war. A bona fide private vessel would not be subject to the limitations on period of sojourn and on character of goods which it might take on board which would apply to a ship of war. Conversion from a private to a ship of war would, according to accepted rulings, also affect the neutral goods on the converted vessel. Neutral goods on board a vessel of war would under the rulings of British prize courts have been regarded as liable to capture. The American decisions have in some cases been more lenient (The Nereide, 9 Cranch; Sup. Ct. Repts., p. 388.) It is probable that neutral goods placed, in good faith as to the private character, on board an enemy vessel would not be subjected to the extreme penalty of confiscation if the vessel should be transformed into a ship of war. . The neutral merchant would seem to be entitled to some means by which knowledge as to the probable character of a vessel for a voyage may be obtained. The neutral State would be much more justified in seeking such information as would make it free from accusation of neglect to fulfill its obligations. Résumé. The commander has reason to believe that the Robin, which is taking on supplies in the nature of contraband, is to be transformed into a war vessel. If the Robin is to be transformed the opportunity to take war supplies in a neutral port and the further privilege of remaining in the port unrestrained by the usual 24hour rule gives the Robin an advantage over a ship of war of State D though the Robin will shortly assume that character. The commander of the United States cruiser is therefore justified in requesting that the Robin be interned or otherwise restrained. As the neutral State F would be liable for failure to observe strict neutrality if it did not investigate such a claim, it would be expedient for State F to take such action as may relieve it of responsibility. If it be found that the vessel may be converted, the neutral State may take the necessary measures to remove grounds for claims of indemnity. This may be done by placing the vessel under obligation to maintain its private character till it reaches a port within the jurisdiction of belligerent State D. If such a pledge can not be secured, there would be ground for restraint or internment or such other action as would secure neutral State F against liability for neglect to use due diligence. SOLUTION. The action of the commander of the cruiser of the United States is warranted. Neutral State F should take such action as would maintain its neutrality by obliging the Robin to give a guaranty that it would not change its private character till it reached a port under the jurisdiction of its own flag or a port under jurisdiction of an ally; or neutral State F may maintain its neutrality by other means of restraint even by internment if necessary. INDEX. Aerial jurisdiction: Hazeltine, H. D., views on. de Valles, opinion on---- Aerial navigation: Blockade, rules of, as applicable to-- Carriage of dispatches, case of Atalanta_ Conference, views of 1909____ 1910_. Fauchille, views of__ Jurisdiction of- Fauchille's views__. Juridical Conference of 1910, views on__. von Bar's views_____ National regulations- France General remarks. Aerial space, use of, various opinions__ Aerial zones Air craft: Belligerent, in neutral territory--. In peace, proposed rules, 1911, Institute of International Law In war- Analogies, legal, with shipping. Blockade, rules of, applicable to_- Capture- No right in neutral waters_ On high seas_. 91 Atalanta, case of, as establishing principles controlling Austria, conversion of merchant ships into warships: 77 At Hague, 1907 At London, 1909. 164, 174 184 Bar, von: Views regarding aerial navigation___ Base: Coaling in neutral port_. In neutral territory forbidden___ Belligerency, recognition of... Belligerent: Protectorate, exercise of, while belligerent_ Supplies to, in neutral port.. Vessels in Belgian ports__- In 1908_. Austria-Hungary, contraband, views on, at London Confer- ence- Proposed rules for aerial navigation, 1911_- 174 139 72 66 133 153 Belgium, regulations in war for belligerent's vessels.. 134 19 106 Blockade: Air craft in war, application of rules of, to.... Area of, definition---- Chilean insurrection, 1891___. During insurrection, views of United States State De- Rules of, as applicable to aerial navigation___. Brazil: Insurgents, interference with foreign commerce forbid- 41 Neutrality proclamation, 1898. 145 Cables, insurgency does not permit interference with___. 46 Coal: Blockade, during insurrection____ Insurrection in, instructions to United States forces__ Destined for neutral port not contraband.. 28 25 52 142 134 |