questions involved should be examined
and passed upon by a Commission of representative experts. Which shall
it be?

Your obedient servant,
T. E. HOLLAND.
Oxford, July I (1911).

_Cf._ a letter of July 7, 1911, _supra_, p. 36.

NAVAL PRIZE MONEY

Sir,--The existing enactments as to prize bounty are, it seems,
unsuitable to present conditions of naval warfare, and are accordingly
to be varied by a bill shortly to be introduced.

May I venture to recommend that the Bill should contain merely the
half-dozen clauses needed for this purpose, leaving untouched for
subsequent uncontroversial passage, the Naval Prize Consolidation with
Amendments Bill? This Bill, suggested and drafted by myself, in the
spacious times of peace, in consultation with the Admiralty and other
Government Departments, as also with the Judge of the Admiralty Division
and the Law Officers (including the present Lord Chancellor), was twice
mentioned in the King's Speech, and several times, after careful
consideration, passed by the House of Lords, but still awaits the
leisure of the Lower House. It deserved a better fate than to have been
used, in 1911, as a corpus vile for facilitating the ratification of the
Convention for an International Prize Court and of the Declaration of
London; receiving, most fortunately, as so perverted, its _coup de
grace_ from the Lords. It should be passed as an artistic whole, apart
from any contentious matter, account having, of course, been taken of
recent legislation by which it may have been, here and there, affected.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
T. E. HOLLAND.
Oxford, May 23 (1918).

* * * * *

SECTION 10

The Declaration of London

For incidental mentions of the Declaration in earlier sections
see _supra_, pp. 22, 36, 39, 55, 58, 80, 90, 92, 148, 149, 154,
155, 156, 158, 163, 164, 174, 181, 191, 193, 194, 195, 196.

See also my paper upon _Proposed Changes in the Law of Naval
Prize_, read to the British Academy on May 31, 1911,
_Transactions_, vol. v., of which a translation appeared in the
_Revue de Droit International_, N.S., t. xiii, pp. 336-355.

THE DECLARATION OF LONDON

Sir,--The questions put last night by Mr. M'Arthur need, perhaps, more
fully considered answers than they received from Mr. McKinnon Wood.

With reference to the first answer, it may be worth while to point out
that, in Art. 66 of the Declaration, t