he existing
rules of international law. This was not true, however, of all the
provisions of the Declaration. On several of the most vital questions
of maritime law, such as blockade, the doctrine of continuous voyage,
the destruction of neutral prizes, and the inclusion of food stuffs in
the list of conditional contraband, the Declaration was a compromise
and therefore unsatisfactory. It encountered from the start the most
violent opposition in England. In Parliament the Naval Prize Bill,
which was to give the Declaration effect, was discussed at considerable
length. It passed the House of Commons by a small vote, but was
defeated in the House of Lords. It was denounced by the press, and a
petition to the king, drawn up by the Imperial Maritime League
protesting against it, was signed by a long list of commercial
associations, mayors, members of the House of Lords, general officers,
and other public officials. One hundred and thirty-eight naval
officers of flag rank addressed to the prime minister a public protest
against the Declaration. In the debate in the House of Lords the main
objections to the Declaration were (1) that it made food stuffs
conditional contraband instead of placing them on the free list, (2)
that the clause permitting the seizure of conditional contraband bound
for a fortified place or "other place serving as a base for the armed
forces of the enemy" would render all English ports liable to be
treated as bases by an enemy, and (3) that it permitted the destruction
of neutral prizes.

The refusal of England to ratify the Declaration of London sealed its
fate. The United States Senate formally ratified it, but this
ratification was, of course, conditional on the ratification of other
powers. At the beginning of the Great War the United States made a
formal proposal to the belligerent powers that they should agree to
adopt the Declaration for the period of the war in order that there
might be a definite body of law for all parties concerned. This
proposal was accepted by Germany and Austria, but England, France, and
Russia were not willing to accept the Declaration of London without
modifications. The United States, therefore, promptly withdrew its
proposal and stated that where its rights as a neutral were concerned
it would expect the belligerent powers to observe the recognized rules
of international law and existing treaties.

The Hague Conferences were concerned with questions of g