had prior to 1914 been embodied in the regulations of many States. Articles 30 and 35, relating to absolute and conditional contraband, often appeared without change. Article 32 of the French instructions of 1912 was issued in conformity with article 30 of the Declaration of London.

66

'Les articles énumérés ci-dessus sont de contrebande, s'il vous apparait qu'ils sont destinés au territoire de l'ennemi ou à un territoire occupé par lui ou à ses forces armées. Peu importe que le navire transporteur soit lui-meme à destination d'un port neutre." (1925 Naval War College, International Law Documents, p. 149.)

Article 35 of the German ordinance of September 20, 1909, followed the same principle.

Articles of conditional contraband are subject to seizure only on board a ship which is on the way to the enemy country or a place held by the enemy or to the enemy forces, and when these articles are not to be discharged in an intermediate neutral port, i. e., a port at which the ship must call before reaching any final destination. (Ibid. p. 157.)

No Japanese rules had embodied much of the Declaration of London.

After the outbreak of war an effort was for a time made to conform to the articles of the Declaration of London, but soon changes were introduced in general, restricting neutral freedom of commerce.

Declaration of London and World War.-On August 6, 1914, Mr. Bryan, Secretary of State of the United States, sent communications, similar to the following, to the embassies at St. Petersburg, Paris, Berlin, and Vienna, and to the legation at Brussels:

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 6, 1914-1 p. m. Mr. Bryan instructs Mr. Page to inquire whether the British Government is willing to agree that the laws of naval warfare as laid down by the Declaration of London of 1909 shall be applicable to naval warfare during the present conflict in Europe provided that the governments with whom Great Britain is or may be at war also agree to such application. Mr. Bryan further in

DECLARATION OF LONDON

19

structs Mr. Page to state that the Government of the United States believes that an acceptance of these laws by the belligerents would prevent grave misunderstandings which may arise as to the relations between neutral powers and the belligerents. Mr. Bryan adds that it is earnestly hoped that this inquiry may receive favorable consideration. (Special Supplement, vol. 9, Amer. Jour. Int. Law, p. 1.)

Austria on August 13 and Germany on August 20 replied indicating that their Governments were prepared to apply the Declaration of London "provided its provisions are not disregarded by other belligerents."

Russia, August 20, answered that its actions would be similar to the British.

On August 22 the British Foreign Office informed the American ambassador that the Government

have pleasure in stating that they have decided to adopt generally the rules of the declaration in question, subject to certain modifications and additions which they judge indispensable to the efficient conduct of their naval operations. A detailed explanation of these additions and modifications is contained in the inclosed memorandum.

The necessary steps to carry the above decision into effect have now been taken by the issue of an order in council, of which I have the honor to inclose copies herein for your excellency's information and for transmission to your Government.

I may add that His Majesty's Government, in deciding to adhere to the rules of the Declaration of London, subject only to the aforesaid modifications and additions, have not waited to learn the intentions of the enemy governments, but have been actuated by a desire to terminate at the earliest moment the condition of uncertainty which has been prejudicing the interests of neutral trade. (Ibid. p. 3.)

This order in council was as follows:

Whereas during the present hostilities the naval forces of His Majesty will cooperate with the French and Russian naval forces; and

Whereas, it is desirable that the naval operations of the allied forces so far as they affect neutral ships and commerce should be conducted on similar principles; and

Whereas the Governments of France and Russia have informed His Majesty's Government that during the present hostilities it

is their intention to act in accordance with the provisions of the convention known as the Declaration of London, signed on the 26th day of February, 1909, so far as may be practicable:

Now, therefore, His Majesty, by and with the advice of his privy council, is pleased to order, and it is hereby ordered, that during the present hostilities the convention known as the Declaration of London shall, subject to the following additions and modifications, be adopted and put in force by His Majesty's Government as if the same had been ratified by His Majesty.

The additions and modifications are as follows:

(1) The lists of absolute and conditional contraband contained in the proclamation dated August 4, 1914, shall be substituted for the lists contained in articles 22 and 24 of the said declaration.

(2) A neutral vessel which succeeded in carrying contraband to the enemy with false papers may be detained for having carried such contraband if she is encountered before she has completed her return voyage.

