The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1899-12-31
rnELAW OF THE CASE.


we had something to say yesterday
upon the practical side Of the seizure by
a British cruiser upon the high seas OF
vessels carrying American -four to Del
aroa Bay. But as this subject is now up
before the public mind It would seem
proper there should be some discussion
Of the legal aspects of the matter. The
question has been as much debated az al
most any other question OF international
law. and the doctrines involved in It led
to our war OF 1872 with England.
There IL no definition cf what Is and
what Is not contraband OF war, nor Is
there an authenticated classification which
places in one category the articles that
arc contraband. and In another those that
are not. The general principles involved
are about as well stated IN a letter from
Mr.. jefferson when Secretary Of state.
10 Mr.. Pinckney, in 1873. as they can be
found anywhere else. He contended that
Il IS the right OF all nations 10 carry the
products Of their industry for exchange
10 all other nations, belligerent or neu-
trial: 10 go and comet freely without In
aulry or molestation. and, in short that
war among others shall be for them as
~ II did not exist "Our restrictions on
their national right" he adds. ''has been
submitted 10 by nations at peace-that is
10 say, that Of not furnishing 10 either
party implements merely Of war for the
ANNOYANCE OF the others. nor anything
whatever to place blockaded by its en-
emy. 1t Is not enough" he says Tor
q nation to say we and our friends viii
not buy your produce. We have right
n answer that II suits us better 10 sell
10 their enemies as we'll as their friends
Mr.. Randolph. Secretary Of State IN
1874 wrote TO Mr.. Hammond III by
circuit of construction, food can be uni
versallv ranked among military engines,
what articles to which human comfort
of any kind can be traced Is not to be
| registered as contraband."
These passages from the writings OF
/ these eminent men contain great deal
/ OF most persuasive argument, and yet
there is not wanting authority upon the
: other side OF the case. In the case or the
Commercers l Wheaton's Rep, the Su-
preme Court Of the United States said
IN an opinion delivered by Mr. Justice
story "By the modern law Of nations,
provisions are not. I'm general deemed
contraband; but they may become so, al
though the property OF neutral, on &C
count OF the particular situations OF the
war, or on account of their destination
II destined for the ordinary use OF life in
the enemy's country they are not, in gem
eral. contraband: but IL is otherwise II
destined for military use" The same
doctrine IS laid down in the case OF Mar
| sounaire VS.. Heating. 2 Gallison. 1925, and
IS reported in substance in several decis-
IONS Of the Supreme Court since the first
During hostilties between France and
China the French government declared
rice contraband Of war. Mr. Kasson, our
representative at that time in Berlin
wrote at the time to our Secretary OF
State. Mr.. Bayard. Of their action, Eng
land however. found here navigation and
commercial interests so much involved
that her government appears 20 have
protested against the doctrine" He adds
in the same communication:
Food constitutes an immense portion
OF our exports. Every European war
produces an increased demand for these
supplies from neutral countries Tie
French doctrines declare them contra
band not only when destined directly for
military consumption. but when going
in the ordinary course OF trade as food
for the civil population of the belliger-
ent government. The entire trade of neu-
trails with bellgerents may thus be de-
stroyed. irrespective Of all effective block
ads of ports. War Itself would become
more fatal to neutral States than to bell
| Hgerent interests. There is always dan
| ger that this precedent VIII be again
adopted in the heat of another war I'M
| less resisted By energetic protests In the
| interest Of neutral trade and Of humanity
itself. Its adoption. indeed would prse-
tically nuil.fy the advantages Of neutrals
intended to be secured by tha Paris dec
laration OF 1856"
| II seems impossible. therefore. 10 say
| what the law of any given case is. and 1t
I VIII require very delicate handling.
All persons applying to our government
| should be told that they must have their
claims adjudicated in prize court. and
that the government will see that they
| get such rights as are adjudicated 20
| them.
=---==---=
DEMOCRATIC DOCTRINE.