Vattel (III. § 178) relates the following case of perfidy: In 1755, during war between Great Britain and France, a British man-of-war appeared off Calais, made signals of distress for the purpose of soliciting French vessels to approach to her succour, and seized a sloop and some sailors who came to bring her help. Vattel is himself not certain whether this case is a fact or fiction. But be that as it may, there is no doubt that, if the case be true, it is an example of perfidy, which is not allowed. VII REQUISITIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS, BOMBARDMENT Hall, § 140*--Lawrence, § 204--Westlake, II. pp. 315-318--Moore, VII. §§ 1166-1174--Taylor, § 499--Bonfils, Nos. 1277-1277'1--Despagnet, Nos. 618-618 _bis_--Fiore, Code, Nos. 1633-1642--Pradier-Fodéré, VIII. Nos. 3153-3154--Nys, III. pp. 430-432--Pillet, p. 117--Perels, § 35, p. 181--Holland, _Studies_, pp. 96-111--Dupuis, Nos. 67-73, and _Guerre_, Nos. 42-47--Barclay, _Problems_, p. 51--Higgins, pp. 352-357--Lémonon, pp. 503-525--Bernsten, § 7, III.--Boidin, pp. 201-215--Nippold, II. § 28--Scott, _Conferences_, pp. 587-598, and in _A.J._ II. (1908), pp. 285-294. [Sidenote: Requisitions and Contributions upon Coast Towns.] § 212. No case has to my knowledge occurred in Europe[422] of requisitions or contributions imposed by naval forces upon enemy coast towns. The question whether or not such requisitions and contributions would be lawful became of interest through an article on naval warfare of the future, published in 1882 by the French Admiral Aube in the _Revue des Deux Mondes_ (vol. 50, p. 331). Aube pointed out that one of the tasks of the fleet in sea warfare of the future would be to attack and destroy by bombardment fortified and unfortified military and commercial enemy coast towns, or at least to compel them mercilessly to requisitions and contributions. As during the British naval manoeuvres of 1888 and 1889 imaginary contributions were imposed upon several coast towns, Hall (§ 140*) took into consideration the question under what conditions requisitions and contributions would be lawful in sea warfare. He concluded, after careful consideration and starting from the principles regarding requisitions and contributions in land warfare, that such requisitions and contributions may be levied, provided a force is landed which actually takes possession of the respective coast town and establishes itself there, although only temporarily, until the imposed requisitions and contributions have been complied with; that, however, no requisitions or contributions could be demanded by a single message sent on shore under threatened penalty of bombardment in case of refusal. There is no doubt that Hall's arguments are, logically, correct; but it was not at all certain that the naval Powers would adopt them, since neither the Institute of International Law nor the U.S. Naval War Code had done so.[423] The Second Hague Peace Conference has