We hope that Congress will not pormit the first week of its coming sessiou to pass without euacting alaw i'bolishing all the ports of eutry in the seceded States, and autkorizing the President to re-opeu tliem in succession as the power of the Federal Q-otermnent shall be established therciü. This would eft'cctually dispose of the ([ucstion of " effective bloekade " which is causing so much trouble to forcigu munsters, consuls, and journalists. We do not bclieve that the Gov ernment is under any obligation to inaintain a blockade against foreign powers. - If we were at war witk a third power, instead of aiming to put down a rebellion in States of the Union, tko law of uations might require an " effeotive bloekade," but we kold that iu a war to put down rebellion wc aro uuder no obli gations to keep up a blockade against the vcssels of England, France or any other nation. Whatever blockado we see üt to keep up is only to hem rebel eoïïh merce m, and not to keep foreign commerce out. But, if tkere is the least doubt of the present obligation of foreign powers to respect " a paper blooado," whioh we do not coucede, abolishing ue ports of ontry in the seceded States will removt1 it - We take it to be s self evident proposition that everj nation ias a right to establish and declare its ports of entry, and that all foreign powers are bound by Bueh actiop. Let this be done at the earliest possiblc-'day, and wo shall hear no more of a " non effective " or " paper blockade," or of a claim to raise or break it, st least not until foreign powers shall have acknowledged the separate existenco and iudepcudence of the Confedérate States, and then we shall only occupy the sanie position wo are unnecessarily occupying at present. Abolish the ports of entry and the knotty question is solved, and Lord Lyous may cali in hij spies.