New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-01-07
INVIOiABILITY OF MAILS
Not Absolute, but Conditioned to Use
Made Of Them.
To Tho Editor Of The Tribune.

To tho Editor Of The Tribune.
siri II is. believe duo to your readers,
no less than to the high reputation Of your
journal for truthfulncss and accuracy TO
note some distinctions vhich are observed
by writers on international law on the sub
icct of the so-called inviolability OF mails
carried on neutral vessels In time Of war.
and which arc apparently overlooked by your
Washington correspondent There Is no alb
solute immunity Of mall matter recognized
by the general customs or conventions be-
tween nations. There ia limited immunity
recognized by virtue Of the Hague conyen-
ton OF 1907, which favors postal CORE
spondence" Tor what We in the United States
usually call Hrst-class mail mattcr) ns long
as the carriage Of such mail does not violate
II blockade. infringe the law OF contraband,
or amount to the rendering Of what Is known
as "unneutral service" to the enemy.
This rule was formulated as Article ! OF
Convention " Of the Final Act Of the Sec
ond Peace Conference at the Hague, as fol
lowsi
THE postal correspondence OF neutrals or
belligerents, whether its character be official
or private, found at sea on a neutral or
enemy ship is inyiolable II 1t Is captured
with the snip it shall be sent forward with
the least possible delay by the captor
THE regulations of the preceding para
graph shall not apply in case of the violation
Of a blockade to correspondence which IL
destined for or coming from a blockaded
port"
Commenting on this rule. Professor Open
helm says that "it must be specially OBJ
served that postal correspondence and not
parcels sent by parcel post are immune from
capture" Oh international Law, p. 23O.
And again he says lp. $3.50: "But the rec
ognizcd freedom o. neutral commerce neces
states on the other hand certain measures
OF the part Of bcligerents II would be
unreasonable 20 impose on belligerent a
duty not 70 prevent the subjects of neutrais
from breaking a blockade from carrying CON
trabaud, and lastly from rendering unneutral
service 20 the enemy. international law
gives therefore the right 10 either belligerent
20 forbid an such acts 20 neutral merchant
men, and accordingly to visit, search, capture
and punish them"
Again Professor Opperheim comments %
52I: Though the vessel may be seized and
punished for unneutral service. according To-
Article / of Convention ~ OF the Second
Hague Conference. the postal correspondence
Of neutra's or belligerents, whatever IT'S char
acter found on board IS inviol1blc. d.
However, self-preservatiou would. in case OF
necessity, justify bellIgcrent In temporarily
OBTAINING such a liner transmitting intel
hcence TO the enemy In the ordinary course
of her VOYAGE for the purpose Of preventing
the intelligence from reaching the enemy"
p. 523, etc.).
The above CLOSES on the meaning OF the
article quoted were written before the war,
and may be considered 10 represent res-
soua0le Interpretation OF the rule Of the
Hague Conference. submit that they hardly
Justify the condemnation OF the action Of the
British government (which your Washington
correspondent calls "a clear violation Of in
tornatona Lawn. so far as the facts have
been published 70 date X. Y. h.
Ncw York Dec. so 1915.