(3) The destination referred to in article 33 may be inferred from any sufficient evidence, and (in addition to the presumption laid down in article 34) shall be presumed to exist if the goods are consigned to or for an agent of the enemy state or to or for a merchant or other person under the control of the authorities of the enemy state.

(4) The existence of a blockade shall be presumed to be known

(a) To all ships which sailed from or touched at an enemy port a sufficient time after the notification of the blockade to the local authorities to have enabled the enemy Government to make known the existence of the blockade;

(b) To all ships which sailed from or touched at a British or allied port after the publication of the blockade.

(5) Notwithstanding the provisions of article 35 of the said declaration, conditional contraband, if shown to have the destination referred to in article 32, is liable to capture, to whatever port the vessel is bound and at whatever port the cargo is to be discharged.

(6) The general report of the drafting committee on the said declaration presented to the naval conference and adopted by the conference at the eleventh plenary meeting on February 25, 1909, shall be considered by all prize courts as an authoritative statement of the meaning and intention of the said declaration, and such courts shall construe and interpret the provisions of the said declaration by the light of the commentary given therein.

DECLARATION OF LONDON

21

And the lords commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury, the Words commissioners of the Admiralty, and each of His Majesty's principal secretaries of state, the president of the probate, divorce, and admiralty division of the high court of justice, all other judges of His Majesty's prize courts, and all governors, officers, and authorities whom it may concern are to give the necessary directions herein as to them may respectively appertain.

(Ibid. p. 4.)

The United States replied:

ALMERIC FITZROY.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, October 22, 1914—4 p. m.

Your No. 864, October 19, Declaration of London.

Inasmuch as the British Government consider that the conditions of the present European conflict made it impossible for them to accept without modification the Declaration of London, you are requested to inform His Majesty's Government that in the circumstances the Government of the United States feels obliged to withdraw its suggestion that the Declaration of London be adopted as a temporary code of naval warfare to be observed by belligerents and neutrals during the present war; that therefore this Government will insist that the rights and duties of the United States and its citizens in the present war be defined by the existing rules of international law and the treaties of the United States, irrespective of the provisions of the Declaration of London; and that this Government reserves to itself the right to enter a protest or demand in each case in which those rights and duties so defined are violated or their free exercise interfered with by the authorities of His Britannic Majesty's Government.

(Ibid. p. 7.)

LANSING.

This reply was in accord with article 65 of the Declaration of London, which stated

The provisions of the present declaration form an indivisible whole.

The general report says:

This article is of great importance, and is in conformity with that which was adopted in the Declaration of Paris.

The rules contained in the present declaration related to matters of great importance and great diversity. They have not all been accepted with the same degree of eagerness by all the delegations; some concessions have been made on one point in con

sideration of concessions obtained on another. The whole, all things considered, has been recognized as satisfactory. A legitimate expectation would be defeated if one power might make reservations on a rule to which another power attached particular importance. (1909 Naval War College, International Law Topics, p. 155.)

Restraints on commerce.-A British order in council of October 29, 1914, introduced still further modifications in the provisions of the Declaration of London and other modifications followed.

These and other acts led the Secretary of State of the United States in a note of December 26, 1914, to say:

To Ambassador W. H. PAGE.

*

*

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, December 26, 1914.

The Government of the United States has viewed with growing concern the large number of vessels laden with American goods destined to neutral ports in Europe, which have been seized on the high seas, taken into British ports and detained sometimes for weeks by the British authorities. During the early days of the war this Government assumed that the policy adopted by the British Government was due to the unexpected outbreak of hostilities and the necessity of immediate action to prevent contraband from reaching the enemy. For this reason it was not disposed to judge this policy harshly or protest it vigorously, although it was manifestly very injurious to American trade with the neutral countries of Europe. This Government, re.ying confidently upon the high regard which Great Britain has so often exhibited in the past for the rights of other nations, confidently awaited amendment of a course of action which denied to neutral commerce the freedom to which it was entitled by the law of nations.

*

Articles listed as absolute contraband, shipped from the United States and consigned to neutral countries, have been seized and detained on the ground that the countries to which they were destined have not prohibited the exportation of such articles.

In the case of conditional contraband the policy of Great Britain appears to this Government to be equally unjustified by the established rules of international conduct. As evidence of this, attention is directed to the fact that a number of the American cargoes which have been seized consist of foodstuffs and other articles of common use in all countries, which are admittedly