is suspended during war, and everything is allowable against
the enemy nation--that this abominable error can but increase
the unavoidable sufferings and evils of war without necessity,
and without utility from the point of view of that energetic
way of making war which I also think is the right way.

"With reference to several rules being stated with the
qualifications 'if possible,' 'according to circumstances,' we
look on this as a safety-valve, intended to preserve the
inflexible rule of law from giving way when men's minds are
overheated in a struggle against all sorts of dangers, and so
to insure the application of the rules in many other
instances. Sad experience teaches us that in every war there
are numerous violations of law which must unavoidably remain
unpunished, but this will not cause the jurist to abandon the
authoritative principle which has been violated. Quite the
reverse. If, for instance, a flag of truce has been fired
upon, in contravention of the law of nations, the jurist will
uphold and proclaim more strongly than ever the rule that a
flag of truce is inviolable.

"I trust that your Excellency will receive indulgently this
sincere statement of my views, and will regard it as an
expression of my gratitude, as well as of my high personal
esteem and of my respectful consideration.

"Dr. BLUNTSCHLI, Privy Councillor, Professor."

THE UNITED STATES NAVAL WAR CODE.[1]

Sir,--The "Naval War Code" of the United States, upon which an
interesting article appeared in _The Times_ of Friday last, in so well
deserving of attention in this country that I may perhaps be allowed to
supplement the remarks of your Correspondent from the results of a
somewhat minute examination of the code made shortly after its
publication.

One notes, in the first place, that the Government of the United States
does not shirk responsibility. It puts the code into the hands of its
officers "for the government of all persons attached to the naval
service," and is doubtless prepared to stand by the rules contained in
it, as being in accordance with international law. These rules deal
boldly with even so disagreeable a topic as "Reprisals" (Art. 8), upon
which the Brussels, and after it The Hague, Conference preferred to keep
silence; and they take a definite line on many questions upon