The Sun.
London, England, 1870-09-17 00:00:00

CONTRABAND OF WAR.

We have received copies of communications which have
passed between Count Bernstorff, the Ambassador of the
North German Confederation in this country, and Earl
Granville, her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs. The subject under discussion originated with a
circular issued by the Foreign Secretary on the 11th of
August last, and the memorandum communicated by.
Count Bernstorff on the Ist instant is practically a com-
ment on that public document. The Count begins by
declining to survey the existing neutrality laws, and their
ultimate bearing and scope, but starts from the point that
the verdict of the world, and the public opinion of
England, have unanimously pronounced the Emperor
of the French guilty of a most flagitious breach of the
peace. Germany, therefore, was " led to expect that the
neutrality of Great Britain, her former ally against Napo-
leonic aggression, however strict in form, would at least
be benevolent in spirit to Germany ; for it is impost
sible for the human mind not to side with one
or the other party in a conflict like the present." The
Count asks what more could Great Britain have
done, had Germany been the aggressor, than to allow
France all the benefit that she now possesses, in access to
coal and mnnitions of war; and he observes:—" In the
face of the continuous export of arms, ammunition, coal,
and other war material from this country to France—in
the face of facts openly made a boast of by the French
Minister of War, and not denied by the British Govern-
ment—it is not necessary to prove that the neutrality
of Great Britain, far from being impartial towards
that party which has been pronounced to be in the right,
is, on the contrary, such as it might possibly have been if
that party had been wrong in the eyes of the British
people and Government." The Count treats as scarcely
serious the idea that the Germans are at liberty to bring
each case before their own prize courts; for it would be
quite out of place " thus to taunt Germany with not being
mistress of the seas."
Earl Granville, in a despatch dated the 15th instant,
replies at some length to the two main positions assumed
by Count Bernstorff—first, that the attitude of Great
Britain in the present war towards Prussia should be that
of " a benevolent neutrality ;" and, secondly, that there
is no analogy between the course adopted by Prussia in
regard to the Crimean war and that of England in the
present war. England has endeavoured to maintain%
complete neutrality, whereas Prussia now asks for
one which, being " benevolent " towards Prussia, must
necessarily be unfavourable towards France. Lord
Granville fully recognises the difficulty of de-
fining belligerent and neutral rights, and the not un-
natural feeling of Germany at the present juncture.
Prussia demands that the export of arms, ammunition,
coal, and other contraband of war to France should be
prevented, and observes that our law empowers the Exe-
cutive to take a ship.
" There is no doubt that the Executive has, under the
Customs Consolidation Act of 1853 the legal power to
prohibit the export of contraband of war ; but the highest
authority can be adduced to show that such exportation
is not forbidden by our municipal law, and it has not
been the practice to prohibit it, except when the interests
of this country, as in the case of self-defence are directly
and immediately concerned in the prohibition; and even
in some of these cases, such as the Crimean war, consider-
able doubts arose during its continuance whether the pro-
hibition, when actually attempted to be enforced, was as
disadvantageous to the enemy as it was inconvenient to
ourselves. Such, then, being the state of the case
as regards existing practice, I would venture to ask
your Excellency's serious attention to the following
specimens or the difficulties which would at the outset
have to be met in an attempt to alter existing prac-
tice. The export of arms and contraband of war may
be open or clandestine. Exportations, if prohi-
hibited, would be entirely clandestine; the nature of a
cargo and the destination of a vessel would be equally
•i concealed. It would be necessary to alter the present
system of exportation under which (except_ in the Dort

