The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-08-04
BRITISH REPLY TO
 AMERICAN NOTES
 IS MADE PUBLIC
tContinued from Page One)

that the United States would not recognize the orders in council in lieu of interna tonsl law, Sig Edward Grey writes he does mot understan dto what divergence of views as to the principles of law ap- plicable in cases before tho prize court, the government of the United States refer, | for I am not aware of any difference existing between the two countries as to the principles of law applicable in cases before such courts"
 1 Sir Edward compares the rules govern ing British prize courts to the rules ap- piled by American courts. referring espe- oially to the American case of the Amy l Warwick before the United States su- preme court where it was held that prize courts are subject to the instructions of l their own sovereign. In the absence of such instructions their jurisdiction and l 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 nations. 1t would appear, therefore, that the prin. ciples applied by the prize courts of the two countries are identical"
 The supplemental note then proceeds to demonstrate the practica blity of a prize court being governed by international law and at the same time by municipal law in the form of orders in council. It 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 be apprehensive that crders in council will emanate from the government of this country in such viola . ton of the acknowledged laws of nations that it Is conceivable that our prize tribunals, holding the law of nations in reverence. would feel called upon to dis regard and refuse obedience to the pro- Nisions of such orders"
 Legality of Orders
 , Sir Edward then points out that the , legality of the orders in council or of , the measures taken under them, have f not yet been brought to decision in a prize court, but he reminds the United , States that it Is open to any United f States citizen whose claim Is befol | t the prize court to contend that any or s der in council which may affect hi, l claim Is inconsistent with the prin- ciples of international law and is there r fore not binding upon the court. Ii the prize court declines to accept his e contentious, and if, after such a de- [ cision has been upheld on appeal by q the judicial committee of his majesty's y privy council, the government of the . United States consider that there Is 5 serious ground for holding that the de- e cision is incorrect and infringes the e rights of their citizens, 1t Is open |, f them to claim that 1t should be sub . jected to review by an internationa d tribunal"
 s The Matamoros cases of the civil wal @ then are cited to show that the United e States supreme court held 1t had tin, right to reverse prize court decisions and that there was no doubt of the Jurisdiction of an international tribuna A to review the decision of the prize c courts of the United States, where tn, r parties alleging themselves aggrleved ', had prosecuted their appeals to th court of last resort"
 : To Decide Best Way
 If the United States should be dis
 satisfied with British prize court de
 cisions as sustained by the prvy coun
 ell, the British government is prepared
 to concert with the United States "i
 order to decide upon the best way o
 applying the principle to the situation
 which would then have arisen"
 To the American note in the case O
 the steamer Neches, which summaril.
 demanded the expeditions release of tn
 American owned goods detained unde
 the orders in council the interna tiona
 invalidity of which the government O
 the United States regards as plainl,
 illustrated by the present instance
 Great Britain replied that while thes
 acts of the German government con
 tinue csinking neutral as well as Brit
 ish merchant ships. irrespective of des
 tination of origin of cargo and withou
 proper regard for safety of passenger
 or crews) it seems neither reasonabl
 nor just that his majesty's governmei
 should be pressed to abandon the right
 claimed in the British note and t
 allow goods from Germany to pas
 freely through waters effectively pa
 trolled by British ships of war"
 Great Britain offers. however, t | ms a iN
 Neches case if hardship has been in
 flicted.
 The British reply, in short. is
 declnation to allow free passage
 goods originating in Germany or a ter
 ritory under German control. The ger
 eral cargo of the Neches originated 1
 Belgium
 All Phases Covered