The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-11-08

ana mas Oeen inc pr4CtlCe OF inc farltlsN
prize courts for over "A century. This
practice has been changed by tho Brit
teh Prise court rules adopted for the
present war by the order In Counc! OF
August 5. Under these new rules there
IL no longer a first hearing on the EVIL
dence derived from the ship. and the
prize court Is no longer precluded from
receiving extrinsic evidence for which a
suggestion has not been laid IN the pre-
paratory evidence. The result IL. ss
pointed out above, that innocent vessels
or cargoes are now seized and detained
on mere suspicion while efforts are made
TO obtain evidence from
sources to Justify the detention n the
commencement Of prize Proceedings. The
effect OF this new procedure Is to sub
ject traders TO risk Of loss. delay and
expense 80 great and 10 burdensome as
practically TO dest roy much of the export
trade Of the United states to neutral
countries Of Europe.
Delays OF Sesseis.
10. In order TO place the response
bility for the delays of vessels and car
! goes upon American claimants. the Or
| der In Council of October 20. 1914. as
| pointed out In the British note OF Feb
| ruary 10, seeks to place the burden Of
proof as to the non-contraband char
| scter OF the goods upon the eiaiman
In cases where the goods are consigned
ito order" or the consienec Is not
named or the consignee Is within enemy
territory. without admitting that the
onus probandi FAR rIghtfully he made
to rest Upon the claimant IN these cases
4, is sufficient for the purposes OF this
rote 20 point out that the three classes
Of cases indicated in the Order in Coun-
Gil OF October 70 apply to only "A few
of the many seizures or detentions which
have actually been made by British
, authorities. \
II. The British contention that In the
American civil wal the captor was al
lowed to establish enemy estimation by
"all the evidence at his disposal cit
ing the Bermuda case "a Wallace, 3i5b,
In not borne out by the facts OF that
case. The case Of the Bermuda was
one OF further proof" u proceeding not
to determine whether the vessel should
he detained and placed In y prize court.
hut whether the vessel. having been
placed In prize court, should be restored
or condemned. The same ruling was
made In the case OF the Sir william
Peel Is Wallace, SD, These cases,
therefore,. can not he properly cited as
supporting the course Of "A British cap
tor in taking a vessel into port. there
TO obtai extrinsic evidence TO Justify
him In OBTAINING the vessel for prize
proceedings.
l2. The further contention that tbs
greatly Increased imports of neutra
countries adjoining Great Britain's enc
mics raise "A presumption that certain
commodities, such as cotton, rubber and
others more or less useful for military
purposes. though destined for those coun-
tries. are intended for reexportatiOn 10
the beliigerents. who cannot import them
directly. and that this fact j~ust!fies tht
detention for the purpose OF eXamina
ton OF all vessels bound for the port
OF those neutral countries. notwithstand
Ing the fact that most OF the articles
of rad have been placed on the en-
barge lists OF those countries, cannot
be accepted az laying down a jus, oil
legal rule Of evidence. Such a presump
ton Is too remote from the facts ant
offers too great opportunity for abuS
by the belligerent. who could, II thu
rule were adopted. entirely ignore neu
trail rights on the high seas and pre-,
with impunity upon neutral
, To such 4 rule Of legal presumption thil
, Government cannot accede. as It is op
posed to those fundamental principles o
Justice which are the foundation o
the Jurisprudence OF the United state
and Great Britain.
!. British Exports Up.
G3) Before passing from the discus
, sio.i OF this contention a. to the pre-
= sumption raised by increased importa
. lions to neutral countries this Govern
. ment directs attention to the fact tina
a his Majesty's Government admit that tn
v British exports to those countries hav
: also materially increased since the pres
I en- war began. Thus Great Britain con
cededly shares in creating IL conditio
r which Is relied upon AS a sunlcien
g-ound to Justify the in~terception q
American goods destined 20 neutral Eu
ropean ports. II British exports TO thos
ports shOuld be stiil further increase
A II II obvious that under the rule ~ evI
dsnce commended for ny the British Go,
ernment, the presumption Of enemy de-,
tinatiOn could he applied IL " create
" number Of American and Amel
lean trade would suffer to the extent tn
British trade benefited by the increas
Great Britain canhot expect the Unite
i states 20 submit TO such manifest Il
justies or TO permit the rights % I
10 citizens TO be 80 seriously Impaired.
r. GN When goods are clearly intende
to become incorporated In the mass ,
- merchandi ) for Hale In a neutral coui
II try It II AN unwarranted and inquis
T. tor,al proceeding to de.ain shipnen
- for examination AZ to whether tho
ID goods are ultimately destined for Il
u enemy's country or use, Whatever ms
n be tho conJectural conclusions to !
Of drawn from trade statistics. which, VIII;
20 stated by value, are Of uncertain eV
r dence al to quantity, the United stat
or maintains the right TO sell goods into Il
no general stock of n neutral country. ~