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