unded; but Mr.
Rae, in the letter which you print this morning, overstates a good case.
He asks that, "whatever steps are taken for the release of the
_Malacca_, equally strong steps should be taken for the release of the
_Allanton_"; and he can see no difference between the cases of the two
ships, except that the former is owned by a powerful company in the
habit of carrying British mails, while the latter is his private
property.

One would have supposed it to be notorious that the facts which
distinguish the one case from the other are, first, that the capture of
the _Malacca_ was effected by a vessel not entitled to exercise
belligerent rights; and, secondly, that Great Britain is prepared to
claim the incriminated cargo as belonging to the British Government.
Capture by an unqualified cruiser is so sufficient a ground for a claim
of restoration and compensation that, except perhaps as facilitating the
retreat of Russia from a false position, it would seem, to say the
least, superfluous to pray in aid any other reason for the cancellation
of an act unlawful _ab initio._

I have not noticed any statement as to the actual constitution of the
prize Court concerned in the condemnation of the _Allanton._ Under Rule
54 of the Russian Naval Regulations of 1895, a "Port Prize Court" must,
for a decree of confiscation, consist of six members, of whom three must
be officials of the Ministries of Marine, Justice, and Foreign Affairs
respectively. An "Admirals' Prize Court," for the same purpose, need
consist of only four members, all of whom are naval officers.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
T. E. HOLLAND.
Oxford, July 25 (1904).

_(Note upon the Declaration of London)_

The British delegates to The Hague Conference of 1907 were
instructed that H.M. Government "are ready and willing for
their part, in lieu of endeavouring to frame new and more
satisfactory rules for the prevention of contraband trade in
the future, to abandon the principle of contraband of war
altogether, thus allowing the oversea trade in neutral vessels
between belligerents on the one hand and neutrals on the other,
to continue during war without any restriction," except with
reference to blockades. This proposal, fortunately, was not
accepted by the Conference, which was unable even to agree upon
lists of contraband articles, and recommended that the question
should be further considered by the G