International Law :: FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:

George Fox Tucker

[1] Hall, Introductory chapter.

[2] Dicey, "Conflict of Laws," English, with notes of American cases, by J. B. Moore.

[3] Wheaton's "International Law," translated and made a textbook for Chinese officials in 1864.

[4] "Inst.," I., 1, 1.

[5] "De Jure Belli," Bk. I., Ch. I., § 10.

[6] I. "Political Ethics," 2d ed., p. 68.

[7] Maine, "Ancient Law," Ch. IV.

[8] "Inst.," I., 2, 1.

[9] "Inst.," I., 2, 2.

[10] Heffter, "VÖlkerrecht," § 2.

[11] Cicero, "De Republica," 2. 17.

[12] Droit international is the French term, subsequently adopted.

[13] Last hostages given in Europe 1748, by England to France.

[14] "Lectures on Jurisprudence," I.

[15] Walker, "Science of International Law," Chs. I. and II., fully discusses Austin's definition.

[16] Bluntschli, "VÖlkerrecht," Introduction; Lawrence, § 20.

[17] Walker, "Science of International Law," Ch. III., p. 58. "But when, beside the vague and fleeting World Law, the law of all humanity, was recognized a law special to certain peoples, when the distinction was drawn between the progressive and the stationary, between civilization and barbarity, when the Greek noted [Greek: ta nomima tÔn HellÊnÔn], and the Roman felt the ties of a particular Jus Fetiale and a particular Jus Belli, International Law cast off its swaddling bands, and began its walk on earth."

[18] Cicero, "Pro Lege Manilia," Ch. XIII.

[19] Justinian Digest, 14. 2, "If goods are thrown overboard to lighten the ship, as this is done for the sake of all, the loss shall be made good by a contribution of all."

[20] Bluntschli, "VÖlkerrecht," Introduction; Thucydides, "Peloponnesian War," II., 12, 22, 29.

[21] The Amphyetionic League recognized some principles of interstate right and comity, as well as preserved Grecian institutions and religious traditions. This is shown in the oath of the members, "We will not destroy any Amphyctionic town nor cut it off from running water, in war or peace; if any one shall do this, we will march against him and destroy his city. If any one shall plunder the property of the god, or shall be cognizant thereof, or shall take treacherous counsel against the things in his temple at Delphi, we will punish him with foot and hand and voice, and by every means in our power." They also agreed to make and observe humane rules of warfare. See also Bluntschli, "VÖlkerrecht," Introduction.

[22] Maine, "Ancient Law," Ch. III. The idea as to what jus gentium was, of course varied with times. Under the Empire it lost its old meaning. See Cicero, "De Officiis," III., 17; Livy, VI., 17; IX., 11; I., 14; V., 36; Sallust, "Bell. Jug.," XXII.; Tacitus, "Ann.," 1, 42; "Quintus Curtius," IV., 11, 17.

[23] Bryce, "Holy Roman Empire," Ch. VII.

[24] Bryce, "Holy Roman Empire," Chs. VII, and XV. The "Truce of God" introduced by the clergy (1034) left only about eighty days in a year for fighting and settling feuds.

[25] On effects of Crusades, see Milman, "Latin Christianity," VII., 6; Hallam, "Middle Ages," Ch. III., Pt. I.; Bryce, "Holy Roman Empire," Chs. XI., XIII.

[26] Hall, § 268, p. 740.

[27] Laws of Wisby contain early reference to marine insurance, § 66.

[28] Expanded in 1614.

[29] De Valroger, "Droit Maritime," I., § 1.

[30] The Marine Ordinance of Louis XIV, 1681, became the basis of sea law.

[31] With the decline of the influence of the "Holy Roman Empire," the use of Latin in diplomacy became less general.

[32] AbbÉ Saint-Pierre, in three volumes, 1729, "AbrÉgÉ du Projet de Paix perpÉtuelle," outlines a plan for peace by fixed system of balance of power.

[33] "Institutes," II., 1, 21, 22.

[34] Declaration of Russia, Feb. 28, 1780.

[35] The works of Moser (1701-1786) and his immediate followers attempt to make practical the principles of International Law.

[36] I. Hertslet, 317.

[37] I. Hertslet, 573.

[38] Ibid., 658.

[39] Hall, § 88, p. 297.

[40] Walker, "Hist. Law of Nations," pp. 283, 336.

[41] See p. xix for list of authors and works.

[42] Jenks, "Law and Politics in the Middle Ages," p. 30.

[43] The Santa Cruz, 1 C. Rob., 49, 61.

[44] Act of Congress, March 3, 1891. 26 U. S. Sts. at Large, 826.

[45] Lawrence, § 64.

[46] Bolton v. Gladstone, 5 East, 155, 160.

[47] United States v. Rauscher, 1886, 119 U. S., 407.

[48] United States Constitution, Art. III., § 2. For English view, see Walker, p. 46, who quotes 3 Burr, 1480.

