cation to the Japanese war department. The applications of foreign correspondents were required to be sent through their respective ministers or consuls and the department of foreign affairs. The officers of the army were required to accord to correspondents, as far as circumstances permitted, suitable treatment and facilities, and when in the field and in case of necessity to give them food or, when so requested, transportation in vessels or vehicles. A war correspondent violating the criminal law, military criminal law, or the law for the preservation of military secrets was to be adjudged and punished by court-martial according to the military penal code. For. Rel. 1904, 415; Monthly Consular Reports, May, 1904, LXXV. 393. Regulations were also issued governing naval war correspondents. (Id. 395.) "By the law of war either party to it may receive and list among his troops such as quit the other, unless there has been a previous stipulation that they shall not be received. But when they [such refugees] have been received, a high moral faith and irrevocable honor, sanctioned by the usages of all nations, gives to them protection personally, and security for all that they have or may possess. They are exempt also from all reproach from the sovereignty to which their services have been rendered. Nothing that they claim as their own can be taken from them, upon the imputation that they had forfeited or meant to relinquish it by the abandonment of their allegiance to the sovereignty which they had left." Wayne, J., United States v. Reading, 18 How. 10. 2. NONLIABILITY FOR BELLIGERENT ACTS. § 1110. An officer of the Army of the United States, whilst serving in the enemy's country during the rebellion, was not liable to an action in the courts of that country for injuries resulting from his military orders or acts; nor could he be required by a civil tribunal to justify or explain them upon any allegation of the injured party that they were not justified by military necessity. He was subject to the laws of war, and amenable only to his own Government. Dow r. Johnson, 100 U. S. 158. A person voluntarily residing within the Confederate lines cannot maintain an action against a Confederate soldier who, under military orders, burned the former's cotton to prevent it from falling into the hands of the Union forces, such destruction being a justifiable exercise of the rights of war. Ford r. Surget (1878), 97 U. S. 594, 606 (1878). During the civil war where a United States officer in command of troops, while in an insurgent State, seized property belonging to a citizen thereof and sold it to a third person and the latter was sued after the war by such former owner, Held, that the court had no jurisdiction over the subject-matter, as the seizure was an act of war, and the validity of such acts cannot be tried in a municipal court in a common-law proceeding. Coolidge v. Guthrie, 1 Flip. C. C. 97. VI. BELLIGERENT MEASURES. 1. PERMISSIBLE VIOLENCE. § 1111. A belligerent has in a general sense the right to use all forms of violence against the person and property of his enemy that may be necessary to bring the latter to terms; so that violence, when used to that end, ceases to be permissible only when it is shown to be wanton, or grossly disproportioned to the end to be attained. 66 Hall, Int. Law (5th ed.), 531. 14. Military necessity, as understood by modern civilized nations, consists in the necessity of those measures which are indispensable for securing the ends of the war, and which are lawful according to the modern law and usages of war. "15. Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of armed enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally unavoidable in the armed contests of the war; it allows of the capturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to the hostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows of all destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels of traffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of sustenance or means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of whatever an enemy's country affords necessary for the subsistence and safety of the Army, and of such deception as does not involve the breaking of good faith either positively pledged, regarding agreements entered into during the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to exist. Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another and to God. "16. Military necessity does not admit of cruelty-that is, the infliction of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions. It does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult. 17. War is not carried on by arms alone. It is lawful to starve the hostile belligerent, armed or unarmed, so that it leads to the speedier subjection of the enemy. "18. When a commander of a besieged place expels the noncombatants, in order to lessen the number of those who consume his stock of provisions, it is lawful, though an extreme measure, to drive them back, so as to hasten on the surrender.” Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the "68. Modern wars are not internecine wars, in which the killing of the enemy is the object. The destruction of the enemy in modern war, and, indeed, modern war itself, are means to obtain that object of the belligerent which lies beyond the war. Unnecessary or revengeful destruction of life is not lawful. 69. Outposts, sentinels, or pickets are not to be fired upon, except to drive them in, or when a positive order, special or general, has been issued to that effect. 