The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-05-04
THE LAWS OF WAR.

THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF EEUTRALs IN
THEIR RELATIONS WITH BELLIGERENrs-
NEUTRALITY AND THE RUSSIAN fLEEr-DoEs
THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON ESTABLISH
NEW INTERNATIONAL LAW RULE?
Tho statement upon the important subject OF tho
rights obligations Of neu,rals toward belgeron.s
which will be found below made by Mr. A. r.
spraguc. a writer on international law. Mr.. sprague
Ia OF the International Law Reform Associa.
son and Of tho editors Of tho International Revieo
He snys:-
TIE que nion OF the obligations or tho United States
government with reference to Russia and Turkey in
the war which has already begun must be looked
at under two aspects. BY The common law
OF nations, as II has existed for many years,
rde OF obligation prevails, and by treaty
s:ipulatiops between the United States and
different nations, another rule has been rccog-
nized. BY the old rules Of international law neutras
allowed to afford almost any possible assistance
to bclGerent Powers They might allow thcir ports
waters to be used the base OF naval operations
and for the purpose OF the renewal augmentation
their supplies arms. They might allow their citI-
TO expert arms and ammunition TO either OF tho
belligcrcnts and % make loans OF money any ex-
In fact, tho obligations OF neutrals with reicr
once 10 warning Powers were formerly OF tho most
meagro character; but within tho las. quarter OF a
century there has been constant tendency TO restrict
tho privileges OF neutrala
The most remarkable instance In times OF tho
declaration OF the rights Of neutras In conformity
with tho now theories OF International law Is that
tanned in tho Treaty Of Washington, under which tho
Alabama claims were settled Tho British govern
did not then admit that the rules laid down
correct statement OF the principles OF international
law which had bocn IN force previous to adoption
OF that treaty. But Great Britain submitted TO the
adoption OF these rules as governing the case in hand.
and both the United States and the English govern
ent agreed call tho attention the other nations
TO these rules, which foiows:-
TIIB IRoy-CLAD RULES
Fr-To dill ence TO the hitting arminy
equpping, within s jursdicon OF any vessel which e
has reasonable ground TO believe In tended
also 70 use IKE dissnce 70 departure from It's
rs above, having been specially adapted in
whole % IN part within such Jurisdiction. 20 wsrike
offs ports or waters as the base Of naval operations
mentalion OF military supplies the
OF men; IL
and MS to all within its sdicon TO pro-
any Infringement Of the foregoing LEGATIONS aud
duties
But II cannot DO said that the principles they laid
down have ever been formally recognized by the
nations. Although the United States would be bound
by these rules with reference to Groat Britain
all certain that our governments would DO bound
with regard 10 Russia Turkey tho present bel
ligerent state OF affairs. some question has been
raised as 10 the obligation OF the United states in rcla
ton to the Russian fleet now lying In New York har
Dor Laying aside the new rules of neutrality as en-
bodied In the treaty Of Washington there ques-
lion right OF the Russian feet remain In our
waters, our government being willing; tor the
old rulc Is that either beligerent may claim
the right OF asylum for its vessels Of war, unless
tho neutral nation signifies It's refusal OF such
usyums But II would not do Tor the Russian fleet
any supplies except provisions aud other
necesarcs may DO requisite Tor the subsistence OF
tho craw and much coal as would DO sufficient an
ordinary voyage OF tho leet 10 time OF peace And
ton OF war between Russia and Turkey they might
take such suppOs as have been Indicated even II the