[49] Declarations, protocols, conventions, proclamations, notes, etc.

[50] III. Hertslet, 1904.

[51] Holtzendorff, "Introduction droit public," 44.

[52] Hall, § 1 p. 18; I., Rivier, § 3, 9, I.

[53] Hall, § 1, p. 20.

[54] The internal acts of a de facto state are valid, whatever the attitude of the international circle. As an example, in 1777, during the Revolutionary War, the British governor of Florida made a grant of land in what is now the southern part of the United States. Fifty years later a descendant of the grantee laid claim to the land, but the Supreme Court of the United States declared, "It has never been admitted by the United States that they acquired anything by way of cession from Great Britain by that treaty [of Peace, 1783]. It has been viewed only as a recognition of preËxisting rights, and on that principle the soil and the sovereignty, within their acknowledged limits, were as much theirs at the Declaration of Independence as at this hour. By reference to the treaty, it will be found that it amounts to a simple recognition of the independence and limits of the United States, without any language purporting a cession or relinquishment of the right, on the part of Great Britain ... grants of soil made flagrante bello by the party that fails, can only derive validity from treaty stipulations." Harcourt v. Gaillard, 12 Wheat., 523, 527. See also M'Ilvaine v. Coxe's Lessee, 4 Cr., 209, 212.

[55] Suarez, "De Legibus," 6.

[56] Wheat., D., 41 n.

[57] United States of Central America, Nov. 1, 1898, from Republics of Nicaragua, Salvador, and Honduras.

[58] Japan has been generally recognized since 1894, and her foreign relations have been in course of readjustment.

[59] 1 Whart., § 70.

[60] I. Rivier, §§ 44, 125.

[61] See on this subject 1 Whart., § 70.

[62] 13 Pet., 415. See also Jones v. United States, 137 U. S. 202; Foster v. Neilson, 2 Pet., 253.

[63] State of Mississippi v. Johnson, President, 4 Wall., 475, 500. For late review of the question, see 32 Amer. Law Rev., 390, W. L. Penfield.

[64] I. Rivier, Droit des gens, §§ 3, 11.

[65] Hall, § 26*, note 1, p. 93.

[66] Hall, § 27, p. 100.

[67] Lawrence, § 51, p. 75.

[68] "Political Annuals," since 1887 rich in discussion of neutralization.

[69] Statesman's Year Book 1901, p. 591.

[70] Ibid., pp. 657, 1237.

[71] 6 American Cycl., 376.

[72] Lawrence, p. 82, § 54.

[73] Wheat., D., note 15, p. 37.

[74] For full discussion see Wilson, "Insurgency" lectures U. S. Naval College, 1900.

[75] Hall, § 5, p. 31, ff.

[76] 3 Whart., § 381; United States v. "Ambrose Light," 25 Fed. Rep. 408. Snow, 206, "Montezuma."

[77] President Cleveland's Message, Dec. 2, 1885. U. S. For. Rel. 1885, pp. 254, 273.

[78] Parl. Papers, 1887, 1 Peru, 18.

[79] 3 Whart., § 381, "Huascar."

[80] 33 Albany Law Jour., 125.

[81] Lawrence, § 162.

[82] 1885, For. Rel. U. S. 252, 264.

[83] 1885, For. Rel. U. S. 254, 273.

[84] See 3 Whart., § 381; Bluntschli, § 512; Hall, § 5, p. 34; U. S. For. Rel. (1885), 252, 254, 264, 273.

[85] See numerous references in 51 Br. and Fr. St. Papers; also Hall, § 5, p. 39.

[86] Hall, § 5, p. 35.

[87] Wheat., D., note 15, p. 34.

[88] 1 Whart., §§ 69, 71.

[89] Story, "Santissima Trinidad," 7 Wheat. 354.

[90] Hall, § 83, p. 281.

[91] "Caroline," 1 Whart., § 50 c; 2 ibid., § 224. See Appendix, p. 434.

[92] 3 Whart., § 327, p. 147. Snow's Cases, § 179.

[93] § 87, p. 291.

[94] Hall, § 87, p. 294.

[95] Von Gentz, "Fragments upon the Balance of Power in Europe," 1806.

[96] Hume, "Essays," VII.

[97] Nys, "Origines," pp. 165 ff.

[98] Bernard Lectures on "Diplomacy," 98.

[99] Tucker, "Monroe Doctrine," 4.

[100] "The Monroe Doctrine," VI.

[101] See Tucker, "Monroe Doctrine."

[102] Ann. Cycl. (1895), p. 741; (1896), p. 804; (1899), p. 845, also U. S. For. Rel. 1896.

[103] Bonfils, No. 295; Pradier-FodÉrÉ, No. 355.

[104] § 92, p. 304.

[105] Hall, § 88, p. 297.

[106] Bonfils, 295.

[107] "Letters to Historicus," p. 41.

