In considering violations of neutral ports, one may say that in practice the neutral port of a weak power has always been violated whenever there was any occasion for it. Moreover, since respect for a neutral port is a matter of courtesy only, we may be sure that whenever wars shall occur in future, weak neutral ports will be violated as they have been in the past. It is a question of policy in each case, and the captain of the aggressive ship must decide for himself whether the circumstances warrant the insult to the weak power. As to this particular case, it is the sentiment of the people of the United States, if the writer knows that sentiment, that Captain Collins was entirely justified in capturing the _Florida_, especially as the Brazil authorities had permitted Semmes, of the _Alabama_, to use Fernando de Noronha as headquarters, so to speak, while cruising against American commerce. Indeed, Semmes took an American ship, the _Louisa Hatch_, into the port at that island, coaled his ship from her, and then towed her outside and burned her. While lying there, too, he saw two American vessels in the offing, went out and burned them, and came back again within a few hours to hobnob with the Governor. The mouth of Brazil was stopped. If Collins had sunk the _Florida_ in port or burned her outside, it would have been proper for the United States government to set off the _Alabama’s_ case against that of the _Wachusett_, and leave it to arbitration to decide which government should pay damages. But the most interesting feature of this case is found in the attitude of the British writers on the subject. When one recalls how the _Essex_ was captured at Valparaiso after Porter’s too generous treatment of Hillyar, and how the _Armstrong_ was attacked in the Azores, and how the _Levant_ was taken at Porto Praya, one might suppose that the British would be rather lenient with their cousins across the sea, especially as blood is thicker than water; but we find in a work printed in 1896, called “Ironclads in Action,” by H. W. Wilson, a work that deals with ironclads as late as 1895, the capture of the _Florida_ is denounced (page 151, vol. 1) as “disgraceful.” The writer really goes out of his way to do this, for neither the _Wachusett_ nor the _Florida_ was an ironclad in any sense. Moreover, he asserts that “the _Florida’s_ officers were very badly treated,” which is simply a false statement.