or "Ammon) cargoes, in order to insure rapidity of ship-
ment, are not examined by the Custom authorities, who
receive the account of them from the shippers generally
after the ship has sailed. It would require the establish-
ment of-an-expensive, intricate, and inquisitorial Customs
system, under which all suspiqious packages, no matter
what their assumed destination, would be opened and
examined. Finally, though it might certainly diminish
the profits of certain merchanti with whose proceedings
her Ma;!.- ty's Government, in common with your Excel-
lency, have no sympathy, it would also cause infinite de-
lay and obstruction to innocent trade. Your Excel-
lency would not interfere with the trade to neutral coun-
tries; but how would it be possible to avoid this? A ship
carrying prohibited articles would invariably have a
colourable neutral destination. How is this to be de,
tected without interfering with the trade with neutrals, it
even then ? During the Crimean war Prussia had no such
difficulty. There could be no doubt of the destination of
goods arriving on the R ussian frontier ; and yet the Cus-
toms authorities were practically powerless. But Great
Britain has no frontier ; a ship leaving her ports may
shape her course where she pleases. Your Excellency
has suggested the exaction of a bond from shippers; but
such a measure would be most onerous to the mercantile
community, would be easily evaded, and at the best would
be no security against ultimate destination. It would be
necessary, too, to take these bonds not only from foreign-
bound ships, but from coasting yes eels, which are at pre-
sent subject to little or no Custom s supervision ; for
what could hinder a coasting vessel from crossing the
Channel and delivering her cargo at a French port ?
Again, your Excellency includes coal among the articles
to be prohibited, on the ground that coal is more
useful to France than to Germany during the present
war. This raises the question of the prohibition of
all articles not contraband of war, which might be of
service to a belligerent. But if this principle were ad-
mitted, where is it to stop? It would be difficult if a
neutral, and obviously inadmissible for a belligerent, to
draw the line. It must be remembered, too, that the
features a a war may change, Articles invaluable to a
belligerent at one period may be valueless at another, and
vice vevsa. Again, the 11th article of the Treaty of Com-
merce between this country and France expressly pro-
vides that the contracting parties shall not prohibit the
exportation of coal. Can this solemn treaty stipulation be
lightly regarded as long as we remain neutral ? • . . .
Her Majesty's Government fear that no means could
be devised for securing, at this moment, a calm discussion
of the subject. They by no means desire to claim excep-
tional rights for this country. They would be prepared
to enter into consultation with other nations, as to the
possibility of adopting in common a stricter rule,
altlicrugh their expectations of a practical result in the
sense indicated by the North German Government are not
sanguine.

THE ST. PETERSBURG JOURNAL ON THE

SIEGE OF PARIS.

The St. Petersburg Journal says that the siege of Paris
is imminent unless an armistice can be obtaided to afford
leisure to carry on the negotiations of peace and arrest
this new misfortune. It is not yet officially known what
are the pretensions of Germany; those of the French
Government for the national defence have been made
public through the circular of M. Jules Favre. Since
the publication of this circular two manifestations have
been made, one by the International League and one by
M. Victor Hugo. It must be frankly stated that the in-
terference of the Socialist democracy of France and its
organs can only exercise a baneful influence on the
state of public affairs. It is very certain that Germany
will not turn her eyes in the direction of France
when she seeks for light to steer her course, and counsels
ik indicate her progress. France con gratulates herself
upon the establishment of a Revolution. So be it ; but
we have also heard her eager felicitations at having de-
cided through the medium of the, popular voioe to live
under the regime of an Imperial Government. Let her
make the experiment of the new system she has inaugu-
rated, but let her not un d ertake the dangerous work of
drawing hes neighbours after her in the movement. The
fraternity of the peoples may be advocated, but their
federation is quite another thing. There is no occasion
for the men of different nations to follow precisely customs
and habits in order that they may be associated
together. The Germans are not in the delirium
of a Revolution, and have no ' desire for one.
We believe, therefore, that the intervention of the revolu-
tionary European Federalists is an unfortunate under-
taking, which can only result in mischief. Victor Hugo
seeks to prevent the Germans from attacking France by
declaring that it is the city of nations, to attack which
assimilate the German p eople—that country of thinkers
—to the modern Vandals. Certainly there is no one who
does not hope that Paris may escape from the horrors
with which she is menaced, but in sober truth should the
Germans re solve to besiege Paris, will they be the Vandals
that the illustrious poet of Notre Dame proclaims them
to be ? It must be borne in mind that Paris has been
fortified, and when this work was accomplished did any
one come forward and say thatit was an idle task to under-
take, because by all the laws of civilisation it would be an
act of barharism, and a criminal shame to attack Paris
No, poet ! the siege of Paris will not be a crime, and the
army which shall undertake it will not be denounced by
civilisation; but it will be an immense misfortune. Your
protest is couched in such terms that it is calculated to
cause provocation in the German camp, as irritating as
it is useless, that it is to say if it produces any effect there.
It is by the adoption of otter language, and by the
expression of other sentiments that we must hope to carry
out the establishment of peace. May another form of
words bring about the much-desired peace, and the peace-
ful seed of the future, of which Victor Hugo speaks, be
spread abroad without being mixed with the ashes of the
fortresses of Paris. If it must be that Paris is besieged
as Rome was by the French army, may it come out from
the trial as Rune came out in the untouched splendour
of its riches and of its beauty.