The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-08-09


Hague conference would fail TO improve
the prospect Of peace, optimistic onlook-
ers fell back upon the hope that A. least
IL would alleviate sensibly the losses and
suferings hitherto ipseparable from war.
Here, too, most Of their expectations
seem likely to be disappointed. IL is
true That on August 7 Lord REAY IN
nounced Great Britsin's adhesion to the
declaration Of the conference Of 1890
against tho use Of dumdum bullets.
Promising, also, was the vote Of 30 to ?
in favor ~ f~orbidding the dropping from
balloons Of proiectiles on ~undefended
towns or the discharge of deleterious
gases thereon. The committee refused
to go further, however, and apply the
same prohibition in the case Of regularly
beleaguered garrisons. L. was notice.
able on August 7 that England showed
herself opposed to the federation Of aerial
warfare In any form. Her objection
was evidently based on knowledge Of
the fact that she could not look forward
to the ascendency in aerial navigation
which she possesses at ga. Other hui
msnitarian resolutions were rejected
practically on August 2, to wit: n
abolishing the destruction of prizes when
for any reason a captor should deem it
difficult or inexpedient TO take them to
one OF his country's ports, and another
adopting the principle Of indemnifying
the of ships wrongfully seized.
A proposal made by France on the same
day for the abolition Of prize money
obtained only sixteen votes, and thus
was virtually killed, although. as Mr..
CHoATE pointed out, the reform has
actually been accomplished in the United
States.
As we have formerly noted, the most
drastic mitigation Of the barbarity of
warfare, to wit: the assertion of the
principle that tho private property Of
the citizens OF a belligerent Power, if
not contraband, should be exempt from
seizure, as private property on land al
ready is, has no chance of acceptance,
Notwithstanding the ability with which
it was urged by Mr.. CHoATE, because it
was opposed by England and such other
Powers as she could influence. Subse-
quently Mr.. CHoArE declined the Eng
fish proposal to abolish contraband on
the ground that assent to il would render
the maintenance of a blockade imprac-
ticable. 1t would be preposterous to
allow neutrals to convey with impunity
arms and ammunition 20 a belligerent.
1t does not follow that the Hague
a.Aono. .lanI1 -At a1.a,lar -tth do
ference the resolution passed by the in
terparliamentary conference of 1906 that
contraband OF war should be defined rs
restricted to arms, munitions and ex-
plosives. 1t is true that many articles
other than the three specified might
under certain circumstances be ex-
tremely useful il not indispensable to an
enemy. 1t would not be unreasonable,
however, to ask that an international
agreement should declare such other
articles as conditional and not absolute
contraband, as only confiscable, that 10
to say, when their destination or charac-
ter suggests application to the military
purposes Of a belligerent.
The international Law Association in
its meeting at Christiania in 1905 ex-
pressed the unanimous belief that coal
should be declared conditional contra
band only, and suggested that the Hague
conference should draw up a list OF the
general heads of conditional contraband
which the Powers would covenant to
respect. The decision of the Russian
prize court at st. Petersburg, which re-
vised the sentence passed upon the
Calchas by the court OF first instance
at Vladivostok in 1904, propoundcd an
Interpretation of contraband which
might well pass into the law Of nations.
The court declared that the term con-
traband' is applicable only to specified
articles when they are transported on
account of or are destined for the enemy.
That is to say, for the enemy's Govern
ment or army or navy contractors, and
not for private individual subjects Of
a belligerent Power. A tortiori, such
conditionally contraband articles should
be exempt from seizure when they are
intended for neutral Governments or
private individuals Of a neutral country.
If legal effect should be given at The
Hague to this Interpretation neutral
traders could have little reason for COM
plant and the second peace conference
would not have been held altogether in
vain, since at least it would have tenn
pered the losses incident 10 war.