New Britain herald., 1915-08-04

ble in cases before the prize court, 1 the government of the United States refer, for I am not aware of any diff ferences existing between the two { counties as to the principles of law applicable in cases before such courts"
 Sir Edward compares the rules governing British prize courts to the rules applied by American courts, re- ferring especially to the American case of the Amy Warwick before the United States supreme court where it was held that prize courts are sub- ject to the instructions of their own sovereign. In the absence of such instructions their Jurisdiction and rules of decision are to be ascertained by reference to the known powers of such tribunals and the principles by which they are governed under the public law and the practice of na- tions. It would appear therefore that the principles applied by the prize courts of the two countries are identical"
 Prize Court Practical.
 The supplemental note then pro- ceeds with a long legal argument to demonstrate the practicability of a prize court being governed by inter- national law and at the same time by municipal law in the form of orders Tn council 1t finally comes to the case of the steamer zamora in the present war, in which the British court declared:
 The nations of the world need not
 De apprehensive that orders in council Will emanate from the government of this country in such violation of the acknowledged laws of nations that it IS conceivable that our prize tribun- ais, holding the law of nations in re-
 vefence, would feel called upon to dis regard and refuse obedience to the provisions of such orders"
 Sir Edward then points out that the legality of the Orders in Council or Of the measures taken under them have not yet been brought to a deci- sion in prize court, but he reminds the United States that eft is open to any United States citizen whose claim is before the prize court to contend that any Order in Council which may affect his claim is inconsistent with
 the principles of international law and is, therefore, not binding upon l the court. If the prize court de- i clines to accept his contentious and if. l after such a decision has been upheld ! upon appeal by the judicial commit l tee of his majesty's privy council, the government of the United States con- 1 slder that there is serious ground for holding that the decision is incorrect and infringes the rights of their citi- zens, it is open to them to claim
 that 1t should be subjected to review by an international tribunal The celebrated Matamoros cases of the Civil War then are cited to show l that the supreme court of the United 1 States held 1t had the right to re- verse the decisions of prize courts and that there was no doubt of the l Jurisdiction of an international tri- bunal to review the decisions of the prize courts of the United States, where the parties alleging themselves aggrieved had prosecuted their ap- peals to the court of last resort" If the United States should be dis satisfied with decisions of British prize courts sustained by the privy council the British government is prepared to concert with the United States "in order to decide upon the best way of applying the principle to the situation which would then have arisen"
 Case of Steamer Neches.
 To the American note in the case of the steamer Neches, which sum- marily demanded the expeditions re- lease of the American owned goods detained under the Orders in Council '' the international invalidity which the government of the United States regards plainly illustrated by the present instance" Great Britain re- piled that while these acts of the German government continue (Sink- ing neutral as we'll as British mer- chant ships irrespective of destination or origin of cargo and without proper regard fo safety of passenges or crews), it seems neither reasonable nor just that his majesty's govern ment should be pressed to abandon the rights claimed in the British note and to allow goods from Germany to pass freely through waters effectively patrolled by British ships of war;"
 Great Britain offers, however, to make special examination in the Neches case if hardship had been in- f1icted.
 The British reply in short, is a goods originating in Germany or in a territory under German control The geneal cargo of the Neches originated in Belgium.