[108] See Rolin-Jaequemyns, R. D. I., XVIII., 591.

[109] Hall, § 91, p. 301.

[110] Hertslet, 1181, 1193.

[111] § 85, p. 129. See also 1 Halleck, 507.

[112] 1 Hertslet, 317. Ibid., 658.

[113] Walker, p. 151.

[114] Ann. Cycl. 1898, p. 159; U. S. For. Rel., 1898, p. 760.

[115] 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 738.

[116] Bluntschli, § 477.

[117] § 94, p. 307.

[118] 1 Hertslet, 664 ff.

[119] See ch. XV.

[120] See § 70 (b).

[121] 1 Hertslet, 574.

[122] For detailed summary, 1826-1881, see Holland, "European Concert in the Eastern Question," Ch. II.

[123] "European Concert in the Eastern Question," p. 221.

[124] Lawrence, "Disputed Questions," V.

[125] Lawrence, "Disputed Questions," V., end.

[126] 3 Kent Com., 379, 380; 1 Gould and Tucker, 484.

[127] In case of the United States, while the President may after declaration of war conquer and hold foreign territory, the joint action of the President and Senate is necessary to make the title complete by treaty.

[128] Treaties of U. S., 444.

[129] Woolsey, 496.

[130] See discussion in Hall, § 36, note 1, p. 124.

[131] The "Anna," 5 C. Rob., 373.

[132] "Institutes," II., 1, 20.

[133] See Lawrence, 153, 161, 164-167; Reinsch, "World Politics," pp. 60, 113, 184.

[134] Wheat., D., § 193, p. 274.

[135] Ed. Engelhardt, "Du rÉgime conventionnel des fleuves internationaux," Ch. II.

[136] Grotius, II., ii., 12-14; Pufendorf, III., 3, 4; Vattel, §§ 104, 126-130, 132-134; Bluntschli, § 314; Calvo, §§ 259, 290-291; Fiore, §§ 758, 768; Carnazza-Amari, "Traite," § 2, Ch. VII., 17; Heffter, § 77; Wheat., D., § 193.

[137] Wheat., D., §§ 197-204; Whart., § 30; Pradier-FodÉrÉ, "Traite," §§ 727-755.

[138] Justinian, "Inst.," 2, t. 1, §§ 1-5.

[139] 3 Whart., § 305 a.

[140] Parl. Papers, 1889, Commercial, No. 2; Holland, "Studies in International Law," p. 270.

[141] See Tucker, "Monroe Doctrine," pp. 43-76; Lawrence, "Disputed Questions," 72-146.

[142] See Regina v. Keyn, 2 L. R. (Exch. Div.), 63.

[143] Ann. Cycl. (1894), 292.

[144] Lawrence, pp. 138, 182.

[145] See Cushing's "Treaty of Washington."

[146] 24 U. S. Sts. at Large, 475.

[147] See Whart., §§ 301-308.

[148] Treaties of U. S., 940.

[149] Proceedings Fur Seal Arbitration, 1893; also 27 U. S. Sts. at Large, 947.

[150] Note 63, § 105.

[151] IV. Hertslet, 2783.

[152] Art. 28, Gen. Act Brussels Conference, July 2, 1890.

[153] Wildenhus's Case, 120 U. S. 1, 18.

[154] Bonfils, "De la compÉtence des tribunaux franÇais," § 326.

[155] Statutes, 41 and 42, Vict., p. 579.

[156] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1993; 1 Gould and Tucker, 478; 2 ibid., 178, 203.

[157] Civil Code, Art. 28.

[158] Law of June 1, 1870.

[159] Dec. 24, 1879.

[160] Feb. 27, 1858.

[161] July 3, 1876.

[162] Whart., § 183 ff.

[163] 3 Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 1648-1653.

[164] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1994; 1 Gould and Tucker, 479; 2 ibid., 178.

[165] 3 Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 1656 ff.

[166] Constitution of U. S., Art. I., § 8.

[167] U. S. Rev. Sts., §§ 2165-2174; 1 Gould and Tucker, 513; 2 ibid., 202.

[168] 2 Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 863; 3 ibid., 1671 ff.

[169] Treaties of U. S., 1262; 2 Whart., § 181.

[170] Hall, § 71, p. 240 ff.

[171] 2 Whart., § 175, Frelinghuysen to Wallace, March 25, 1887.

[172] 2 Whart., § 175, Bayard to Williams, Oct. 29, 1885.

[173] 2 Whart., § 193, Marcy to Seibels, May 27, 1854.

[174] 2 Whart., § 193, Marcy to Fay, May 27, 1854.

[175] 2 Whart., § 198, Marcy to HÜselmann, Sept. 26, 1853.

[176] 6 Messages and Papers of President, 168.

[177] Bonfils, 337.

[178] § 48, p. 173.

[179] Snow's "Cases," 72 ff., for this and other cases.

