcuffion of the other propofitions infifted upon by the Northern States, is promifed in a future publication. In that cafe we would recommend to the learned author more brevity in his expofitions, more selection in his arguments, and more polish in his language. Yet we can with truth applaud his diligence, extenfive information, and foundness of argument, as well as the patriotic fpirit which pervades his work. ART. V. Mrs. Weft's Letters to a young Man. THE fecond volume of this useful work opens with the feventh Letter; which contains very judicious strictures on the Socinian Tcheme of fubjugating divine Revelation-to human human reafon. It also gives an excellent defence of the genuineness of our prefent copies of the Scriptures. Many of the arguments are borrowed from the champions of our faith; but among several original remarks, we noticed the following illuftrations. "Let me produce two inftances, as explanatory of the difficulty (I fhould fay the impoffibility) of altering whatever has obtained great publicity. If it were eafy to eradicate what we dislike in Scripture, and to fubftitute what fupports our own opinions, why did not the prohibitions of image-worship, the command to adminifter the facrament in both kinds to all the difciples, and above all, the prophecies relating to the ufurpations of the Papacy, difappear from the facred canon, while the Church of Rome had it, at least in the western empire, exclufively in her cuftody? And why did not the Proteftants, on their recovering poffeffion of it, find fome interpolated texts, which enjoined the fale of indulgences, the doctrine of pilgrimages, penances, and all her other fopperies? The principles of this church juflified, or rather inculcated, the practice of pious frauds, which tended to fupport her own authority; and fhe had an opportunity, which the primitive church could not poffefs, of falfifying the fcriptures; for holy writ, inftead of being read, studied, and appealed to, remained in the envelope of a learned language, which was understood but by few even of the clergy, and was wholly unintelligible to the common people. Here was every chance that the corruption would have remained undifcovered; and nothing can be more diffimilar than the state of Chriftian knowledge in this period, and in that preceding the converfion of Conftantine. Yet the facred volume efcaped uncontaminated by its corrupt guardians; and the reformers had only to appeal to it, and to restore it to general ufe, to overthrow all that mafs of abfurdity which had been founded on oral tradition, or on apocryphal writings. Peter, as Dean Swift terms the church of Rome, did not alter his father's will, he only locked it up in a ftrong box, and forged a codicil. "Let us confider, whether it would be poffible in these days to make feveral hundred alterations in any popular work, a play of Shakespeare for inftance; (I do not mean mere verbal changes, but fuch as would affect the plot and character) and to perfuade the public, not that these changes were made on the authority of fome unpublifhed manufcript which had received the author's laft corrections, but that all copies actually were, and always had been, fimilar to the new edition. At whatever period thefe fuppofed alterations of the New Teftament took place, fuch impudent nenfenfical affertions muft have impofed on the bodily organs as well as the rational faculties of Chriftians. I hope this comparison is not indecorous; I am aware that it is very inadequate. Our national veneration for our admired bard, and the care with which critics guard his page from fpurious infertions, cannot be compared with the zeal, attachment, and vigilance, which the Chriftians anciently felt for their facred charter of immortality. Nor can the number of our copies of our favourite author, bear any resemblance to the infinite multitude of tranfcripts of holy |