Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-07-30
!" say. the court decision on this

for says the court decision on thi
point.
In support of this statement tn,
court quotes Secretary Seward. reply
ing TO the Peruvian legations as to thu
position OF the United States respect.
ing the war between Spain and Peru:
This government will observe tbs
neutrality which is enjoincd by its
own municipal law and by tho law OF
| nations. No armed vessels of either
party will be allowed to bring their
prizes into the ports of the United
States"
PNtSSlAN TREATY
Is FULLY DISCUSSED
Turning to the Prussian treaty tho
| court says.
The history of the adoption of this
/ treaty with Prussia, the conditions that
| brought about the same and the con-
| tetnporancous opinions OF the eminent
statesmen of that day, who participated
IN It's procurement and acceptance by
the two countries. has been gone into
| lully in the effort to show that it was
meant to give asylum TO prizes in neu-
! trail waters, and that its particular
| purpose was to afford tho United States
! an asylum for their prizes in Prussian
| waters.
Whatever may have been tho view
! OF those representing this country at
that time. il seems clear TO the court
that no such enlarged and far-reach-
ing view of the treaty as is now
claimed for Il can for a moment be
entertained AT this day. in the light
of present methods OF warfare and
the laws, rules and regulations affect
ing the neutrality OF nations In eX-
istence now for nearly 100 years.
"Anciently II was believed pcrmis-
sible for one nation to grant to an
other rights ana privileges in Its
waters not granted to others. Such
may be said TO have been the char
acter OF our treaties OF amitv and
commerce of 177S with France: but
the painful outcome OF our expert.
ences. growing out of those treaties,
and the position taken by this gov
eminent ultimately. in connection
with them, would seem to dispel the
idea that this country even in that
early period. ever Intended 10 afford
a harhor Of refuge for prizes of war
Of any other nation. and certainly such
idea is now uniformly negativcd by
the customs of all nations. Article
XVII OF the treaty of amity and com
merce is substantially in the terms OF
the Prussan treaty now being con-
sdered, and under the Interpretation
placed upon IT by the United State.
tsee Mr.. Jeffcrsor's letter to Gallatin
June 2S, 1901 Moore's Digest, sec. 1902,
page a3D. the claim here made that a
prize master could bring IN his prize
Tor indefinite asylum, was not MAIN
tanned.
CAN ONLY M BROUGHT
by ANOTHER VESSEL.
"A careful review Of the provisions
Of tho Prussian treaty, when read In
the light Of the rulin. and interpre-
tation placed upon other contem-
poraneous treaties especially Article
NN1T. OF tho treaty o. amity and com
merce with France in 177s. convinces
the court that the Secretary of States
ruling is correct, and that under the
same prizes cannot he brought into
the waters Of tho United States for
the purpose of laying up by A prize
master. hut can only be brought in by
tho capturing vessel herself, or a war
vessel acting as convoy TO such prize
and then not for an indefinite period
hut for the temporary causes recog-
ni2ed by International law.
What arc the rights of tho Appam
under general international law? Was
she entitled 70 como into the waters
Of the United States. and. If so. has
she the right of asylum therein?
These questions must be answered in
the light of that law. The generally
accepted doctrine now is that enlight-