Valdez daily prospector., 1915-02-03
UNSETTLED QUESTIONS OF IN
 TERNATIONAL LAW.

frOI. JOQn b. NOOTo, III HIS paper on Problems of War and Commerce, read at the Foreign Trade Conven- tion in St. Louis, brought out forcibly some of the uncertainties in the laws of war which the present European conflict has disclosed. These relate chiefly to contraband, the use of floating mines, etc. Professor Moore believes that the differences between our government and the English, in the matter of contraband of war and the right of search, will be amicably settled, but he thinks that this will be only a "makshift." That is to say, the two countries will agree on the procedure to be followed, but this will not settle the international law of the case. A thorough-going revision and codification of the whole subject of contraband will be necessary, in Professor Moore's opinion, after the war is over. If unsettled questions have no pity for the repose of na- tions, in their internal affairs, it is equally true that undetermined points of international law may any day threaten the good relations between countries.
 An instance of this last is just now brought to public attention in the controversies over the ship Dacia. The only reason that there is any controversy at all is that the law of the case has never been definitely settled. The books show no authori- tative decision in a dispute of pre- cisely this kind. There are implica- tions, looking one way or the other, and there are obiter dictum; but no prize court has, so far as we can as- certain, ever ruled on the nationality of a ship in exactly the conditions of the Dacia. Needless to say, there are no prescriptions of international law clearly covering the case The law is general. It simply lays down the rule that the nationality of a ship is to be recognized at sea- but does not S, y in detail how that nationality is, in every conceivable instance. to be decided. It is not solely a ques- tion of the flag and the ships papers, American authorities are explicit on the right of "an inquiring na+ion" to go behind the flag and the papers. It can appeal to "the actual fscts' upon which, in the case of sus- pected ship, her national character depends" But this simply means that the facts, and the due legal in depreciation thereof, must be laid be- fore court. This is apparently what the British government would do with the Dacia.
 The motive is plain. The Dacia her self is of little account. She is a small and cheap boat. But she was German-owned when the war broke out, and then was bought by Ameri cans, who now propose to sail her under the flag of the United States. If England should acquiesce in this procedure, she would be establishing a precedent which might be invoked to cover the sale and transfer to American registry of the vastly more important German steamships intern ed here since the outbreak of the war. The quiet and conciliatory note of the British ambassador simply states the fact that the validity O the Dacia's registry is open to legal ques- tion, ''in the circumstances"
 It might be thought that our gov ernment had no direct concern in the matter, except the general obli- gation +o see that American prop erty at sea enjoys it's rights The venture seems to be wholly private. The Dacia is owned by individuals, and her cargo is to be merely cotton. Where does the government come in |? It comes in through the transfer of the Dacia to American registry. That was governmental act. It was done, of course, under warrant of law. Our navigation laws were so changed that ships, if owned in good faith by Americans, could be sailed under our flag even if they were foreign-built. It was under this provision that the Dacia was transferred. This would have been perfectly regular and un. questionably lawful had 1t not been that the question of the war came in. International public law in time of war differs from the same law dur