[180] Snow's "Cases," 82, Rothschild v. Queen of Portugal; Bynkershoek, "De Foro Legatorum," C. XVI.

[181] See § 80 (f) for full discussion.

[182] Exchange v. M'Faddon, 7 Cr., 116, 139.

[183] "International Law," Naval War Col., 2d ed., p. 23.

[184] Hall, § 55.

[185] Snow's "Cases," p. 114.

[186] § 55, p. 205.

[187] 1 Whart., § 125.

[188] By treaties with Japan, going into effect 1899, such courts were abolished in that empire. 29 U. S. Sts. at Large, 848.

[189] 1 U. S. Rev. Sts., §§ 4083-4130; 1 Gould and Tucker, 770-772; 2 ibid., 503; Treaties of U. S., 1279, 1288; 1 Whart., § 125.

[190] Proclamation of March 27, 1876; 19 U. S. Sts. at Large, 662.

[191] "The surrender of fugitives from justice is a matter of conventional arrangement between states, as no such obligation is imposed by the law of nations." In the Matter of Metzger, 5 How. 176, 188.

[192] 2 Whart., § 268.

[193] Snow's "Cases," 151 ff.; Treaties of U. S., 1289-1293.

[194] I. Moore, "Extradition," 156.

[195] 26 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1508; Snow's "Cases," 151 et seq.; 2 Whart., § 270; 1 Moore, "Extradition," 196 ff.; Treaties of U. S., 1289 et seq.; 1 Gould and Tucker, 987.

[196] Treaties of U. S., 437 and 1289-1293; 26 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1510; U. S. Rev. Sts., §§ 5270-5280; 1 Gould and Tucker, 979-989; 2 Whart., §§ 274-280.

[197] In case of Chesapeake, 1863, the consul acted as agent. Wheat., D., § 428, note 207; 3 Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 1876.

[198] 3 Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 1877.

[199] "Annuaire de l'Institut de droit international," 1881-1882, p. 128.

[200] IV. Hertslet, 2783.

[201] Ibid.

[202] For the general question, see 2 Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 834, 845.

[203] § 43, p. 167.

[204] U. S. Chinese Exclusion Act, 1882, 1 Gould and Tucker, 502 et seq.; 2 ibid., 193 et seq.

[205] Digest, LVII., 17.

[206] 3 Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 1233.

[207] Nys, "Les Origines du Droit International," 297.

[208] Walton, "Life of Wotton," 155.

[209] Calvo, § 1311 ff.

[210] I. Hertslet, 62, 63.

[211] I. Hertslet, 575. These rules have been adopted by the U. S. Department of State.

[212] Calvo, § 1328 ff.

[213] March 1, 1893, 27 U. S. Sts. at Large, c. 182.

[214] 1 Whart., §§ 82, 82 a, 83.

[215] "The American Passport," U. S. Dept. State, 1898, p. 7.

[216] Wicquefort, "The Embassador and his Functions," Digby's translation, Ch. XXII., p. 201.

[217] "Droit des gens," Liv. IV., Ch. VI.

[218] Calvo, § 1328 ff.

[219] Lehr, "Manuel des Agents Diplomatiques," § 367 ff.

[220] The Department of State instructs the representatives of the United States to follow this practice.

[221] U.S. Rev. Sts., § 2000.

[222] U.S. Rev. Sts., § 4075.

[223] Till the reign of Louis XIV., Latin was the language of diplomacy; from that time, French became more and more used. Since the Congress of Vienna, 1815, any language may be used without offense, Art. 120.

[224] 22 U. S. Sts. at Large, 216, § 5.

[225] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1750; 1 Gould and Tucker, 446; 2 ibid., 158.

[226] Hall, § 53, n. 1., p. 192.

[227] 16 Ann. Cycl., 833.

[228] 1 Whart., § 84.

[229] "Droit Int.," § 1481, ff.

[230] Lehr, "Manuel," §§ 988-998.

[231] Despagnet, "Droit international public," 2d ed., § 235; Heffter, § 204.

[232] Grotius, "De Jure Belli," II., 18.

[233] § 50.

[234] U. S. Rev. Sts., §§ 4063, 4064; Wheat., D., 308-310.

[235] Instructions to Diplomatic Officers, § 47.

[236] 1 Whart., § 98.

[237] Ibid.

[238] De Martens, "Causes CÉl.," I., 174.

[239] Instructions to Diplomatic Officers, 1897, § 50.

[240] Hall, § 52, p. 189.

[241] See the "Right of Asylum in the Legations of the United States in Central and South America," by Barry Gilbert, in Harvard Law Review for June, 1901, p. 118.

[242] U. S. Constitution, Art. III., § 2, 2.

[243] U. S. Constitution, Art. I., § 9, 8.

[244] 1 Whart., § 100.

[245] 1 Whart., § 105.

[246] Instructions to Diplomatic Officers, U. S., 1897, §§ 68, 69.

[247] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1751.

[248] 1 Whart., § 99.

