Evening star., 1898-05-13
THE DECLARATION OF PARIS
English View of It's Effect on Com.
merce In the Present War.

English View of It's Effect on Conn
merce In the Present War.
From the London Law Journal
In the event Of war between the United
states and Spain the effect upon English
commerce is a matter which has excited
some attention.
one result Of the outbreak of war would
be that either belligerent would have the
right to search any merchant vessel unon
the high sea to ascertain its nationality and
the nature of the cargo on board Resist
ance to the right of search, according to
the rule which has been emphatically af-
firmed in the British prize courts. renders
the ship liable to condemnation.
The United States and Spain are not mar
Ties to the declaration of Paris. Conse-
quently they are not bound by the rule that
the neutral nag covers the cargo There
fore British ship carrying cargo belong
Ing to either belligerent could be taken by
ship of the other belligerent to a conyen-
lent port for the purpose of having the
cargo condemned. Under such circum-
stances the usage is for the captor to pay
freight to the captured ship.
Goods which are contraband of war des-
tined Tor the use of the enemy, are liable to
confiscation. and freight is not allowed in
respect of them to the carrier The car
rtage of contraband goods does not, how
ever, according to the prize law of most
countries, render the ship liable to any 9TH
er penalty in the absence of fraud or other
aggraVat1ng circumstances. There are dicta
in one or two English cases that when the
shipowner is privy to the carriage of con-
traband goods his ship is liable to condem-
nation; but there is no English or American
case In winch such principle has been
clearly established.
A ship which violates an effective block
ade Is, together with the cargo intended for
the blockaded port, liza BILE to capture
1t is, however, clearly established that by
English law trade in contraband goods or
to blockaded port is lawful for a British
subject when this country is neutral. There
fore charter made by British shipoWner
for the purpose of running a blockade could
not be repudiated by him. On the other
hand, performance of a contract to carry
goods to a port which before the loading
becomes blockGded is excused when the
charter contains an exception of restraints
of princes. And even without this excep-
tion the shipowner would, 1t is thought not
be bound to carry out his contract on the
ground that the adventure had been frus-
trated by circumstances not contemplated
when the contract was made.
The question Is more difficult one If in
the course of the voyage the port of desti-
nation should become blockaGed If the
cargo owner requires delivery at a port
where the ship has put in, ''The Teutonia 3"
Al Law ]. Rep. Ad. 4, is an authority for
saying tnat he must pay freight If the
shipowner calls on him to take delivery
elsewhere than at the port Of destination
1t has been held that he does not by ac-
ceptirg the cargo become liable to pay any
freight (Castel VS.. friedman, / c. and E.
276). If the cargo owner absolutely refuses
to take delivery elsewhere, it seems prob
able, on the scanty authorities dealing with
the point. that the shipowner must keep
the cargo until it is possible to deliver it,
unless the charter contains the usual clause
for delivery, "as near thereto as she can
safely get." and it is possible to discharge
the cargo at some place near to the block
aded port.
Contracts of insurance made in this coun-
try would not, from the legal point of
view, be much affected by a war between
two foreign states assurances on the prop
erty Of bellgerents would be valid, unless
as was the common practice in maritime
wars, warranty Of neutrality were in
serted in the policy; but unless the char
acter of the property were disclosed, the
policy might be avoided on the ground Of
ooncealment. 1t follows from the fact that
trade in contraband goods or to block
AIDED port would. by English law, be law
full. that an insurance on such goods on
such a voyage would be good. But the ma
ture of the cargo or OF the voyage would
aggravate the risk. and would therefore
have to be disclosed.