The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-07-26
The Russian Seizures.

Notwithstanding the protest of the
British government to Russia against
the seizure of the Malacca, the cable
continues to report such acts, British
vessels being the victims chiefly, for
the reason that British commerce on
the seas is the largest. Note the case
OF the British steamer Knight Com
mander, which sailed from New York
for the orient with a valuable miscel-
laneous cargo, part Of which con-
sisted of steel rails and machinery for
Japanese ports. She was wantonly
destroyed without adjudication in a
prize court. No French vessel has
been reported among the seized ships,
a fact that suggests discrimination.
Our own freight for the orient is car
ried largely on British merchant
ships, which makes it matter of in
terest to our government that these
acts of Russia be inquired into, on
the ground that she Is stretching her
right of search considerably beyond
legitimate limits. In destroying the
knight Commander, Russia apparent
ly did not follow the lawful procedure
mander carried contraband it was a
lawful prize, subject to the action of
a prize court. - ...
The hostility awakened in England
and Germany by these seizure meth
DDS may lead to serious trouble. The
right of seizure of to-day is an out
growth of old savage methods Of war
fare. Our government tried in vain
to get the Hague congress to adopt
the principle of exemption of private
property from capture at sea by a bel
ligerent. A mistaken notion of bel
ligerent rights led Captain Wilkes of
San Jacinto to halt the British mail
ship Trent on the high seas, in the
civil war, and take from her as con-
traband Messrs. Mason and Slidell,
the southern ENJOYS to Europe. Sec
rotary Seward saw that the seizure
could not be justified and England,
who had begun vigorous preparations
to fight, was informed that Wilkes
acted without authority. It was be-
cause England claimed the right of
search on American vessels for men,
that we fought the war of 1924.
The disposition to exceed her bel
Hgerent rights at sea is likely to bring
Russia face to face with the al
Tentative of apologizing or fighting a
European power.
Under the law of prize, a captor
has no property in a captured vessel
or her cargo, until the rightfulness of
the seizure has been determined by a
court administering the provisions of
International law. Russia defies Vat
tel and all later authorities on inter-
national law and claims the piratical
right of destroying a captured vessel
on the high seas.
Russia's patrol of the Red Sea is
within her rights, provided it is car
ried on by warships in proper way.
English authorities admitted that we
had, during the civil war, perfect right
to station cruisers at the mouth Of the
British channel to overhaul every
west-bound ship, to ascertain by
actual search that she carried no con
traband or hostile dispatches. Great
Britain is inclined now, with her
y great merchant marine, to call for the
restriction of such belligerent rights.
This is the true position to take. There
should be new codifcation OF the
lawful usages of the sea in war time,
subscribed to by all the nations with
maritime interests.
Chicago is evidently booked for great