[249] 1 Whart., § 102.

[250] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1226.

[251] Ibid., § 1688.

[252] Schuyler, "Amer. Dip.," 144.

[253] Instructions to Diplomatic Officers, U. S., § 67.

[254] U. S. Rev. Sts., §§ 1674-1752; 1 Gould and Tucker, 439-447; 2 ibid. 155-158.

[255] Nys, "Les origines du droit international," "Le Commerce," p. 286.

[256] Lawrence, "Commentaire sur Wheaton," IV., p. 6.

[257] Consular Regulations, 1896, 1.

[258] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1674.

[259] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 1674.

[260] § 105, p. 331.

[261] See Treaties: United States and Colombia (New Granada), 1850; United States and France, 1853; United States and Austria, 1870; United States and Germany, 1871; Austria and Portugal, 1873; Germany and Russia, 1874; France and Russia, 1874; United States and Italy, 1878; Portugal and Belgium, 1880; United States and Roumania, 1881; United States and Congo Free State, 1891, and others.

[262] 29 U. S. Sts. at Large, 848.

[263] See § 64 for extent of jurisdiction.

[264] U. S. Treaty with Borneo, June 23, 1850, Art. IX., Treaties of U. S., 102.

[265] U. S. Treaty with China, Nov. 17, 1880, Art. IV., Treaties in Force, 120.

[266] Hall, § 105 note, p. 338.

[267] Lehr, § 1236 ff.

[268] "De Clercq et de Vallat," I., pp. 106, 107.

[269] § 244.

[270] For various protocols, see Treaties of U. S., 824, 1148; 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1593; ibid., 1596. For the recent protocol between the United States and Spain as to terms of peace, see 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1742.

[271] Wheat., D., §§ 254, 344.

[272] The Holy Alliance of 1815 was signed by three sovereigns.

[273] See p. 163.

[274] The Declaration of Paris, 1856.

[275] 17 U. S. Sts. at Large, 863; Treaties of U. S., 478.

[276] Art. II., § 2, 2.

[277] Calvo, §§ 643-668.

[278] Grotius, II., 16; Vattel, II., 17. The rules of Vattel are briefly and well stated by Baker, "First Steps in International Law," 1899, p. 105.

[279] For the subject of interpretation, see Hall, §§ 111, 112, p. 350 ff.; 2 Phillimore, Pt. V., Ch. VIII.; Calvo, §§ 1649-1650; Pradier-FodÉrÉ, §§ 1171-1188.

[280] For discussion of the "most favored nation" clause, see 2 Whart., § 134, also Appendix to Vol. III., p. 888.

[281] § 116, p. 367.

[282] See Holls's "Hague Peace Conference," 176 et seq.

[283] See, on this entire subject, Moore's "International Arbitration"; Holls's "Hague Peace Conference," 176-305; Cushing's "Treaty of Washington."

[284] 3 Phillimore, 21, 22.

[285] Pradier-FodÉrÉ, 2634-2636.

[286] Art. 15, U. S. Naval War Code; Proclamations and Decrees, p. 77. See Appendix, p. 405.

[287] 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1770.

[288] Proclamations and Decrees, p. 93.

[289] Parl. Papers, Greece, No. 4, 1886.

[290] The London Gazette, March 19, 1897.

[291] U. S. For. Rel., 1897, p. 255.

[292] "De Jure Belli," I., II., "Bellum est publicorum armorum justa contentio;" Instr. U. S. Armies, § 20.

[293] Halleck, Ch. XIV.; Calvo, § 1866 ff.

[294] 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1769, 1776.

[295] Takahashi, 42 et seq.

[296] Prize Cases, 2 Black, U. S. 635.

[297] Takahashi, 38 et seq.

[298] Calvo, § 1910.

[299] 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 364.

[300] The French declaration of war against Prussia in 1870 is given in 2 Lorrimer, 443.

[301] Inst. U. S. Armies, § 29; Appendix p. 338.

[302] Appendix, p. 369.

[303] Hall, § 126, p. 405; Instr. U. S. Armies, §§ 20, 21, 22; Appendix, pp. 336, 337.

[304] See Appendix, p. 386.

[305] Appendix, pp. 353, 372, 388.

[306] "De Jure Belli," III., ix., 4.

[307] "De Jure et Officiis Bellicis," l., v., 25.

[308] 4 Ellis and Blackburn's Reports, 217.

[309] Appendix, pp. 340, 385.

[310] Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 451.

[311] Appendix, pp. 339, 385.

[312] 8 Cr., 110.

[313] See Index U. S. Treaties, "Reciprocal Privileges of Citizens."

[314] Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 447.

[315] Appendix, pp. 339, 377.

[316] Lawrence, § 198.

[317] 3 Whart., § 339.

[318] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 4. See Appendix, p. 401.

[319] Appendix, p. 401.

[320] Appendix, p. 404.

[321] Appendix, p. 404.

