Great Britain upholds her rule that belligerent warships shall not be allowed to take in more provisions and fuel in neutral ports than is necessary to bring them safely to the nearest port of their own country. While, therefore, the matter is not settled, it is agreed that it makes no difference whether the man-of-war concerned intends to buy provisions and coal on land or to take them in from transport vessels which accompany or meet her in neutral waters. Oppenheim, vol. 2, pp. 401–403, No ship of war or privateer of either belligerent shall be permitted, while in any port, harbor, roadstead, or waters within the jurisdiction of the United States, to take in any supplies except provisions and such other things as may be requisite for the subsistence of her crew, and except so much coal only as may be sufficient to carry such vessel, if without sail power, to the nearest European port of her own country; or in case the vessel is rigged to go under sail, and may be also propelled by steam power, then with half the quantity of coal which she would be entitled to receive if dependent upon steam alone: * * * Proclamation of President Grant, October 8, 1870, For. Rel. 1870, 48. See also proclamation of President Roosevelt, February 11, 1904. During the Franco-German war the Peruvian Government issued, October 31, 1870, a decree limiting the amount of coal that might be obtained by belligerent ships to a quantity sufficient to take them to their nearest home or territorial port, for the obtaining of which supply they were to be allowed to remain in port only so long as was necessary; and they were not allowed to renew their supply till four months had elapsed from the date of their last departure from Peruvian waters. Moore's Digest, vol. vii, p. 944; Mr. Elmore, Peruvian minister of foreign affairs, to Mr. Dudley, American minister, July 23, 1898, enclosed with Mr. Dudley to Mr. Day, Secretary of State, July 21, 1898, MSS. Dept. of State. A number of the neutrality proclamations issued by foreign powers during the war between the United States and Spain contained a clause limiting the supply of coal which a belligerent vessel might obtain to a quantity sufficient to take such vessel to the nearest port of its own country, or, in other words, to its nearest national port. In the decree of the Netherlands, the provision read that "the store of coal shall only be supplemented sufficiently to allow the ship or vessel to reach the nearest port of the country to which it belongs, or that of one of its allies in the war." When the Spanish fleet, which was afterwards destroyed at Santiago, arrived off Curaçao on the 14th of May, 1898, the commander sought from the Dutch colonial authorities permission to await there 5,000 tons of coal which had been sent thither. This request was denied, as well as a request for permission to ship the coal whenever it should arrive. A request that each vessel be allowed to take 700 tons was likewise refused. Finally, permission was asked and granted for two of the vessels, the Maria Teresa and the Vizcaya, to enter the harbor and each to take 200 tons, the rest of the ships meanwhile to remain at anchor in the roads. The 400 tons thus obtained were said to be of very poor quality." 66 Moore's Digest, vol. vii, p. 945; Mr. Newell, minister at The Hague, to the Secretary of State, May 20, 1898; Mr. Moore, Assistant Secretary of State to the Secretary of the Navy, June 2, 1898; Mr. Smith, Consul at Curaçao to the Secretary of State, May 16 and May 18, 1898. This shelter [of United States war vessels in a neutral port], which is allowed by comity of nations, may be availed of for the purpose of evading an enemy, from stress of weather, or to obtain. supplies or repairs that the vessel needs to enable her to continue her voyage in safety and to reach the nearest port of her own country. U. S. Naval War Code, 1900, Article 17. Article 19, Hague Convention XIII, 1907, is substantially identical with section 139, Austro-Hungarian Manual, 1913. When, in the latter part of May, 1898, it was rumored that the Spanish armored squadron had sailed or was about to sail to the United States and might stop at the Azores for coal, the minister of the United States at Lisbon was instructed to protest against its coaling at those islands, on the ground that, as they lay entirely outside the route from Spain to the Spanish West Indies, such an act would convert the Portuguese territory into a base of hostile operations against the United States. Moore's Digest, vol. vii, p. 945; Mr. Day, Secretary of State, to Mr. Townsend, minister to Portugal, May 20, 1898. June 29, 1898, when it was supposed that the Spanish armored fleet would proceed to the Philippines by way of the Suez Canal, Mr. Hay, the United States ambassador in London, was instructed to inform the British Government of a report that the Spanish fleet intended to coal from British colliers at the British island of Perim. Mr. Hay replied that the British Government had cabled to the resident at Aden and the assistant resident at Perim, concerning the British vessel Imaum, whose presence had given rise to the report, and that it was ascertained that she was then discharging 5,000 tons of coal consigned to the Perim Coal Company, and that when this work was finished she would proceed to Karachi. He stated that every precaution had been taken to prevent a