(3) The Declaration of London does not purport to decide the controversy, since the Powers represented at the Naval Conference of London could not agree. Whereas Holland, Spain, and Japan approved of the British and American practice, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Germany, and Russia sided with France. For this reason, the Declaration, by articles 58 and 59, only enacts that the enemy character of goods on enemy vessels is determined by the enemy character of their owner, and that all goods on enemy vessels are presumed to be enemy goods unless the contrary is proved. But the chief question, namely, what is the factor that decides the enemy character of an owner, is deliberately left unanswered. It would, therefore, according to article 7 of Convention XII., be for the proposed International Prize Court to settle it. [Footnote 154: The _Postilion_ (1779), Hay & Marriot, 245; the _Danous_ (1802), 4 C. Rob. 255, note.] [Footnote 155: The _Baltica_ (1857), 11 Moore, P.C. 141.] [Footnote 156: The _Indian Chief_ (1801), 3 C. Rob. 12.] [Footnote 157: The _Venus_ (1814), 8 Cranch, 253.] [Footnote 158: From the judgment of Sir William Scott in the case of the _Phoenix_ (1803), 5 C. Rob. 41; see also _Thirty Hogsheads of Sugar_ v. _Boyle_ (_Bentzen_ v. _Boyle_) (1815), 9 Cranch, 191.] [Footnote 159: The _Portland_ (1800), 3 C. Rob. 41; the _Jonge Klassina_ (1803), 5 C. Rob. 297; the _Freundschaft_ (1819), 4 Wheaton, 105.] [Footnote 160: See the French cases of:--_Le Hardy contre La Voltigeante_ (1802) and _La Paix_ (1803), 1 Pistoye et Duverdy, pp. 321 and 486; _Le Joan_ (1871), _Le Nicolaüs_ (1871), _Le Thalia_ (1871); _Le Laura-Louise_ (1871), Barboux, pp. 101, 108, 116, 119.] [Sidenote: Transfer of Enemy Vessels.]