[322] Proclamation of April 26, 1898.

[323] Decree of April 23, 1898.

[324] Takahashi, p. 178.

[325] Appendix, p. 398.

[326] U. S. Proclamation, April 26, 1898; Spain, Decree of April 23, 1898.

[327] Treaties U. S., p. 1176 ff.

[328] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 5. Appendix, p. 402.

[329] Captain C. H. Stockton, "Submarine Telegraph Cables in Time of War," Proceed. U. S. Naval Inst., Vol. XXIV., p. 451.

[330] For the discussion of the laws and customs of war, at The Hague Peace Conference, see Holls, 134 et seq.

[331] See Appendix, p. 375.

[332] Oxford Manual, 51; Appendix, p. 377.

[333] Appendix, pp. 341, 369, 391.

[334] Appendix, p. 370.

[335] Appendix, pp. 370, 387.

[336] Appendix, p. 402.

[337] Appendix, pp. 370, 387.

[338] Appendix, p. 387.

[339] Appendix, p. 364.

[340] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 4; Appendix, p. 401.

[341] Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 93 et seq., 455.

[342] Appendix, pp. 348, 370, 386, 387, 401.

[343] See Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 93 et seq., 461.

[344] For form, see United States v. Baker, 5 Blatchford, 6; 2 Halleck, 110.

[345] See article of Dr. Stark on "Privateering," in Columbia University Publications (1897), Vol. VIII., No. 3.

[346] 1 Kent Com., 97.

[347] Appendix, p. 398.

[348] Proclamation and Decrees (April 25, 1898), p. 77.

[349] Hall, p. 547, § 181.

[350] R. D. I., IV., 695.

[351] See Act of May 10, 1892; 27 U. S. Sts. at Large, 27.

[352] Treaties of U. S., pp. 905, 906.

[353] 3 Whart., § 342.

[354] Appendix, 403.

[355] Ibid.

[356] The "Grotius," 9 Cr., 368, 370.

[357] See rules of the "Inst. of Int. Law," 1882; "Annuaire," 1883, p. 221.

[358] Justinian, I., xii., 5.

[359] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 4652.

[360] The "Two Friends," 1 C. Rob., 271.

[361] Instr. U. S. Armies, 50; Appendix, p. 344, 345.

[362] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 11. See Appendix, p. 403.

[363] Instr. U. S. Armies, 28. See Appendix, p. 338.

[364] Oxford Manual, 71. See Appendix, p. 380.

[365] Instr. U. S. Armies, 124. See, as to prisoners of war, Appendix, pp. 359, 381, 390.

[366] For details, see Geneva Convention, Appendix, p. 395; Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 120 et seq.; U. S. Naval War Code, Appendix, p. 406.

[367] Appendix, p. 392.

[368] "International Law," Naval War College, 2d ed., p. 93.

[369] The "Venus," 4 C. Rob., 355.

[370] Appendix, p. 352.

[371] Halleck (3d ed.), 325.

[372] The "Sea Lion," 5 Wall., 630.

[373] Hall, § 196, pp. 575-578.

[374] § 192, p. 565.

[375] 2 Halleck (3d ed.), 314 et seq.

[376] Calvo, "Droit Int.," §§ 2440-2446.

[377] 2 Halleck (3d ed.), 310 et seq.

[378] Lawrence, p. 453.

[379] See 1 Halleck (3d ed.), 277.

[380] Heffter-Geffcken, "Droit Int.," II., §§ 176-190.

[381] See above, § 97.

[382] Case of Hesse Cassel, Hall, § 204, p. 588.

[383] 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1742.

[384] The Treaty of Ghent, Dec. 24, 1814, between U. S. and Great Britain is a marked exception. See Treaties of U. S., 399; Wheaton, "Hist. Int. Law," 585; Schurz, "Henry Clay," I., pp. 105 et seq.

[385] Treaty between Spain and U. S., Dec. 10, 1898; 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1754.

[386] Case of Swineherd, 1801, 1 Kent Com., 173, note (b); "Sophie," 1 Kent Com., 174; 6 C. Rob., 138.

[387] Hall, § 198, p. 579.

[388] Treaties of U. S., 386.

[389] Lawrence, § 239.

[390] Lawrence, p. 566.

[391] 1 Hertslet, 64.

[392] Ibid., 370; see also "La NeutralitÉ de Suisse," S. Bury, R. D. I., II., 636.

[393] 2 Hertslet, 863.

[394] 3 ibid., 1592.

[395] Art. XXXV., Treaty of Dec. 12, 1846; Treaties of U. S., 204.

[396] Art. XV., Treaty of Jan. 21, 1867; Treaties of U. S., 1784.

[397] Parl. Papers, 1889, Commercial, No. 2. See also Holland, "Studies in Int. Law," p. 216.

[398] Articles I. and II.; Appendix, pp. 395, 396.

[399] U. S. Naval War Code, § IV.; Appendix, p. 370.

