[Sidenote: Abuse of Flag of Truce.] § 223. Abuse of his mission by an authorised flag-bearer must be distinguished from an abuse of the flag of truce itself. Such abuse is possible in two different forms:-- (1) The force which sends an authorised flag-bearer to the enemy has to take up a corresponding attitude; the ranks which the flag-bearer leaves being obliged to halt and to cease fire. Now it constitutes an abuse of the flag of truce if such attitude corresponding with the sending of a flag of truce is intentionally not taken up by the sending force. The case is even worse when a flag-bearer is intentionally sent on a feigned mission in order that military operations may be carried out by the sender under the protection due from the enemy to the flag-bearer and his party. (2) The second form of a possible abuse appears in the case in which a white flag is made use of for the purpose of making the enemy believe that a flag of truce is about to be sent, although it is not sent, and of carrying out operations under the protection granted by the enemy to this pretended flag of truce. It need hardly be specially mentioned that both forms of abuse are gross perfidy and may be met with reprisals, or with punishment of the offenders in case they fall into the hands of the enemy. The following case of abuse is related by Sir Sherston Baker in Halleck (II. p. 315):--"On July 12, 1882, while the British fleet was lying off Alexandria, in support of the authority of the Khedive of Egypt, and the rebels under Arabi Pasha were being driven to great straits, a rebel boat, carrying a white flag of truce, was observed approaching H.M.S. _Invincible_ from the harbour, whereupon H.M. ships _Temeraire_ and _Inflexible_, which had just commenced firing, were ordered to suspend fire. So soon as the firing ceased, the boat, instead of going to the _Invincible_, returned to the harbour. A flag of truce was simultaneously hoisted by the rebels on the Ras-el-Tin fort. These deceits gave the rebels time to leave the works and to retire through the town, abandoning the forts, and withdrawing the whole of their garrison under the flag of truce." IV CARTELS Grotius, III. c. 21, §§ 23-30--Vattel, III. §§ 278-286--Hall, § 193--Lawrence, § 212--Westlake, II. p. 139--Phillimore, III. §§ 111-112--Halleck, II. pp. 326-329--Taylor, § 599--Bluntschli, §§ 679-680--Heffter, § 142--Lueder in Holtzendorff, IV. pp. 525-529--Ullmann, § 185--Bonfils, Nos. 827 and 1280--Despagnet, No. 658--Pradier-Fodéré, VII. Nos. 2832-2837, 2888--Rivier, II. p. 360--Nys, III. pp. 521-525--Calvo, IV. §§ 2419-2429--Longuet, §§ 140, 141--Pillet, p. 359--_Kriegsbrauch_, p. 38--Holland, _War_, No. 100, and _Prize Law_, §§ 32-35--_Land Warfare_, §§ 338-339. [Sidenote: Definition and Purpose of Cartels.]