Изображения страниц

A neutral vessel which succeeded in carrying contraband to the enemy with false papers may be detained for having carried such contraband, if she is encountered before she has completed her return voyage

For this the Order in Council of October 29 substituted the following provisions:

A neutral vessel, with papers indicating a neutral destination, which notwithstanding the destination shown on the papers, proceeds to an enemy port, is liable to capture and condemnation if she is encountered before the end of her next voyage. If the law was as I have have stated it, those provisions do not operate in extension of it, but, if anything, as a mitigation of the captor's rights. Therefore according to The Zamora (supra) they are not invalid. It is not necessary in the present case to decide which is applicable. It is only if the vessel succeeded in carrying contraband to the enemy, in the one case, or if she proceeded to an enemy port in the other, that the penalty on the return or next voyage would attach. For the reasons given, in any view of the present case as the goods were never delivered to the enemy, the vessel was immune when she was captured.

Therefore, an order must be made that the owner of the vessel was entitled to her restitution. By reason of his conduct, however, he must bear and pay the costs and expenses of and incident to these prize proceedings. As it appears that the vessel was delivered up on bail, the form of the judgment will be a declaration of the right to restitution on payment of such costs and expenses, and an order that the bail be released upon such costs and expenses being paid into court.


On May 8, 1916, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council rendered a judgment affirming the decision of the Prize Court, rendered May 21, 1915, that the German ship Ophelia, which had been captured by a British man-of-war, was not constructed, adapted, or used for the special and sole purpose of affording aid and relief to the wounded, sick, and ship-wrecked, and that she was adapted and used as a signalling ship for military purposes, and that she had therefore forfeited protection under The Hague Convention, and, being an enemy ship, must be condemned as lawful prize. (The decision of Sir Samuel Evans in the lower court may be found in The Times Law Reports, Vol. 31, p. 452, and this Journal for January, 1916, p. 170.)


British Prize Court

Decided May 22, 1916

(The Times Law Reports, Vol. 32, p. 529)

Contraband goods sent by post are not protected by Article I of the 11th Hague Convention and when seized as prize are liable to condemnation.

In these cases the Procurator-General asked for the condemnation of a large quantity of rubber which was found upon the removal and examination of the mails carried by the three Dutch steamers, as follows: Tubantia, 173-2lbs. of rubber in about 173 parcels, and seven parcels of wool (sample size); Gelria, 1,390 parcels of rubber; and Hollandia, 1,265 parcels of rubber.

Intercepted correspondence between consignors in Brazil and consignees in Germany referred to an extensive traffic of this kind. One letter from a consignor stated: “Including today's shipment, you have received from me already india-rubber to the selling value of 13,000 marks." Another letter from a Hamburg firm to correspondents in Manaos contained the following:

We have been receiving regularly for some time from Para shipments by parcels of raw rubber, and we would like to draw your attention to this business. These shipments are effected in parcels, as samples without value, by each mail about 200 parcels, each containing about 320 grammes net of raw rubber. The trouble of packing and the high postage expenses are amply compensated for by the good price which can now be obtained here for the goods. Up to the present nothing has been lost. Over there, the price for the article will not be very high, so that if we reckon with the present price here of about 25 marks per kilo (about 10s. per lb.) good profits are possible. The postal authorities, who make a good profit out of the postage, will probably have nothing to say against the dispatch of so many parcels. (And should such be the case, you may easily obtain the permission in Rio de Janeiro which, in a similar case, had already been given once before.)

The shipment would est be effected via Pernambuco, as from there Dutch ships do not call at any English port

You ought to take this business into consideration, as, in this manner, you might make your remittances here in goods on which you could further make very good profits.


Held, That the rubber was not exempt as postal correspondence under Article 1 of the 11th Hague Convention, that to attempt to send these parcels as genuine postal correspondence under the convention, was dishonest and that the property was subject to condemnation as contraband.


Outlines of International Law. By Charles H. Stockton, Rear-Admiral U.S. N., Retired. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1914. pp. .

. xvii, 616.

The long and faithful service which Admiral Stockton has performed in the field of international law will guarantee to his latest work on the subject a cordial reception by the public. The present volume now supplants his earlier brief Manual of International Law, so well known in naval circles. As delegate to the London Naval Conference and as lecturer during many years at the George Washington University the author has had experience in constructive as well as in didactic work upon the problems of international law. He has not, however, sought to give us a treatise based upon individual research work in all of the many branches of a greatly ramified subject, but has rather chosen to collate from existing works, to rearrange, to present obscure questions in clearer form, to criticize and to comment. The present war has shown more and more that international law is not a fixed code, but that it is composed of certain fundamental principles of justice the application of which to the relations of nations has varied with the circumstances of their mutual intercourse. Too often these principles have been distorted beyond recognition and have been made to serve the interests of one great Power or another which has for the time being dominated the affairs of Europe. Hence it has become a matter of importance to distinguish sharply between those international practices which have obtained temporary recognition by reason of the backing of some great nation and others which have won permanent recognition as embodying the consent of all nations. When international law, as is to be hoped, receives clearer definition after the present war, not a few of the existing rules will be set aside as survivals of an outworn international system.

It is as a general study of underlying principles and larger tendencies in the midst of variations of usage and practice that Admiral Stockton's work will be of special value at the present time, and this feature must excuse the frequent omissions of important details which it would be serious to omit from a mere text-book. In discussing the laws of war on land, the author is careful to remind us that while the Hague convention upon that subject has been ratified by “practically all of the civilized states of the world” (Italy, Serbia and Turkey being notable exceptions), the regulations are only binding between the contracting parties. It cannot be too often repeated that the Hague code must not be looked upon as a final statement of positive law, but must be read in connection with the customs and usages preceding the year 1899. It is interesting to note that the author frankly recognizes that certain articles (Art. 18 and the last clause of Art. 60) of Lieber's code have become obsolete. The same might have been said of Art. 26 of the code (quoted p. 301) and of Art. 36 of the code, judged by Arts. 45 and 56 of the Hague convention. The small protection furnished by some of the rules of the Hague convention appears when the author points out (p. 314) that in view of the many ways in which the property of individual citizens may be taken over by a hostile military occupant, the so-called exemption of private property on land from capture “may be called almost nominal."

If in the hurry of preparing the work for publication in the opening months of the war the author has fallen into an occasional loose construction of sentences and has indulged in a superfluity of quotations (his own works, previously published, being quoted where they might have been paraphrased), the general public will readily overlook such minor defects in consideration of the service which has been rendered it in placing at its disposal during these critical times a treatise which is at once readable in form and authoritative in content.


The Diplomacy of the War of 1914. The Beginnings of the war. By

Ellery C. Stowell, Assistant Professor of International Law, Columbia University. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Com

pany. 1915. pp. xxi, 728. It was wittily said of the Spanish-American War by one who has written one of the most successful books in regard to the present war, that "books have been many where battles have been few." Certainly battles have not been few in this the greatest war in history, but books have indeed been many and of many types. One of the commonest types has been a hastily done, hop, skip and jump through the diplomatic correspondence leading up to the war, as published by the various

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »