The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1906-08-23
Dbases Of international Law.

great many supply ships. Suppose,
then, that war suddenly broke out, and
a belligerent found his harbors full of
such ships belonging to subjects of the
enemy, would he permit them to de-
part or would he capture them all, CIV
ing no days of grace? l am certain
that he would capture them at once,
and would be justified in doing so.
The Russian-Japanese war has also
developed remarkable difference of
action on the part of the belligerents
in the matter of contraband of war
By careful study of the war of 1872,
you will find that the Japanese
adopted doctrine close to that fol-
lowed by the English at that time.
The list of goods that were declared
absolutely" contraband contained
military weapons, ammunition, ex-
plosives and machinery for making
them, naval and military uniforms,
and all other goods, intended solely
for use in war. Another list classed
as "conditionap contraband COM
prised drugs, coin, provisions, horses,
vehicles, coal, gold and silver bullion,
in addition to many other things. 1t
may be well to mention that the arti-
cles named in the last list, were con-
sidered contraband only when
destined for the enemy's army or navy,
or when there was reason to believe so.
In other words, distinction was
drawn between goods for warlike pur-
poses, and goods the use of which
varied according to circumstances.
The first being prevented from reach
ing the enemy at all; the second when
it was clear that they were destined
for use Of the enemy. On the other
hand, Russia made no distinction be-
tween the two. Her list, while it en-
braced every article named by the
Japanese, included many others, and
in particular coal and cotton. With
her, goods that were at all contraband
belonged to the former class Fur
} thermOre, no distinction was made as
. to whether the neutral vessels destina-
tion, was commercial or laval port
or whether the articles were destined
for civilian or military use. This
would not be of much Importance
were it not for the fact that it showed
peculiar change of opinion on the
part of Russia at that time.
Many of us are familiar with, the
position taken by Russia at the Wes
> African conference of 1884-5. At tha
time the Russian representative de
,, clared that coal under NO circum
stances could be consideret
!. contraband, in which he was sup
. ported by the French representative
= On the other hand, Great Britain
= supported by the United States, hell
that it is contraband when destine,
:. for naval or military use, but it is no
- when it is destined for commerce, o
) for domestic consumption. Wha
= makes this act on the part of Russi
= SO remarkable is that, when Japa
followed this rule in almost every re
: spect, Russia deliberately faced abou
and declared coal absolute" contrs
band, no matter for what use it wa
T. intended. The result of this nefariou
" act led to a strong protest from bot
10 the United States and Great Britain
u who stated that they did not intend I
8 submit to her (Russia's) condemnatio
le of any of their coal cargoes unless the
81 were clearly destined for Japan's nav,
er or military forces.
=. Food, as rule, has never been col
sidered contrabsnd of war unless
:. was destined for besieged place or q
:. armed force of an enemy. But su
~ pose that it was declared "absolut'
!. contraband; do you think that natie
:, :, like Great Britain, which depends g
= most entirely for its food supplies {
- external sources, would ever agree
~ any such ruleP I should say nc
80 Neither would the United Stat
~ which ranks first as producer and 9
- porter of many varieties of food stu
,ar In fact honestly believe that natio
foolish or weak enough to try to for'
%, or even suggest, any such ruling up
Ire either Great Britain or the Unit