The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-11-08

The Bunderrath. and released them
without prize proceedings, compen-
sation for damages suffered was ar
ranged through diplomatic chan
| nels.
"(2S) There is, furthermore, real
and far-reaching injury for which
| prize courts offer no means of repara-
ton. 1t is the disastrous effect of
the methods of the allied governments
upon the general right of the United
states to enjoy It's international trade
free from unusual and arbitrary linz
nations imposed by be!iigerent ma
tions. unw.irfnnted delay and expense
IN bringing vessels into port for
search and investigation upon mere
suspicion has IA deterrent effect upon
trade ventures, however lawful they
may be, which cannot he adequately
measured In damages. The menace OF
interference with legal commerce
causes vessels to be withdrawn from
their usual trade routes and insur-
nltc on vessels and carxocs to he re-
FUSED, while exporters for the same
reason are unable or unwilling to send
their goods to foreign markets and
importers dare not buy commodities
abroad because OF fear OF their Illegal
seizure Or because they are unable
to procure transportation, For such
through the medium of courts estab-
lishcd to adjust claims for goods de-
tanned or condemned. For specific In
turies suffered by private interests
prize courts. II they are free to amply
the law OF nations might mete out an
adequate indemnity. but for the in
jury to the trade of u nation by the
menace of unwarrantctI interference
with its lawful and established pursuit
tySapr py,tf r,xt4 v~n
remedy in the prize courts OF Great
Britain. to which United States citi-
zens are referred for redress.
Viewed With Surprise and Concern.
"(20) There Is another ground why,
American citizens cannot submit their
wrongs arising out OF undue tAtcn-
lions and seizures to British prize
courts for rs1,aration which l cannot
ncr In which British courts obtain
Jurisdiction Of such eases. The juris-
dictiOn over merchant vessels on the
high seas Is that of the nation whose
flag 1t rightfuIly flies. This Is a prfn-
tons Of the law and practice OF ma
tons fundamental to the rtAesiom of
the high seas. Municipal enacfments
of belli2crcnt power cannot confrr
jurisdiction over or establish rules OF
ftNIut-ltN GOVERNING tJR legality Oh
seizures OF vessels OF neutral nation
atty ON the high seas. International
law alone controls the exercise OF the
beliigcrent right to seize and dctain
such vessels. Municipal laws and
regulations in violation of the inter-
national rights of another nation, can
not he extended to the vessels Of the
latter on the high seas so as TO justify
IN lpelligcrcnt nation bringing them into
its ports, and, having Illegally brought
them within Its territorial juristiic-
ton. compelling them To submit to the
domestic laws and regulations Of that
nation. Jurisdiction obtained In such
% manner IL contrary to those prin-
cfple~ OF justice and equity which all
nations should respect. Such prac-
ticc should invalldate any disposition
by municipal court Of property thus
brought before It, The government
Of the United States has, therefore,
viewed with surprise and CONCERN the
attcrapt Of His Ma1csty's government
to confer upon the British prise courts
jurisdiction by this illegal exercise Of
force in order that these courts may
apply to vessels and cargocs Of men,
trial nationalities, seized on tho high