[400] "De Jure Belli ac Pacis," Lib. III., C. XVI., iii., 1.

[401] "Le Droit de la Nature et des Gens," Liv. VIII., C. VI., vii., n. 2.

[402] "Quaestiones Juris Publici," I., ix.

[403] "Droit des Gens," III., viii.

[404] 5 Speeches, 50.

[405] 1 Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 156.

[406] U. S. Rev. Sts., §§ 5281-5291, see Appendix, p. 417. For cases, see 1 Gould and Tucker, 990, and 2 ibid., 627.

[407] 33 and 34 Vict., c. 90, p. 560. See also 2 Lorimer, 490.

[408] Proc. and Decrees during the war with Spain, p. 31.

[409] Proc. and Decrees during the war with Spain, p. 63. President Cleveland's neutrality proclamations as to the late war in Cuba are given in 29 U. S. Sts. at Large, 870, 881.

[410] Wheat., D., p. 509.

[411] "Internat. Law," Naval War College, p. 118.

[412] Case of the "Gen. Armstrong," 2 Whart., § 227; the "Anne," 3 Wheat., 435; 3 Whart., § 399.

[413] Perels, "Droit Maritime," § 39.

[414] 3 C. Rob., 164.

[415] Hall, § 221, p. 627.

[416] 3 Phillimore, 287-299.

[417] Hall, § 222, p. 631. For the case of the "Caroline," see Appendix, p. 434.

[418] Oxford Manual, §§ 79, 80, 81. See Appendix, pp. 357.

[419] Perels, "Droit Maritime," § 39, p. 244. The Netherlands Proclamation of Neutrality prescribed, in 1898, that "If ships of war, pursued by the enemy, seek refuge within our territory, they shall liberate their prizes."

[420] 7 Attorney-generals' Opinions, 122.

[421] As to the British Neutrality Regulations, see 2 Ferguson, Appendix F, p. 77; 2 Lorimer, 446.

[422] 3 Whart., § 402; U. S. For. Rel., 1870.

[423] Proc. and Decrees of the war with Spain, Brazil, XVI, p. 15.

[424] Wheat, D., § 425; Dana, contra, note 203; 1 Kent Com., pp. 49, 116; Bluntschli, § 759; Woolsey, § 165.

[425] Hall, § 217, p. 621.

[426] 15 U. S. Sts. at Large, 259.

[427] 3 Whart., § 391.

[428] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 5288.

[429] 1 Amer. State Papers, 116.

[430] p. 627, § 221.

[431] See Appendix, p. 435.

[432] 3 Whart., § 402 a, p. 632.

[433] Bonfils, "Droit Int. Public," § 1494 ff.; Despagnet, "Droit Int. Public," § 682 ff.

[434] Walker, "Science of Int. Law," p. 296.

[435] See Treaties of U. S. under respective dates.

[436] See Appendix, p. 398.

[437] For the discussion of "the immunity of private property on the high seas," at the Hague Peace Conference, see Holls, 306 et seq.

[438] Proclamations and Decrees during the war with Spain, pp. 77, 93.

[439] 3 Whart., § 391.

[440] Appendix, p. 365.

[441] "De Jure Belli," Bk. III., Ch. i., 5; The "Petershoff," 5 Wall., 28, 58.

[442] Woolsey, "Int. Law," § 194.

[443] U. S. Naval War Code, Arts. 34, 36; Appendix, p. 412; see Propositions Institute Int. Law, Cambridge, 1895, §§ 3 and 4.

[444] The "Commercen," 1 Wheat., 382.

[445] See article of John Bassett Moore in Review of Reviews, May, 1899.

[446] The "Jonge Tobias," 1 C. Rob. 329.

[447] The "Staadt Embden," 1 C. Rob. 26; Takahashi, p. 94.

[448] Perels, "Manuel Droit Maritime," § 46, p. 283.

[449] p. 690, § 247.

[450] In some cases, belligerents exercise the so-called right of using or destroying belligerent property on the plea of necessity, giving compensation. This practice is called "angary" or "prestation," and is by most jurists either condemned or regarded with disfavor. An illustration is the sinking, during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, by the Germans, of several British merchant ships in the Seine to prevent French gunboats from going up the river. During the same war, the Germans seized in Alsace, for military purposes, certain railway carriages of the Central Swiss Railway and certain Austrian rolling stock, all of which remained in the possession of the Germans for some time. See Lawrence, § 252; Hall, p. 765, § 278. See Appendix, p. 402.

[451] 6 C. Rob. 440, 454.

[452] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 20; Appendix, p. 406.

[453] The "Orozembo," 6 C. Rob. 430.

[454] Wheat., D., p. 648.

[455] The "Kow-Shing," Takahashi, 24-51.

[456] 1 C. Rob. 340, 359.

[457] The "Marianna Flora," 11 Wheat., 1.

[458] "International Law," Naval War College, p. 164; Lawrence, §§ 124, 210.

