The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-11-05
RIGHTS OF NEUTRALS.

eHy PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED BY CAPTURE OF
THE BRITISH BARK sPRISGDoK-A CURIOUS
CASE As APPLIED TO THE nUsso-TUnKIsH
wAn-sEcRErAny EvARrs' OPINION ON THE
suBJrCT.
In MS sCronique do la ouiuxane." In the Rer~ des
De,.r Aordes for october Is. n do Mazodc comments
as follows tho Spnngbok casc:-
it's In tho nature of all wars to disturb In numer'
Gus ways, the nice provisions OF interDatona law,
and thus to leave behind them crop oil misunder,
standings and ugly disputes, gravey affecting national
interests although not calculated, at nrst sight, 10 nre
tho Imagination. The American war OF secession,
which closed some twelve years ago, left great many
about the Alabama was ultimately settled by
tribunal OF arbitration at Geneva IN 1917 ~ naa
made moro NOISE and excited moro angry ieenhgs
than any other There remains anothcr-that OF
the Springbok which dates from the same porlod
II Is not OF q nature TO set diplomatis's ~ INC
ears and yet gives rise to ever recurring cisPuta-
and because Its solution affects Inc M
tcrcsts of merchants and shipowncrs all over the
globe. II originated in novel doctrine OF nterna-
Supreme Court Of the United states IN inc heat oil tho
civil war. The question arose OUT OF me capture on
OF tho United States while tho said bark was
a voyage from London 10 Nassau, In tho British
colony OF the Bahamas Tho doctrine laid down IS
not only startling, but 1t Is calculated TO alarm oil
neutral commerce. 1t amounts TO THIS, that In timc
of war neutral ship, bound from ono ncutral port 10
another neutral por Is liable capture by belliger
cnt, on ground that the destination OF tho ship
and cargo, shown by the ship papers, however reg
they may be- Is to be taken as conclusive, but
may be treated fictitious, and that the cargo IS IN.
tended to be sent forward to some enemy-olockaded
port, after having been transshppcd AZ the hctious
neutral port
HrFECrs OF THE RULING.
Applying this novel doctrine TO tho circumstances
OF the Russo Turksh war; the question whether
a British vessel aud It's cargo while on voyage from
Calcutta 10 LONDON would be liable TO capture by an
Ottoman cruiser, tho vessel left tho Suez
Canal, the ground that part OF the cargo was salt
petrc-conlraband OF war-which might aitcr It's arr
hnt hmm an h0nvh nj
and 50 carried from London TO Russian Again. Is
neutral vessel on a voyage IRON Now York 10 Mar
settles liable TO capture by Russian cruiser should
shero DO some ground Of suspicion that portion OF
the cargo-contraband Of waris intended to be trans
shipped at tho French port and forwarded thence 10
tons questions 10 which the ruling OF tho
Supreme Court Of the United States in tho
case OF tho cargo OF the Springbok has given
rise. That court condemned the entire cargo worth
f66 000) MS good prize money on the assumption that
II intended for sale at Nassau, but that its ul
ierior destination was some blockadcd rebel port"
fhis IS what is termed by international lawyers "tnc
doctrine Of continuous voyage, Involving capture ON
suspicion oil some Interior nostilo destination.
uNsoUND IN LAW.
Although several years have elapsed since judg
mcnt was pronounced IN the Sprngbok case, II has
never ceased to be discussed and criticised,
occasionally In rather strong language, by Amers
can we'll as European Jurists. alike jealous In
uphoding tho sound doctrines OF international law
and resisting all dangerous Innovations The Sprngbok
Judgment has la,ey been made the text Tor ex-
haustivc dissertation by Sir Travers Twss, Advocate
General of Her Britannia majesty, who read, 1st
September last, before tho Association Tor the Re-
form and Codi6cation OF tho Law OF Nations Ant
werp, paper entitled, "rhe Doctrine of Continuous
Voyages, as applied TO Contraband Of War and Block
ndc rastcd with the Declaration OF Pars of 1856
AZ tho last sitting OF that association the eminent
Iursts there assembled passed unanimously n rcsou-
ton declaring the judgment OF the Supreme Court OF
The United States 70 DO "miscarriagc OF justce'
which ought to be rcdresscd. similar but still
stronger resolution was passed unanimously by tho
Institute OF International Law at III meeting o
month ago at Zurich.
BLocKADERs
There can DO no quest on that II the doctrine pro-
pounded and applied by The American Supreme
Court were adopted ana enforced by belligeront
great maritime Power-say by Great Britain-thc con-
sequences would be most disastrous to neutral trade.
The liberal principles prom ugacd In 1856 by the Con-
gross Of Paris In avor Of ncutrais-princples which
no less than iorty-two states have gwen their adhc-
Bion-wouId lose all their efficacy and force and
become waste paper. No nation would have any
rity that IT'S neutrality would DO respected, while the
doctrine OF continuous vovagc' enforced by British
squadrons and cruisers all over the globe mcnaccd
and harassed It's commerce and shipping. In fact, it
the so-caled papcr blockadcsn tho future abuses
which cured by the Declaration Paris, which
provides that "bocxades 10 be binding must be
effective"
MIR. EvARrs on THE RECORD.
Through an unexpected but highly encouraging CO.
Incidence, the present secretary Of Statc or Minister
of Foreign Affairs ut Washington, the Hon. William
~ Evarts. dlsapproves ana deplorcs tho Springbok
Judgment That eminent tursconsuit aud enlight.l
ened statesman placed years ago, these words rec
ord:-
The Of tho sprngboks cargo If suffered remain
ercnts which hereto they have dared
claim ana sunugates the commerce. OF neutral
bcgeren cxigencies before submitted
toan extont toerablc either to their interests
and the prize of Deigcrents wider more un-
controlled sweep OF interference with between
The prescribed neutral ports than they
commerce between neutral and bciiigercnt ports.
Tho enemy ports capture sending in for nd
judicatou vessels thai cannot by possibility convict
Acquit themselves the primary proofs Tor they
only tho present aud Innocent
intent Of lniure not commenced necessarily
proofs at all all thcse strange
follow from this doctrine OF beligcrent right and
I subservency
1t is in aud substance enlargement the do
main OF OF the theatre Of
between neutral ports the fiction of possible
bus voyage Tor cargo. yet TO be named and framed
CHANGED MIND?
Mr.. Evarts Office DOUBT, retains tho opinions
he formerly expressed Ills Official rcspons,b ,li,y
Can only make him moro than alive 10 the I'm.
portancc oil reversing without delay, the dcplorablc
judgment, with WOW TO Tho future protection OF
bhohe great American interests, now conided 10 his
guardianship.
The United States doubt, enforced their bcll,R.
ercnt rights 10 an extent extreme 10 be
BY foreign nations as illegal Tneir national Union
was In peril; they lighting for their existence
everything under the British flag they suspected to be
or TO conceal succor, In some shape or other to hc
Southern rebels" Bot they themselves with their
immense commerce and navigation, will be tho nrst
to rue the novel doctrine Of their supreme Court
when some powerful maritime belligercnt State.
adopting The precedent Of he Springbok, shall
seize anu condemn American ships and goods under
similar circumstances.