FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93  
94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   >>   >|  
n this fact would not have given England any right to interfere with neutral commerce from one neutral port to another and insisted that the task of preventing the transmission of contraband to the Transvaal lay with the Portuguese Government.[12] The fact was also pointed out that when war first broke out, the steamship company owning the _Bundesrath_ had discharged shipments of a contraband character at Dar-es-Salaam as well as at Port Said in order to obviate any possible complication, and since then had issued strict orders that contraband should not be embarked. [Footnote 12: Ibid., p. 7; Lascelles to Salisbury, Jan. 5, 1900.] Great Britain expressed herself as "entirely unable to accede to ... the contention that a neutral vessel was entitled to convey without hindrance contraband of war to the enemy, so long as the port at which she intended to land it was a neutral port."[13] The novel suggestion was made by Germany that "the mail steamer be allowed to go on bail so as not to interfere more than was necessary with her voyage," but the English representative doubted the practicability of such a plan. He was in favor of the suggestion if it could be adopted under suitable conditions, but since the ship had probably gone into the hands of the prize court, that tribunal, he said, would have to act independently. [Footnote 13: Ibid., p. 7; Salisbury to Lascelles, Jan. 4, 1900.] On January 5 the mails and the passengers were released by order of the court and were taken on board the German warship, _Condor_, for Delagoa Bay. But not until two weeks later were the ship and its cargo released.[14] The only reason assigned by the court for the release was that no contraband had been discovered by the search. [Footnote 14: Ibid., p. 22; Hely-Hutchinson to Chamberlain, Jan. 18, 1900.] Since the three cases which attracted most attention, the _Bundesrath_, the _Herzog_, and the _General_, with a few unimportant exceptions as to details, were similar in regard to the points of law involved, the facts in the remaining cases will be outlined. It will then be possible to discuss the grounds upon which Great Britain asserted the right of seizure, and the objections which Germany made to the English assertion. THE HERZOG.--On December 16, 1899, a cable from the commander-in-chief of the Mediterranean station announced to the British Foreign Office that the German "steamship" _Herzog_ had left the Suez Canal on the t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93  
94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

contraband

 
neutral
 

Footnote

 

Salisbury

 

Britain

 

interfere

 

Germany

 

English

 
released
 

German


suggestion

 

Herzog

 

Lascelles

 

Bundesrath

 

steamship

 
Mediterranean
 

Office

 

reason

 
commander
 

independently


assigned

 

release

 

station

 

announced

 
warship
 

Condor

 

British

 

passengers

 

January

 

Delagoa


Foreign

 

exceptions

 
details
 
similar
 

unimportant

 

grounds

 

seizure

 

asserted

 

regard

 

discuss


involved

 
remaining
 

outlined

 

points

 

objections

 

assertion

 

December

 

Hutchinson

 
Chamberlain
 
discovered