In the case of the Hoop,[22] Sir Wm. Scott says,

"By the law and constitution of Great Britain, the Sovereign
alone has the power of declaring War and Peace. He alone,
therefore, who has the power of entirely removing the state
of war, has the power of removing it in part, by permitting,
when he sees proper, that commercial intercourse, which is a
partial suspension of the war. There may be occasions on
which such an intercourse may be highly expedient; but it is
not for individuals to determine on the expediency of such
occasions, on their own notions of commerce only, and
possibly on grounds of private advantage not very
reconcilable with the general interests of the state. It is
for the state alone, on more enlarged views of policy, and
of all circumstances that may be connected with such an
intercourse, to determine when it shall be permitted, and
under what regulations. No principle ought to be held more
sacred than that this intercourse cannot subsist on any
other footing than that of the direct permission of the
state. Who can be insensible to the consequences that might
follow, if every person in time of war had a right to carry
on a commercial intercourse with the enemy; and under colour
of that, had the means of carrying on any other species of
intercourse he might think fit? The inconvenience to the
public might be extreme; and where is the inconvenience on
the other side, that the merchants should be compelled, in
such a situation of the two countries, to carry on his trade
between them, (if necessary,) under the eye and control of
the Government charged with the care of public safety?"