70. The use of poison in any manner, be it to poison wells, or food, or arms, is wholly excluded from modern warfare. He that uses it puts himself out of the pale of the law and usages of war. 71. Whoever intentionally inflicts additional wounds on an enemy already wholly disabled, or kills such an enemy, or who orders or encourages soldiers to do so, shall suffer death, if duly convicted, whether he belongs to the Army of the United States, or is an enemy captured after having committed his misdeed.” Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the 2. SIEGES AND BOMBARDMENTS. § 1112. 19. Commanders, whenever admissible, inform the enemy of their intention to bombard a place, so that the noncombatants, and especially the women and children, may be removed before the bombardment commences. But it is no infraction of the common law of war to omit thus to inform the enemy. Surprise may be a necessity." Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the "ARTICLE XXVI. The Commander of an attacking force, before commencing a bombardment, except in the case of an assault, should do all he can to warn the authorities." Convention respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The "115. It is customary to designate by certain flags (usually yellow) the hospitals in places which are shelled, so that the besieging enemy may avoid firing on them. The same has been done in battles when hospitals are situated within the field of the engagement. "116. Honorable belligerents often request that the hospitals within the territory of the enemy may be designated, so that they may be spared. "An honorable belligerent allows himself to be guided by flags or signals of protection as much as the contingencies and the necessities of the fight will permit. "117. It is justly considered an act of bad faith, of infamy or fiendishness, to deceive the enemy by flags of protection. Such act of bad faith may be good cause for refusing to respect such flags. "118. The besieging belligerent has sometimes requested the besieged to designate the buildings containing collections of works of art, scientific museums, astronomical observatories, or precious libraries, so that their destruction may be avoided as much as possible.” Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the "ARTICLE XXVII. In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps should be taken to spare as far as possible edifices devoted to religion, art, science, and charity, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not used at the same time for military purposes. "The besieged should indicate these buildings or places by some particular and visible signs, which should previously be notified to the assailants." Convention respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, General Scott, in giving an account of the siege of Vera Cruz, says that ground was broken March 18, 1847, and by the 22d heavy ordnance enough being in position, the governor of the city, who was also governor of the castle, was duly summoned to surrender. Immediately on his refusal, fire on the walls and forts was opened. Some of the shot and shells unavoidably penetrated the city and set fire to many houses. By the 24th additional heavy guns were landed, and the whole was in awful activity." The same day came a memorial from the foreign consuls, asking for a truce to enable them and the women and children among the inhabitants to withdraw in safety. They had," says Scott, "in time been duly warned of the impending danger, and allowed to the 22d to retire, which they had sullenly neglected, and the consuls had also declined the written safequards I had pressed upon them. The season had advanced, and I was aware of several cases of yellow fever in the city and neighborhood. Detachments of the enemy too were accumulating behind us, and rumors spread, by them, that a formidable army would soon approach to raise the siege. Tenderness therefore for the women and children-in the form of delay-might, in its consequences, have led to the loss of the campaign, and, indeed, to the loss of the army-twothirds by pestilence, and the remainder by surrender. Hence I promptly replied to the consuls that no truce could be allowed except on the application of the governor (General Morales), and that with a view to surrender. Accordingly, the next morning General Landero, who had been put in the supreme command for that purpose, offered to entertain the question of submission. Commissioners were appointed on both sides, and on the 27th terms of surrender, including both the city and castle of Ulloa, agreed upon, signed and exchanged. The garrisons marched out, laying down their arms, and were sent home prisoners of war on parole. "This was better for the consuls, women, and children, as well as for the United States, than the temporary truce that I rejected-notwithstanding the ignorant censure cast on my conduct, on that occasion, by Mr. William Jay, in his book-Review of the Causes and Consequences of the Mexican War, pp. 202-4." Scott, Autobiography, II. 426–428. The minister of the United States in Nicaragua, on his report that revolutionists had bombarded Managua from the sea without warning, killing one person near the American legation and wounding several others, was instructed" to present, either jointly with the other diplomatic representatives or in a separate note to the titular government, a protest against the waging of hostilities without warning, whereby foreigners are endangered." The minister, as it transpired, had already made a protest against the bombardment, as an “act of barbarism," to General Zelaya, president of the revolutionary junta, which was styled "Junta de Gobierno." General Zelaya, besides taking exception to the language of the protest, justified his action on the ground (1) that Managua was a fortified place in which the enemy were entrenched and from which they fired on his forces who, wishing to avert hostilities, in reality remained in front |