Letters to "The Times" upon War and Neutrality (1881-1920)Holland, Thomas Erskine
History
Letters to "The Times" upon War and Neutrality (1881-1920)
Holland, Thomas Erskine
Neutrality; War (International law)
But Germany contends that the situation is governed by Art. 19, the text
of which has been several times set out in your columns, of the old
Convention of 1799. This may startle those who are acquainted with what
occurred at The Hague in 1907, and I have seen no reference to what must
be the gist of the German argument on the point. They no doubt argue
that the old Convention remains unrepealed by No. xiii. of The Hague,
because the latter Convention is of no effect, in pursuance of its
common form Art. 28, to the effect that:--"The provisions of the present
Convention do not apply except between contracting Powers, and then only
if all the belligerents are parties to the Convention" (which is by no
means the case).
Your obedient servant,
T. E. HOLLAND.
Oxford, February 4 (1916).
Certain reservations on ratification do not affect Arts. 21 or
22.
The State Department ruled that the case did not fall within
the protecting clauses of the Treaty of 1799, which granted
asylum only to ships of war accompanying prizes, whereas the
_Appam_ was herself a prize. Proceedings by the owners in the
local Federal Court for possession of the ship resulted in a
decision in their favour, against which the Germans are
appealing in the Supreme Court. They do not seem to have raised
the objection, mentioned in the letter, as to the applicability
of Convention viii.
* * * * *
SECTION 5
_Carriage of Contraband. (Absolute and Conditional Contraband:
Continuous Voyages: Unqualified Captors: The Declaration of London)_
The letters included in the preceding sections 2 and 3 touched
incidentally upon carriage of contraband, in relation to other
departments of the law affecting neutrals. The eight letters
which follow, suggested respectively by the Spanish-American,
the Boer, and the Russo-Japanese wars, deal exclusively with
this topic, which seems likely to be henceforth governed no
longer only by customary and judge-made law, but largely also
by written rules, such as those suggested by the unratified
Declaration of London of 1909.
(_Absolute and Conditional Contraband_)
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account