The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-08-04
GREY DEFENDS RULINGS
OF BRITISH PRIZE COURT

they would not entertain n priorl. be-
cause they will not entertain a priori
the supposition that any such will
arise.
VIII Not Speculate.
I'm like manner this court will not
let Itself loose Into speculations as to
what would he its duty under such
an emergency because 1t cannot with
out extreme indeCenCy. presume that
any such emergency Will happen. And
IL In less disposed to entertain them
because Its own observation and ex-
p%ericnce attest the general conformity
Of such orders and instructions to its
principles at unwritten law
-. The HhoN" passage has recently
been quoted and adopted by the pres
ident OF the prize court In the case
OF the Scmara In which Sir s. Evans
said I make bold to express the
hope and belief that the nations OF
the world need not he a"pprehensiye
that orders In council will emauate
from the Government OF this country
In such violation of the Acknowledged
laws Of nations hat It is inconceiva-
lie that our prize tribunals, holding
the law Of nations in reverence,
would feel called upon to disregard
aitt NfihNt z W tlt DTONlSlDfN
of such orders
&c. In the note which I handed TO
your Excellency on the 23d Of July
] ~endeavored to convince the Govern
ment of the United States, and
trust with success. that the measures
that we have felt ourselves compelled
To adopt In seque of the numer-
Gus acts committed by our enemies
In violation OF the laws Of war and
the dictates of humanity are consist
ent with the principles of International
law.
Open to Appeals.
The legality OF these measures has
not yet formed the subject Of de-
cision OF the prize court. but | visa
To take this opportunity Of reminding
your Excellency that IL Is open TO
any United states citizen whose
claim is before the prize court 30
contend that any order in council
which may affect his claim is lncon-
sistent with the principles 81 interna-
tional law and Is therefore not bind
ing upon the court.
III the prize court declines to ac-
cept his contentious and II after such
a decision has been upheld on appeal
by the judicial committee Of his Mai
esty's Privy Council the Government
Of the United States consider that
there Is serious ground for holding
that the decision Is Incorrect and in
frtnges the rights Of their citizens. IL
Ia open to them to claim that II should
he subjected To review by an inter-
national tribunal
80. This principle tina, the decisions
OF the national prize courts may
properly be subjected to International
ANsta uaS DO. 49,. 49,, IL.
In Article : o. the jay treaty OF
1898 and by the tinted states q
America under the treaty Of Wash
ington Of 1871. Your Excellency will
no doubt remember that certain cases
collectively known as the 'Mata-
moros Cases') were submitted to the
commission established under Articles
1917 OF the treaty OF Washing O
I'm each OF these cases proceed
ings in prize had been instituted n
the prize courts of he United states
and in each case the judgmen, Of the
supreme Court. the Cour, OF last re-
sort in cases Of prize. had been OBJ
ta!ned the United states filed a
demurrer in these cases. alleging that.
as they had been heard by the prize
courts of the United States Of original
and appellate Jurisdiction. the de-
cision OF the Appellate Court was
rnal and no claim based upon 1t could
be made before the commission.
4. =. Agent satisfied.
The demurrer was unanimously
overruled and the cases heard and the
agen, OF the United States in his re-
port OF the proceedings OF the COM
mission stated hat ne personally
maintained no doubt OF the jurisdic-
f.nn nf the NOM ~ ssfap "A. I, fpro,..-
tional tribune to review the de-
cisions Of the prize courts Of the United
states where the parties alleging
themselves aggrieved had prosecuted
their claims by appeals TO the court OF
last resort as this jurisdiction. how
ever. had been sometimes questioned.
he deemed IL desirable that a formal
adjudication by the commission should
be had upon his question
rs The same principle was ac-
cepted both by the United states
Government and his Majesty's Gov
In 1907 in connection with
the proposed establishment OF an in
ternaiional prize court. although GER
ain constitutional difficulties have ed
the United States Government to pro-
pose that the right OF recourse To the
international prize court in connection
with a decision OF the Supreme Court
Of the United States should take the
form OF a direct claim for compensa-
ton.
- II IL clear. therefore. that both
the United States Government and his
MdJesty's Government have adopted
the principle hat the decis ions OF a
national prize court may he open 10
review. II 1t is held in the prize court
and in the judicial committee Of the
Prlvy Council on appeal that the
orders ana instructions issued by his
Matesty's Government in matters re-
Ilting 10 prize are In harmony with
the principles o: international law
and should the Government of the
United States unfortunately feel COM
PEELED to maintain a contrary view.
his Majesty's Government will be pre-
pared 10 concert with the United
states Government in order TO decide
upon IN" best way OF applying the
above principle 10 the situation which
would then ha"e arisen.
Expects Va Trouble.
II trust, however. that the defence
or our action which ! have already
communicated to your Excellency and
the Willingness OF his Majesty's Gov
(Which has been shown in so
many instances) to make reasonable
concessions TO American interests will
prevent the necessity for such action
arising.
TO In any case I trust thai the
explanations given above will emove
the misrepresentation under which
rannot but feel the Government OF the
n''ed states are laborlng as 10 the
principles applied by British nrize
courts IN dealing with the cases which
come before them.
"E. GREY"