New-York tribune., 1909-01-27
UF IMPORT TO THE U. s.
THE CONTINUOUS VOYAGE
Insistence on Naual Code Point
Necessary, Official Thinks.

Washington. Ian. 2e-"To the American govern
nent the acceptance by the maritime powers Of the
world of its view of the continuous voyage doc
trine which appears to be the feature of the con-
ference now in progress in London creating the
most talk is a most important one" said high
official of the government to-day in speaking OF the
international naval conference. BY the applica-
ton Of our view of that doctrine we have the
right to seize contraband OF war from the very
moment it starts the voyage TO an enemy's coun-
try even though intention is to transship such
contraband at a neutral port. Our country SUI
fered considerably from such transshipment during
the Civil War, when cargoes intended for the Con-
federacy were sent from European ports to foreign
possessions in the West Indies. notably at Nassau.
and thence were easily able to run the blockade and
supply the enemy with munitions of war
1T is with the view to prevent this in the nut
urc" went the speaker. that this government
holds that vessel known TO have contraband or
war abroad. and whose ultimate destination Is
known to be the enemy's ports should be liable TO
seizure and conhscaton the moment she gets out
the territorial waters OF the country Of export
Also this government claims the right to seize
such vessel her return trip, at any port
the high seas before she reaches her point OF
original departure"
TT is not surprising also" the official continued
that Japan should side with the American govern
ment in Its view Of the doctrine of continuous
voyage in view of the proximity of numerous
ports and islands which might be made the bases
Of operations against her. 1t is not surprising that
Of interest this subject, warlike movements
there are likely to be in the shape OF invasion
by land. with blockade running secondary eonsid-
Grafton"
An eminent authority on international law said:
The doctrine of continuous voyage devised by
Great Britain in the war with France. developed
by the United States and extended to blockade
during the Civil War has been the subject Of
much discussion by writers on International law
and by learned societies, including such as the In
ton
of blockade, 1t has been adopted by France. italy
and Japan, but has never commended itself to Con-
tinental jurists. The doctrine may best be defined
by simple illustration. We will suppose that
during the Civil War a vessel sailed from Liver
In the Bahama Islands but whose ultimate destna-
ton a blockaded port Of the Southern Confed-
fbscy b & rs ab port
OF the Southern Confederacy a continuous voy-
neutral port and although the cargo be trans
ferred at the neutral port and placed upon another
vessel for It's ultimate destination The voyage Is
therefore, from neutral port 70 an enemy port
a blOckaded port. The destination to the nau-
trail port for transshpment of the cargo Is simply
blind in order to effect purpose not permitted
garded continuous II would consist OF two parts
first, the eminently proper voyage from Liverpool
neutral trade between neutral ports. The United
States could indeed seize the cargo after its trans
the Confederacy or the blockaded port. because
the cargo, being contraband, is carried from q
blockade
The application Of the doctrine OF continuous
voyage makes the vessel liable seizure and ult-
mate con1scation the moment II leaves the terri
toral waters OF Liverpool, whereas, without the
doctrine, the vessel could only be captured amer
Nassau II is easy to see the aid rendered beIIig-
erents by the doctrine. At the time, II is
obvious that neutral commerce suffers or may
sufFaT