Изображения страниц

York and proceeded to the James River, it does not appear from any records in the Department of State that they succeeded in getting out any of the tobacco before the blockade was raised.

Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Johnston, U. S. Senate, Feb. 27, 1872, 92
MS. Dom. Let. 587.

See, also, Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Adams, min. to England, No.
799, Jan. 4, 1864, MS. Inst. Gr. Br. XIX. 122.

On several occasions during the war between the United States and Spain vessels were, for special reasons and for special purposes, allowed by the United States to enter places which the American forces had blockaded. After the blockade of certain ports on the north coast of Cuba, the French mail steamer Lafayette was permitted to enter the port of Havana for the purpose of landing mails and passengers. This concession was granted on the request of the French embassy, coupled with the representation that the vessel sailed from St. Nazaire, in France, for Havana before the proclamation was issued. A similar privilege was extended to the German steamer Polaria on the request of the German embassy, with the qualification that she should first obtain a formal permit from the United States naval commandant at Key West, that her entrance into Havana was for the sole purpose of landing her Hamburg passengers and mails, and that she should not land cargo of any kind, nor, with the exception of certain articles intended for the Emperor, take away any, though permission was granted to bring away "any American or neutral passengers that may desire to depart in her, but no others."

Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to M. Cambon, French ambass., May 7, 1898, MS. `
Notes to French Leg. X. 492; Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to Mr. von
Holleben, German ambass., May 10 and May 13, 1898, MS. Notes to
German Leg. XII. 132, 134; Mr. Moore, Assist. Sec. of State, to Sec.
of Navy, May 13, 1898, 228 MS. Dom. Let. 460.

In harmony with the conditions imposed in these cases, permission was
refused to neutrals to pass the blockade merely for the purpose of
taking on board and bringing away neutral property. (Mr. Day,
Sec. of State, to Sir J. Pauncefote, Brit. ambass., No. 1016, May 16,
1898, MS. Notes to Brit. Leg. XXIV. 191; Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to
Mr. von Holleben, Aug. 8, 1898, MS. Notes to German Leg. XII. 177.)

Early in the war special permission was given to certain neutral vessels to enter specified blockaded ports in Cuba in order to bring away Americans and any neutrals who might desire to leave. The United States consul at Kingston, Jamaica, was instructed to give certificates for the purpose of passing the blockade to the designated vessels.

Mr. Moore, Act. Sec. of State, to Messrs. E. A. Atkins & Co., tels., May 3 and May 5, 1898, 228 MS. Dom. Let. 227, 269.

See, also, Mr. Moore, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Manso, May 9, 1898, 228

MS. Dom. Let. 355.

Permission was also granted, on the request of the proper diplomatic representatives, for the British steamer Myrtledene and the Norwegian steamer Folsjo to reenter the port of Cardenas, both vessels appearing to have left that port on notification of the institution of the blockade. In each case it was stated that the steamer was not only notified of the blockade, but was also ordered to go away. The allegation that the vessels were ordered away was afterwards denied in the case of at least one of them; but, without regard to this question, there seemed to be an obvious implication that when notice of the blockade was given they were not informed of the provision in the President's proclamation allowing to neutrals vessels lying in any of the blockaded ports thirty days' grace, and that, if they were not expressly ordered away, they at any rate construed the notice as an order to depart. The Folsjo had actually taken on board a part of her cargo, and in each case the cargo which was abandoned appeared to be the property of citizens of the United States. Under these circumstances instructions were given to allow the vessels in question to reenter the port and take on board, with all possible expedition, the cargoes of sugar which they had abandoned, it being understood that the permission was granted subject to the exigencies of any active military operations; that both vessels were strictly to observe the duties of neutrality, and particularly that neither of them was to carry more men or provisions than were necessary for the voyage.

Subsequently, on the representation of the minister of Sweden and Norway that the Folsjo, after lying for some days at Key West, had proceeded to New York, and that in consequence of the delay she was required under a previous charter party to proceed to Europe, the Norwegian steamer Uto was allowed to take her place, with the additional condition that before proceeding to Cardenas she was to call at Key West and obtain from the commandant of the United States naval station a formal letter of permission.

Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to Mr. Grip, May 11, 1898, MS. Notes to Swedish Leg. VIII. 88; Mr. Moore, Assist. Sec. of State, to Sec. of Navy, May 11, 1898, 228 MS. Dom. Let. 404.

Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to Mr. Grip, May 13, 1898, MS. Notes to Swedish
Leg. VIII. 89; Mr. Moore, Assist. Sec. of State, to Sec. of Navy, May
13, 1898, 228 MS. Dom. Let. 461.

It seems that the Spanish authorities at Cardenas refused to allow the
Myrtledene to reenter the port. (See Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to Sir
J. Pauncefote, May 20, 1898, MS. Notes to Br. Leg. XXIV. 200.)
In August, 1898, a request, made on behalf of a German subject, to permit
a vessel to pass the blockade of the southern ports of Cuba for the
purpose of "bringing away German property," was refused. (Mr.
Day, Sec. of State, to Herr von Holleben, German ambass., No. 94,
Aug. 8, 1898, MS. Notes to German Leg. XII. 177.)


§ 1283.

"That a belligerent may lawfully blockade the port of his enemy is admitted. But it is also admitted that this blockade does not, according to modern usage, extend to a neutral vessel, found in port, nor prevent her coming out with the cargo which was on board when the blockade was instituted. If, then, such a vessel be restrained from proceeding on her voyage by the blockading squadron, the restraint is unlawful. The St. Francis de Assise was so restrained, and her case is within the policy.

“It has been contended that it was the duty of the neutral master to show to the visiting officer of the belligerent squadron his right of egress, by showing not only the neutral character of his vessel and cargo, but that his cargo was taken on board before the institution of the blockade.

"This is admitted, and it is believed that the bill of exceptions shows satisfactorily that these facts were proved to the visiting officer. It is stated that the vessel and cargo were regularly documented; that the papers were shown, and that the cargo was put on board, and the vessel had actually sailed on her voyage, before the institution of the blockade."

Marshall, C. J., delivering the opinion of the court, Olivera v. Union Ins.
Co. 1818, 3 Wheat. 183, 194.

"In some respects, I think the law of blockade is unreasonably rigorous towards neutrals, and they can fairly claim a relaxation of it. By the decisions of the English courts of admiralty-and ours have generally followed their footsteps-a neutral vessel which happens to be in a blockaded port is not permitted to depart with a cargo, unless that cargo was on board at the time when the blockade commenced, or was first made known. Having visited the port in the common freedom of trade, a neutral vessel ought to be permitted to depart with a cargo, without regard to the time when it was received on board."

Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. Buchanan, Apr. 13, 1854, H. Ex. Doc. 103, 33 Cong. 1 sess. 12, 13.

When the blockade was proclaimed of the Confederate ports, Mr. Seward announced "that merchant vessels in port at the time when the blockade took effect will be allowed a reasonable time for their departure."

Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Baron Gerolt, Prussian min., May 2, 1861
MS. Notes to Prussian Leg. VII. 109.

Mr. Seward at the same time stated that the Government could not con-
sent that emigrant vessels should enter the interdicted ports.
The Spanish minister at Washington sought permission for the bringing
away of a quantity of tobacco which the Spanish Government had
contracted with a commercial house in the Confederate States to pur-
chase before the blockade was instituted. Mr. Seward expressed his
regret that the circumstances were not so distinctly peculiar as to
permit the request to be granted. Similar requests had, he said, been
made by other governments and had been refused. (Mr. Seward,
Sec. of State, to Mr. Tassara, Spanish min., Sept. 2, 1861, MS. Notes
to Spanish Leg. VII. 232.)

See, also, Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Adams, min. to England, No.
799, Jan. 4, 1864, MS. Inst. Great Britain, XIX. 122.

