Morning journal and courier., 1885-05-12
rHE sUEz CANAL.

An Interesting Talk W1Uh PrOfessOr
 CoIby-A Great National Highway-
 The Rights of Nations i'm Case of
 war-Lecture Before she Yale Kent
 Club.
 Last evening Professor Colby delivered before the Yale Kent club of the Law school, by invitation, an address on "The rights icf neutrals and the status of the Suez canal in event of war between Great Britain and Russia. ''~
 Neutrality is word of modern use. Gro tius, the father of international law, had lit tie to say of it in 1895. Near the close of the last century the relations of neutral rights were forced upon a reluctant world. Before that time nations expected all their neighbors to take sides in every fray. The growth of neutral rights from 1776-the period of Adam Smiths writings-to 1856 was testified to by the treaty of Paris of the latter year. The treaty was signed, not only by the powers involved in the Crimean war, but of Prussia and Austria. Since 1915 the "grsat powers" of Europe have been Great Britain, France, Prussia, Austria, Russia, and these assume supervi- sion over Europe. In '67 Italy was invited into the number. They regard as their ju- risdiction everything not distinctly national. Their procedure is determined by circum- stances. The treaty of '56 was signed by these great powers. Its provisions show It to be national title deed, declaration of neutral rights. It is called the Declaration of Paris, and was four fold, holding that blockades must be effective; neutral goods on neutral ships are free, neutral goods 1n enemies ships are free, except contraDand or war The declaration was approved by all civilized States except the United States, Mexico and Spain The United States was unwilling to give up privateers because It could not support a big navy. In case of war between Great Britain and Russia neutral rights will be determined by this declaration or by the international law pre- vailing in 56, ,as modified by subseq uent trea- ties. In Europe blockades will be regulated by this treaty. They will be binding if the coast is so watched that ingress and egress will be attended with danger such as to rem der capture probable. During the Rebellion numerous cases of breaking the Charleston blockade occurred yet England acknowledged it as valid one. During the Crimean war blockade 120 miles from coast was recog- nized as binding one. The prize court of the belligerent must say whether, in case ot capture the neutral should have regarded the blockade as effective.
 ErlVat06r1nS IS aDOISleO Dy the treaty OI Paris. It is unsafe to entrust such power to vessels not directly responsible to the military state In '61 the United States made use of a volunteer navy instead of privateers and thus itself removed it's chief objection to the treaty of '56. In the event of a European war there would be no sub stantial violation of the treaty in this re- spect.
 The theory is finally and definitely estab-. lished now neutral goods or enemy's ships are exempt from capture, and by the Paris treaty it is settled that neutral flag covers enemy's goods except contraband of war. This treaty binds only signers. In event of war the United States would not find its rights defined here. We would have to look to international law as existing in '56 except as modified since by separate treaties with Russia and Great Britain. In '54 treaty between United States and Russia adopted the. free ship-free goods doctrine. But Great Britain is not so bound to us by any treaty. Russia, then, might be necessitated to retaliate in like way, if the struggle was protracted one. Probably England would not violate the general continental spirit, but legally she is not bound to allow Amer ican vessels to carry her enemy's goods. Any belligerent may stop neutral vessel 10 see if it is entitled to carry neutral flag and whether the goods carried, if enemy's, are contraband Contrabands of war are com modities which tend directly to assist the enemies naval and military operations. If a vessel is stopped with powder and mortar aboard, if the ordinary and primary purpose is for enemies use, it may be confscated. It is a question of probable use All neutrals can be searched. The treaty of Paris has also pro- vision relating to the sick man of the East. It was intended to keep Russia from becoming great naval power. Hence powers on the Black Sea were forbid den to put fleets on the sea. In TO Russia refused longer to abide by this agreement. It was then agreed that in time of peace Turkey could admit fleets of neutrals in order to car " out the provisions of the treaty of '56. In event of war, then, the Turk could easily let in the British fleet. No treaty specially prohibits, in event of war, Turkey from ad- mitting war vessels of neutra1s.
 The Suez canal is the work of one marg DeLesseps, who, in the face of immense opposition, carried it through and finished it in '69 at cost of $83, 100000. It's opening was the most important event since the dis covery of America. It is essential to the prosperity of England. Its essential facts are these It is a narrow strait be- tween two open seas, being wholly within the territory of one power. It is an artific- ial channel and so narrow that it's use in a war would close it to commerce. It was made and worked by commercial company with charter granted by the Khedive and cOnnrmeQ Dy the 0ulUaH 1nlS company has a more or less international character, and has. entered into agreements with vari- ous nations as to their rights to use it. Le gally the sovereignty over the isthmus through which the canal runs is shared be- tween the Khedive and Sultan, but, a matter of fact, Great Britain has more con trol over the Khedive than the Sultan has. She has, however, to obtain the assent of European powers to any important measure relating to the canal. Ships of nations have the right of innocent passage when Egypt is at peace and when neutral. That power must prevent hostilities between belligerents in the canal, and if itself at war, may exer- else belligerent rights against the ships of it's enemy found in it's waters, and the enemy has the same privilege against it's ships. The charter says the company is a universal company" The quasi-inte1national charac- ter of the canal is shown, that when in 1875 Great Britain purchased the Khedive's spells the continental States asked explana- tion. Russia and England particularly ac- knowledged this status. In 1883 it was i'm pliedly thhown open to war vessels. It is proposed to create au Oriental Belgium, in cluding the canal, which is the most feasible plan and the best.