1 The Declaration has been signed by all the Powers represented at the Conference.

GENERAL REPORT ON THE DECLARATION PRESENTED TO THE NAVAL CONFERENCE ON BEHALF OF ITS DRAFTING COMMITTEE1.

Origin of

(Translation3.)

On the 27th February, 1908, the British Government addressed a circular to various Powers inviting them to meet at a ConConference. ference with the object of reaching an agreement as to the definition of the generally recognized principles of international law in the

1 This Committee consists of Messrs Kriege (Germany), Wilson (United States of America), Dumba (Austria-Hungary), Estrada (Spain), Renault (France) (Reporter), Hurst (Great Britain), Ricci-Busatti (Italy), Sakamoto (Japan), Ruyssenaers (Netherlands), Baron Taube (Russia).

"The work of the Conference was materially facilitated by the preliminary exchange of views between the several Governments which had agreed to send Delegates. This entitled His Majesty's Government, with the valuable assistance of the eminent French jurist, M. Fromageot, whose services had been placed at their disposal by the courtesy of the French Government, to present to the Conference as bases for its discussion a set of draft articles dealing with the questions comprised in the programme, and laying down a number of generally recognised rules of international law which it was found possible to deduce from the statements furnished by the different Powers....Under the courteous and efficient chairmanship of M. Renault, the distinguished French Plenipotentiary, whose unfailing tact, unrivalled knowledge, and wide experience materially contributed to the smooth progress of the discussions, the main lines of the general agreement which was subsequently embodied in the terms of the final Declaration, were laid down in this Grand Committee. A more restricted number of members was then selected to constitute an Examining Committee, which proceeded to work out in greater detail the questions presenting special difficulties, whilst the duty of preparing the final text of the rules agreed upon was assigned to a Drafting Committee. A small Legal Committee was also appointed to consider the very technical questions involved in the problem of how to determine what constitutes enemy property. Over the Legal Committee, M. Fromageot presided, whilst M. Renault acted as chairman and reporter of the other committees. The proceedings of the Conference in plenary meetings are recorded in the minutes, and short summaries were made of the discussions in Grand Committee. Attached to these minutes is, among other papers, the General Report to the Conference prepared by M. Renault. We desire to call your particular attention to this document, which contains a most lucid explanatory and critical commentary on the provisions of the Declaration. It should be borne in mind that, in accordance with the principles and practice of continental jurisprudence, such a report is considered an authoritative statement of the meaning and intention of the instrument which it explains, and that consequently foreign Governments and Courts, and, no doubt also, the International Prize Court, will construe and interpret the provisions of the Declaration by the light of the commentary given in the report." (Extract from Report of British Delegates to Sir Edward Grey, Parl. Papers, Misc. No. 4 (1909), pp. 93, 94.)

2 For original French text of the Report see Parl. Papers, Misc. No. 5 (1909), pp. 342377; and for the translation, Parl. Papers, Misc. No. 4 (1909), p. 33. The original Report and the translation contain the text of the various Articles; these are here omitted, but referred to in the side-notes of which there are none in the original or in the translation. The translation of the Report contains only two footnotes, viz. the names of the members of the Committee, and the note on "de plein droit" (Article 23).

3 The Powers are those enumerated in the Declaration (unte, p. 511).

plaire, qui rester archives du Gouv que et dont des conformes, seront diplomatique aux sentées à la Confé

[Suivent les

1 The Declaration

on in Jocturcation of London

teen signed at The

te stadsmect of an Inte Cara Bessey to the Britis Crentes if new which had becomA KUNCED. MAR A MANeon with the settlemen

Hafro cal maritime law in time? 4 erpat mass might, it seemed, render if Dear Prize Court, as the power in 123

eraad z proportion as the rules to be amA ↑

„st. Avernment suggested that the following questions
vene programme of the proposed Conference unit inche
Fwers to express their views regarding then a 15
pay Memoranda':

(2)- Contraband, including the circumstances UNUT BRA

can be considered as contraband; the pensies Tortur
the immunity of a ship from search when under cary te
mas mud regard to compensation where vessels have been seeE VNE NATY
been found in fact only to be carrying innocent cargo;

Bade, including the questions as to the locality wher
oan be effected, and the notice that is necessary before a ship can be
(c) The doctrine of continuous voyage in respect both of contrains aus
of blockude;

(d) The legality of the destruction of neutral vessels prior ther
condemnation by a prize court;

(e) The rules as to neutral ships or persons rendering "use" service" ("assistance hostile ");