Referring to the case of two Russian vessels in the port of Savannah, Georgia, Mr. Seward stated that "fifteen days have been specified as a limit for neutrals to leave the ports after actual blockade has commenced, with or without cargo."

Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Stoeckl, Russian min., May 9, 1861, MS.
Notes to Russian Leg. VI. 99.

See, as to the blockade at New Orleans, Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to
Lord Lyons, British min., May 27, 1861, MS. Notes to Great Britain,
VIII. 431.

In a circular of October 16, 1861, Mr. Seward informed the members of
the diplomatic corps that the judge of the United States court for the
southern district of New York had lately decided, after elaborate
argument of counsel, that the law of blockade did not permit a vessel
in a blockaded port to take on board cargo after the commencement
of the blockade. (MS. Notes to Netherlands Leg. VI. 180.)

The proclamation of blockade having allowed fifteen days for neutrals to leave, a vessel which overstays the time is liable to capture, even if her delay was partly due to difficulty in procuring a tug, this being one of the accidents which must have been foreseen and should have been provided for while the vessel was remaining in port and loading a cargo with the proclamation in view.

The Prize Cases, 2 Black, 635.

The first hostile act of the United States, on the outbreak of the war with Spain in 1898, was the blockade, under a proclamation of the President of April 22, 1898, of the ports of the north coast of Cuba from Cardenas to Bahia Honda, inclusive, and of the port of Cienfuegos on the south coast. On June 27, a governmental blockade was proclaimed of all ports on the south coast of the island from Cape Frances to Cape Cruz, inclusive, and of the port of San Juan, Porto Rico. Various blockades de facto were also maintained. The object of a blockade being to cut off all intercourse between the inhabitants of the blockaded place and the world outside, it is a

general rule that while a period is allowed-usually of fifteen days— during which vessels may depart either in ballast or with cargo bought and shipped before the commencement of the blockade, no cargo is permitted to be shipped after the blockade is instituted. In the first proclamation of blockade by the United States, which was issued April 22, a period of thirty days was allowed for the departure of neutral vessels from the blockaded ports, but nothing was said as to the cargo. The natural inference would therefore have been that no cargo could be taken on board after the blockade was instituted. But in applying the proclamation to the cases that arose under it, the United States construed it as permitting the taking of cargo during the thirty days, and when the next proclamation was issued, the point was expressly covered by a clause in which it was stated that neutral vessels lying in any of the ports to which the blockade was then extended would be allowed "thirty days to issue therefrom with cargo." The same rules were applied in the case of the de facto blockades established by Admiral Dewey in the Philippines. These and other features of the law of blockade were included in General Orders, No. 592, entitled "Instructions to blockading vessels and cruisers," which were issued by the Navy Department, with the cooperation of the Department of State, on June 20, 1898, for the information and guidance of the naval service.

Proclamations and Decrees during the War with Spain, 75, 79.

Naval Operations of the War with Spain, 99; Mr. Moore, Assist. Sec. of
State, to Sec. of Navy, May 19, 1898, 228 MS. Dom. Let. 599; Mr.
Day, Sec. of State, to Sir J. Pauncefote, Brit. ambass., No. 1029, May
21, 1898, MS. Notes to Great Britain, XXIV. 201.

In proclaiming on Dec. 20, 1902, a blockade of the ports of Puerto Cabello and Maracaibo, because of the rejection of certain demands by the Venezuelan Government, the German Government allowed days of grace, as follows: From ports in the West Indies or on the east coast of the American continent, 10 days for steamers and 20 days for sailing vessels; from all other points, 20 days for steamers and 40 days for sailing vessels, while ships lying in the blockaded ports were allowed 15 days. The British Government on the same day proclaimed a blockade of Laguayra, Carenero, Guanta, Cumana, Carupano, and the mouths of the Orinoco, with similar days of grace. For. Rel. 1903, 425, 458.

The blockade was raised from midnight, Feb. 14-15, 1903. For. Rel. 1903, 476.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »