The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1914-08-13
FATE OF SHIPS
SEIZED IN WAR
Nation Taking Merchant Ves-
sci Sole Judge Of Its Prize.
NO WORLD CODE AT PRESENT

Plan For international Court Adopted
at London Conference In 1909 Held
Up by Great Britain--United States
- Neutral Country Could Claim Re-
endorsement From an Offender.
Merchant ships seized as prizes dur
Ing the European war will be dealt
with by the prize courts OF the nations
making the capture unless an inter-
national prize court should be set up.
In recent years attempts have been
made by the great nations 10 establish
an international tribunal 10 decide
whether n merchant ship was seized on
justfable grounds and to award dam
ages where the capture or sinking Of
such ship was unwarranted.
As things are now. II ships OF the
United States are seized as prizes In
the present war, this country has the
right 10 make protest which would
ordinarily end In settlement before
an award court established for the oc-
casion. The advocates Of an interna
tional prize court say that ii would
work more swiftly and that Its very
existence would make warning nations
proceed more carefully in the taking Of
prizes.
According to the present internation-
al practice, the belligerent nation cap
turing neutral merchant ship Is the
Judge to decide whether the vessel is a
valid prize. The carrying OF contra
band. the attempt to run Blockade or
the rendering Of other kinds Of ''nn-
neutral service" makes neutral mer-
chant ships liable to confscation.
Treaty Obligations Only Exception.
There Is at present no international
code which specifies the offenses
against neutrality which make mer-
chant ship a Ia wful prize, and each ma
ton involved In war settles the ques-
ton according to fits own lights, eX-
cept where it Is bound by treaty OBJ
legations with neutral nations.
A plan was adopted at the interna-
tiOnal naval conference at London in !
1909 to establish an international prize
court, and that such a court has not /
been established Is due to the failure
of Great Britain to pass the necessary |
legislation. The delegates OF Great /
Britain were among the strongest nd /
vOcates Of the international prize court |
at the second Hague peace conference
In 1907, but the plan was defeated by
strong popular opposition In England.
especially by the conservatives
Prize Court Waits Action by England.
According to James Brown Scott. ed
itor Of the American Journal OF Inter
Law. the establishment of the
prize court depends upon
the action OF Great Britain He says:
"The signatories OF the original con
vention and Of the declaration have
waited. and are still waiting, for favor
ible action by Great Britain upon these
two international documents. apparent
~ unwilling to create the international
prize court without the cooperation Of
Great Britain and to bind themselves
by the provisions Of declaration call
ed by Great Britain to meet British
objection unless 1t is ratified by Great
Britain. The establishment of the
prize court therefore Is thus made to
1epend upon the action Of Great Brit
,in."
Article Of the prize court conven-
Ion is as follows:
II question Of law 10 be decided is
covered by treaty In force between the
,elligerent captor and q power which Ia
tself or whose subject or citizen is a par
y to the proceedings the court is govern
d by the provisions Of the said treaty.
In the absence Of such provisions the
'ourt should apply the rules OF interna- s
ional law. II no generally recognized
ule exists the court shall give judgment
q accordance with general principles OF
ustice and equity.
1t Is unlikely, according to DIR. Ellery {
J. Stowell Of Columbia university. {
lew York, and an expert on interna- {
ional law, that any OF the nations al J
var will take steps to bring about the I
OF such a court Just now.
"Tbe court would be Of great ad- ,
antage to neutral powers" said Dr. =
lowell but there is no reason why y
belligerent should be anxious to es- y
,blish such court now. The two o
nncipal neutrals In this war, as II ap-
ears, will be the United States and
.aiy. These two nations might insist z
pom the rights Of neutrality defined n
= the London declaration, but II In .
ard TO see how the nations at war C,
,uld be brought TO establish the inter a
ational prize court. II spch a court
ere established its usefulness would
,t begin until the war WAS over IN.
ss the war proves to be a very long = :.
ne" :