[459] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 31; Appendix, p. 409.

[460] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 32; Appendix, p. 410.

[461] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 33; Appendix, p. 410. Most of the forms are given in Glass's "Marine International Law."

[462] Hall, p. 644, § 277.

[463] Takahashi, 16-23.

[464] Gessner, "Le droit des neutres sur mer," Ch. IV.; Perels, "Manuel Droit Maritime," § 56.

[465] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 30.

[466] Takahashi, p. 13.

[467] Lawrence, § 268; Appendix, p. 409.

[468] Walker, "Science of Int. Law," p. 304.

[469] Appendix, p. 398.

[470] President McKinley's Proclamation of Blockade, during the war with Spain, is given in Proclamations and Decrees, p. 75, and President Lincoln's, during the war with the South, in 12 U. S. Sts. at Large. Appendix, ii, iii.

[471] Declaration of Paris, Appendix, p. 398.

[472] Art. 37; see Appendix, p. 412.

[473] Calvo, § 2841.

[474] "International Law," Naval War College, p. 155.

[475] "Juffrow Maria Schroeder," 3 C. Rob., 147, 153, 154.

[476] See 3 Phillimore, Chap. XI.

[477] The "Maria," 5 C. Rob., 365, 368.

[478] 5 C. Rob., 385, 396.

[479] p. 695 n, § 247.

[480] 3 Wall., 514.

[481] Blatchford's Prize Cases, 387, 405, 407; Snow's "Cases," p. 509.

[482] Appendix, p. 398.

[483] U. S. Naval War Code, Arts. 13, 14, 21.

[484] Lawrence, § 212.

[485] Takahashi, p. 105.

[486] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 563, cl. 8; 18 St., 316, c. 80.

[487] U. S. Rev. Sts., § 4618, also 1624, par. 16-17; 4615, 4617, 4621; The "Nassau," 4 Wall., 634.

[488] Wheat., D., n. 186, III.; U. S. Rev. Sts. § 4622.

[489] Wheat., D., n. 186, III.; The "Springbok" 5 Wall., 1; The "Sir William Peel," ibid., 517.

[490] Wheat., D., n, 186, III.

[491] The "La Manche," 2 Sprague, 207. The method of procedure in a prize court, in case of enemy property, is given in Appendix, p. 421 et seq. With a few changes, the same forms may be used in the case of neutral property. See further on the method of procedure in a prize court, Takahashi, pp. 11 et seq., 73-107, 172-191.

[492] Lawrence, § 212.

[493] Perels, "Manuel Droit Maritime Int.," p. 457.

[494] 30 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1007.

[495] U. S. Naval War Code, Art. 50; Appendix, p. 415; U. S. Rev. Sts. §§ 4615, 4627, 4628.

[496] This translation is by W. E. Hall, member of the Institute.

[497] See Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 457.

[498] The modified text alone is given. The entire report of the proceedings by Sir A. Horsford will be found in 2 Lorimer, 337 et seq.

[499] See Glenn, 373; Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 457.

[500] See Holls, "Hague Peace Conference," 121 et seq.

[501] The British Foreign Enlistment Acts of 1819 and 1870 may be found in 2 Lorimer, 476 et seq.

[502] See late U. S. statute cited on p. 327.

[503] See 1 Whart., § 67.

[504] See ibid., §§ 21, 50 c., 3 ibid., § 350.

[505] Attorney Gen'l v. Sillem et als, 2 Hurlstone v. Coltman, Exchequer Reports, 431.

[506] Page 544. For the cases of the "Pampero" and the two iron-clad rams, see Wheat., D., note p. 572 et seq.

[507] The American view may be found in Cushing's "Treaty of Washington," and the British in Bernard's "Historical Account of the Neutrality of Great Britain during the American Civil War."

[508] See Wheat., D., note p. 553 et seq.

[509] Hall, § 225.

[510] U. S. Treaties, 481.

[511] Argument of Sir R. Palmer in the "Argument at Geneva," published by the United States at p. 426 et seq.

[512] 7 Cranch, 116.

[513] Argument of Mr. Evarts in "Argument at Geneva," p. 448 et seq.

[514] Decision and Award of the Tribunal of Arbitration in 3 Wharton, § 402 a.

[515] pp. 553, 554.

Transcriber's note

The following changes have been made:

In "Calvo, Ch. Droit International. 5e Éd. 6 vols. 1896." "ed." changed to "Éd." (for French Édition)
In "Nearly all the important states of the world acceded" "acceeded" changed to "acceded"
In "from a failure to fulfill the obligations of neutrality" "fulfil" changed to "fulfill"
In Footnote 455 "Kow-shing" changed to "Kow-Shing"
In index entry "Guerrilla troops" "Guerilla" changed to "Guerrilla" to match spelling on referenced page

*******

This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
/4/1/7/5/41759

Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will be renamed.

1.F.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org

Clyx.com