violation of neutrality. Moore's Digest, vol. vii, p. 946; For. Rel. 1898, 983-984. On June 29, 1898, Mr. Hay, American Ambassador to England telegraphed to the Secretary of State concerning a Spanish vessel; that "British Government concludes Camara can not remain at Port Said more than twenty-four hours, except in case of necessity, and can not coal there if he has enough coal to take him back to Cadiz, which appears to be the case." Moore's Digest, vol. vii, p. 946; For. Rel. 1898, 983. Before the outbreak of hostilities. [between the United States and Spain in 1898] the Pacific Mail Steamship Company was permitted, under its agreement with the Mexican Government, to furnish supplies of coal to United States men-of-war at Acapulco. During the war, the Mexican Government placed limitations on the supply of coal to belligerent vessels in its ports, and made no exception as to United States vessels at Acapulco. The Department of State abstained from addressing any representation to Mexico on the subject, on the ground that as it had " on numerous recent occasions asked of Mexico the strict execution of its neutral duties," it was "not disposed, upon the strength of an agreement between the Pacific Mail Steamship Company and the Mexican Government, made before the war, to insist that public ships of the United States may now be allowed to take coal without limit in a Mexican port." Moore's Digest, vol. vii, p. 946; Mr. Day, Secretary of State, to Secretary of To an inquiry of the Government of the Netherlands as to whether the United States understood that the Japanese declaration that coal was contraband of war entailed any restrictions of the rule that coal might be supplied to a belligerent man-of-war in neutral waters sufficent to enable it to reach the nearest home port, the Department of State replied in the negative, saying that the effect of the Japanese proclamation was understood to be merely to serve notice that where Japan found coal being carried to her enemy she would seize it, just as in the case of other articles treated as contraband. Moore's Digest, vol. vii, p. 949; For. Rel. 1904, 523. FUEL NOT ALLOWED TO BELLIGERENT WAR-SHIP IN NEUTRAL PORT IF SHIP HAS RECEIVED FUEL IN PORT OF SAME COUNTRY WITHIN THREE MONTHS. Belligerent war-ships which have shipped fuel in a port belonging to a neutral Power may not within the succeeding three months replenish their supply in a port of the same Power.-Ilague Convention XIII, 1907, Article 20. Even during the American Civil War ships of war were only permitted to be furnished with so much coal in English ports as might be sufficient to take them to the nearest port of their own country, and were not allowed to receive a second supply in the same or any other port, without special permission, until after the expiration of three months from the date of receiving such coal. The regulations of the United States in 1870 were similar; no second supply being permitted for three months unless the vessel requesting it had put into a European port in the interval. There can be little doubt that no neutral states would now venture to fall below this measure of care; and there can be as little doubt that their conduct will be as right as it will be prudent. * Hall, pp. 629, 630; Earl Russel to the Lord Commissioners of the Admiralty. January 31, 1862; State Papers, 1871, lxxi., 167. * the three months' interval between supplies of coal has been adopted by the Netherlands, Denmark, Belgium, Japan and China besides Great Britain. Westlake, vol. 2, p. 241. ** * ** * We must therefore admit that the limits which as above mentioned have been set by many states to their supply of coal, are not yet a part of international law; but the amount of recognition which they have received would lend very great weight to any complaint which a belligerent might make on principle of conduct by a neutral power not in conformity with them. Westlake, vol. 2, p. 242. The British neutrality regulations of 1862 declared that at least three months must elapse between any two supplies of coal to the same belligerent vessel in any British port, whether the same as on the previous occasion or a different one. Many powers adopted this rule, but France and several others declined to limit their action by it or any other hard and fast line, while they admitted a duty to grant nothing more than what was necessary for the proper navigation of the vessel. At the second Hague Conference the powers were able to agree on the British rule, with the exception of Germany, who reserved the article which embodied it. This represented a general advance. Lawrence, p. 643. and no coal shall again be supplied to any such ship of war or privateer [which has coaled in the United States] in the same or any other port, harbor, roadstead, or waters of the United States, without special permission, until after the expiration of three months from the time when such coal may have been last supplied to her within the waters of the United States, unless such ship of war or privateer shall, since last thus supplied, have entered a European port of the Government to which she belongs. Proclamation of President Grant, October 8, 1870, For. Rel. 1870, 48. See also proclamation of President Roosevelt, February 11, 1904. Article 20, Hague Convention XIII, 1907, is substantially identical with section 140, Austro-Hungarian Manual, 1913. |