The legality of the conversion of a merchant-vessel into a warship on the high seas;

(g) The rules as to the transfer of merchant-nessels from a belligerent to a neutral flag during or in contengo son qy" hamlities;

(h) The question wither the nation, y or the domicile of the owner
should be adopted as the demonam facer un deciding whether property is
enemy property

The invitations en annan, and the Conference met on the 4th
Days ist Gerernment had been so good

Bases of
discussion at 832 ANN IN Z Nisan by presenting a collection of
NUS WA gawk' became knower Knong us by the name

*w! Babap% ཁནཔ

of the Red Book, and which, after a short introduction, contains a "Statement of the views expressed by the Powers in their Memoranda, and observations intended to serve as a basis for the deliberations of the Conference." These are the "bases of discussion" which served as a starting-point for the examination of the chief questions of existing international maritime law. The Conference could not but express its gratitude for this valuable preparatory work, which was of great assistance to it. It made it possible to observe, in the first place, that the divergences in the practices and doctrines of the different countries were perhaps less wide than was generally believed, that the essential ideas were often the same in all countries, and that the methods of application alone varied with traditions or prejudices, with permanent or accidental interests. It was, therefore, possible to extract a common element which it could be agreed to recommend for uniform application. This is the end to which the efforts of the different Delegations tended, and they vied with one another in their zeal in the search for the grounds of a common understanding. Their efforts were strenuous, as is shown by the prolonged discussions of the Conference, the Grand Committee, and the Examining Committees, and by the numerous proposals which were presented. Sailors, diplomatists, and jurists cordially co-operated in a work the description of which, rather than a final estimate of its essential value, is the object of this Report, as our impartiality might naturally be suspected.

The Declaration concerning the laws of naval warfare.

The body of rules contained in the Declaration, which is the result of the deliberations of the Naval Conference, and which is to be entitled Declaration concerning the laws of naval war, answers well to the desire expressed by the British Government in its invitation of February 1908. The questions in the programme are all settled except two, with regard to which explanations will be given later. The solutions have been extracted from the various views or practices which prevail and represent what may be called the media sententia. They are not always in absolute agreement with the views peculiar to each country, but they shock the essential ideas of none. They must not be examined separately, but as a whole, otherwise there is a risk of the most serious misunderstandings. In fact, if one or more isolated rules are examined either from the belligerent or the neutral point of view, the reader may find that the interests with which he is especially concerned are jeopardized by the adoption of these rules. But they have another side. The work is one of compromise and mutual concessions. Is it, as a whole, a good one?

We confidently hope that those who study it seriously will answer that

sense of Article 7, paragraph 2, of the Convention signed at The Hague on the 18th October, 1907, for the establishment of an International Prize Court. This agreement appeared necessary to the British Government on account of certain divergences of view which had become apparent at the second Peace Conference in connection with the settlement of various important questions of international maritime law in time of war. The existence of these divergent views might, it seemed, render difficult the acceptance of the International Prize Court, as the power of this Court would be the more extended in proportion as the rules to be applied by it were more uncertain.

The British Government suggested that the following questions might form the programme of the proposed Conference, and invited the Powers to express their views regarding them in preparatory Memoranda1:

Programme
suggested by
British
Government.

(a) Contraband, including the circumstances under which particular articles can be considered as contraband; the penalties for their carriage; the immunity of a ship from search when under convoy; and the rules with regard to compensation where vessels have been seized but have been found in fact only to be carrying innocent cargo;

(b) Blockade, including the questions as to the locality where seizure can be effected, and the notice that is necessary before a ship can be seized; (c) The doctrine of continuous voyage in respect both of contraband and of blockade;

(d) The legality of the destruction of neutral vessels prior to their condemnation by a prize court ;

(e) The rules as to neutral ships or persons rendering "unneutral service" ("assistance hostile ");

(f) The legality of the conversion of a merchant-vessel into a warship on the high seas;

(g) The rules as to the transfer of merchant-vessels from a belligerent to a neutral flag during or in contemplation of hostilities;

(h) The question whether the nationality or the domicile of the owner should be adopted as the dominant factor in deciding whether property is enemy property.

The invitations were accepted, and the Conference met on the 4th December last. The British Government had been so good as to assist its deliberations by presenting a collection of papers which quickly became known among us by the name

Bases of discussion at Conference.

1 For texts of the Memoranda of the Powers see Parl. Papers, Misc. No. 5 (1909), pp. 2-56. The British Memorandum in English is to be found in No. 4 (1909), pp. 3-11.