New-York tribune., 1908-08-22
FOR. LAW OF SEA WAR
CONFERENCE At LONDON.
c,ound York for International
prize Court To Be Discussed.
rrrou TIE Tribune Buresu.

y -,-..,sh government and which. in the judg-
' - washington authorities on the subject, may
- ,he most productive meeting in which the
g.-s, naval powers VIII have taken part since
p..,ss-ence Immediately after the Crimean War.
'1s - a. the Declaration Of Paris for the sool-
,iou Of privateerins
-,s-,srllv the forthcoming international naval
.e-,a has been called for the determination
many definite principles OF maritime inter
- law as are possible and capable Of being
= sr- the government Of the proposed tnterna-
- ,rsze court under the twelfth convention
- second Hague conference last year. which
o x,rnad by the American plenipotentaries, but
~~t been approved by the Senate Without
s,s -7,les for its government this prize court
80 undoubtedly encounter many grave difficult
- the realization CT this By powers enter
80 divergent views such important ques-
= :. the right Of capture. the abolition and
uoaS ..s.- OF coatrabend. the maintenance OF
,-ssss the status Of private property at sea
- srli-d questions led to the ready acceptance by
e+hs~ great maritime powers Of the Invitation
..,s.s last ep-ins By Sir Edward Grey, the Brit
- ro-sisn Secretary. for the forthcoming October
conference =. ,,.
ss--i,s pv Rear Admiral Charles h Stockton,
y sn6 Professor George Grafton Wilson, OF
- - university. Both are eminent authorities
Fs.s-,aticnai and maritime law. Rear Admiral
e.o.Eten was president OF the Naval War College
:. vsrvort ten years ago, and was afterWaro naval
s--,,bs st the American Embassy, London, so that
:. I'll be 10 stranger TO the British capital He
= .he editor Of g manual OF international law
-. :, the lectures Of Dr.. Snow. Of Harvard. and
sc taxi work on the laws and usages Of war
p, Wilson the other American delegate, has been
-ofsssor OF social and political science at Brown
University for nearly twenty years, has written
,svs-ai important treases on internatenai law Is
90 ef tbs recognised authorities on naval and
-.-ir-ne law in this country and has been a lect-
,,.r on International law the Naval War College
for the last eight years, well at Harvard Uni
verify.
DUTIES OF THE COMMISSIONS
The commissions which the Department Of State
has prepared for the tWo American Representatives
r.eate that the international naval conference
which they srs to attend viii be held 'fGr the pur
rsss Of arriving at agreement as TO what are the
generally recognized principles OF international law
governing rcatters Of prize and Of formulating
rules 70 BE observed by the International prize
court provided fer by the convention signed at The
Hague October IS, 1907" The commissions Of the
American delegates authorize them 'to execute and
.ulh 81 the duties appertstning TO this connis-
sion. with fuu powers TO negotiate. conclude ard
sign &c referendum agreement
The objectionable feature Of the convention for
the creation Of an international prize court was
contained in its seventh article, setting forth the
law &c govern the court in rendering its decisions
Of the court. First, where the relations between
ihe nation which IS before the court as captor OF
the prize and the nation which Is sggrieved are
regulated BY treaty the terms Of the 'treaty
are 70 govern the court Second. II there is no
treaty the court IS TO apply the rules Of intsrna-
iionsl' law Lastly, If there is neither treaty
ror generally recognized rule governing the sub
ect the court IS TO give its judgment in the case
in accordanee with the general principles OF JUS
tee and equity
Where the parties in dispute before the prize
court have al existing treaty covering certain
points az issue that tribunal would have little diff
Guilty applying the terms 10 the case. hut when 1t
csnes 70 rendering g judgment In accordance with
rules Of International Law" and general principles
Of Justice and equity the path Of the court viii
become difficult for these rules differ auonS
VARIOUS nations on certain points and the parties
oonssnding before the prize court may entertain
divergent notions Of Justice and equity" Hence.
ne general objection Of the great maritime powers
les principally against the last two provisions Of
the seventh article Of the prize court convention
NATIONAL. PRIZE COURTS NOT CHANGED
Any great maritime power like England would
be anxious TO know what rule Of law would be
applied by the international prize court Il war
should occur. As the prize court convention now
stands this would be rather uncertain where there
sre 10 existing treaties covering point that might
be raised n q prize Rules Of international
law 10 be applied IN the absence Of treaties must
he generally recognized" according to the prize
oourt convention. Under that convention it is
stipulated that national prize courts 10 ofieate
3cst f. the past An appeal may be taken
directly from the national court and the case
transferred from the national court to the inter
Rational prize court, at The Hague, This court
tasrsupon becomes seized OF the law, and the
facts involved in the case snd the decision pro
nounoed would become final and binding upon the
AaganI parties. While the proposed prize court is
rz4f and uor irGiT
.st the individual suitor. unless expressly pro-
diaited by his country. may himself appeal and
transfer his Il his country Should feel inds-
posed toward appearing before the bar as his rep
'essntztive
IF there is no treaty governing certain points,
nat there is rule Of International law tor which
Engisn6 and the United States should stand,
Fhle ether nations interested IN the case do not
s-sAa Tor IL that rule could not be applied very
&c to those other nations" explained promi-
hent government lawyer to-day, enc who is thor
osghly familiar with the purpose Of the forth
coming conference. still. If in the event Of hos
Titles Engiand should bring suit against a
french captor for instance, and there was no
keeraiy recognized principle Of international law
"se"een those two countries governing the issue,
o9lnSe for the English ltigant would probably
Ty TO find some recognition by the French govern
iasnt OF rule of International law espoused BY
'feaI Britain. The NEST eminent Italian jurtst
may Tor example entertain notions Of justice and
seoify' thoroughly different from Judge Grays-
lAcanental notions OF jurisprudence are al stake.
ahoe Great Britain is the greatest maritime power
naturally has the most at stake, and reason
Ao'g wants 10 know definitely Just what law is 10
81 eTn the judgments Of the proposed prize court
HNe whole idea Of the coming London conference
= 70 frame many rules possible so that law
: n1ore definite character may be applied in the
ueeaslon Of cases before the court.
Is il as yet impossible 10 tell what the dele
n or n cagff he q
.'aslne The prize court convention was the best
,ing along that line that could be got at The
.<gae without possibly jeopardizing the success
:. mat gathering il step IN the advance