presumption of a hostile use, founded on its destination to a military port, is very much inflamed, if at the time when the articles were going, a considerable armament was notoriously preparing, to which a supply of those articles would be eminently useful."()

CCLV. The doctrine laid down in the foregoing extracts from the judgment of Lord Stowell, was, Mr. Chancellor *Kent(m) observes, "fully adopted by the Supreme Court of the United States, when [*352] we come to know and feel the value of Belligerents' rights, by becoming a party to a maritime war." The Chancellor goes on to observe that, "in the case of the Commercen the Supreme Court observed, as Lord Stowell had done, that by the modern Law of Nations, provisions were not generally Contraband, but they might become so on account of the particular situation of the war, or on account of their destination; that if they were destined for the ordinary use of life in the enemy's country, they were not Contraband; but that it was otherwise if destined for the army or navy of the enemy, or for his ports of military or naval equipment."

"But it is argued" (Mr. Justice Story says in the Commercen) "that the doctrine of Contraband cannot apply to the present case, because the destination was to a neutral country; and it is certainly true that goods destined for the use of a neutral country can never be deemed Contraband, whatever may be their character, or however well adapted to warlike purposes. But if such goods are destined for the direct and avowed use of the enemy's army or navy, we should be glad to see an authority which countenances this exemption from forfeiture, even though the property of a Neutral. Suppose, in time of war, a British fleet were lying in a neutral port, would it be lawful for a Neutral to carry provisions or munitions of war thither, avowedly for the exclusive supply of such fleet?-would it not be a direct interposition in the war, and an essential aid to the enemy in his hostile preparations? In such a case, the goods, even if belonging to a Neutral, would have had the taint of Contraband in its most offensive character, on account of its destination; and the mere interposition of a neutral port would not protect them from forfeiture."(n) And in a later part of the same judgment *he says: "It is in vain to contend that the direct effort of the [*353] voyage was not to aid the British hostilities against the United States. It might enable the enemy, indirectly, to operate with more vigour and promptitude against us, and increase his disposable force. But it is not the effect of the particular transaction that the law regards, it is the general tendency of such transactions to assist the military operations of the enemy, and the temptations which it presents to deviate from a strict Neutrality. Nor do we perceive how the destination to a neutral port can vary the application of this rule; it is only doing that indirectly which is prohibited in direct courses. Would it be contended that a Neutral might lawfully transport provisions for the British fleet and army while it lay at Bordeaux preparing for an expedition to the United

(7) The Jonge Margaretha, 1 Rob., pp. 194-5.

(m) Commentaries, vol. i. p. 143.

(n) The Commercen, 1 Wheaton, (Amer.) Rep., p. 387. AUGUST, 1857.-18

States? Would it be contended that he might lawfully supply a British fleet stationed on our coast? We presume that two opinions could not be entertained on such questions; and yet, though the cases put are strong, we do not know that the assistance is more material than might be supplied under cover of a neutral destination like the present."(o)

CCLVI. Upon the principles laid down in the foregoing judgments of Lord Stowell and Mr. Justice Story, cheeses fit for naval use, and going to a port of naval equipment, have been condemned as Contraband. (p) Biscuits have shared the same fate, especially when going from one enemy's port to another.(q) Wines are not generally and per se Contraband, but when taken on their way to supply an armament of the enemy are condemned.(r)

CCLVII. In 1797, a dispute arose between the United States of North America and Spain as to this question of *naval stores. [*354] America had, by Treaty with Spain, covenanted to exclude, and, by Treaty with England, to include them in the catalogue of Contraband. Spain protested against this as a failure in the duty of reciprocity. The Government of the United States, however, after having demonstrated that this reciprocity could only be shown when Spain was at peace and the United States at war, proceeded to defend the stipulation with England upon the ground of its conformity with the principles of International Law. "Ship timber and naval stores" (the American Secretary wrote) "are by the Law of Nations contraband of war. . . . . . Permit me to say, that our engagement with Great Britain ought to be no matter of surprise to the Catholic King; because His Majesty has seen, during the whole course of the American war, how steadily Great Britain persisted, in opposition to the demands of all the maritime Powers, to maintain her claims under the Law of Nations, to capture enemy's property, and timber, and naval stores, as Contraband in neutral ships. Could His Catholic Majesty, therefore, expect that Great Britain would relinquish her legal rights to a nation (the United States) which abounded in materials for building and equipping ships ?"(s)

CCLVIII. We have seen, from the foregoing judgment, under what circumstances naval stores and materials for ship-building are holden confiscable by the English and North American Prize Courts. With respect to any aid to be obtained from an investigation of Treaties towards the elucidation of this subject, not only can no general inference be derived from their examination, but, on the contrary, it will appear that the same States have declared naval materials to be Contraband in one Treaty, and not Contraband in another.(t)

*CCLIX. The principles on which the French Prize Courts [*355] act, may be gathered from the following decision of the Conseil des Prises in 1807. The subject was the capture of the Austrian ship

(0) The Commercen, 1 Wheaton's (Amer.) Rep., p. 392.

(p) The Zelden Rust, 6 Robinson's Adm. Rep., p. 93. The Frau Margaretha, Ib., p. 92. The Jonge Margaretha, 1 Rob., p. 193.

(9) The Ranger, 6 Rob., p. 125. (r) The Edward, 4 Rob., p. 68.

s) Debrett's State Papers, p. 380.

(†) Manning, pp. 287-9.

Ward on Contraband, p. 254.

Il Volante, by he French privateer, l'Etoile de Bonaparte. The Court said:

"Attendu qu'il est constant par les pièces de bord que le navire et le chargement sont propriétés neutres; que le port de Messine, pour lequel l'expédition était destinée, malgré l'autorité que peuvent y exercer les Anglais, n'est point soumis au blocus, qui, aux termes du décret du 21 Novembre, 1806 (rapporté ci-après, No. 7,) a lieu pour les ports et les Iles Britanniques; et que les sucres, suivant le manifeste et le connaissement, proviennent de Lisbonne, et ont été raffinés par la compagnie de Trieste et de Fiume;

"Attendu que le moyen déduit de la qualité des bois composant la majeure partie de la cargaison, et sur lequel les capteurs ont le plus insisté, ne peut être accueilli, si l'on considère que, loin qu'il soit démontré que ces bois appartiennent exclusivement à la construction des bâtimens de guerre, comme l'ont pensé les experts qui ont opéré, hors la présence des parties intéressées, le contraire semble résulter, tant de la teneur du procés-verbal de visite qu'ils ont irréguliérement dressé, que de la dimension des planches et de leur nombre comparé avec la capacité du navire;

[*356]

"Qu'au reste, et en abordant la question de Contrebande élevée par le corsaire, il est facile de se convaincre que la solution lui en est contraire. En effet, les bois de construction ne sont déclarés contrebande de guerre par aucun réglement Français encore subsistant, ni par aucun traité particulier. C'est faute d'avoir lu le Traité de 1742, conclue entre la France et le Danemarc, qu'on a dit qu'il comprenait sous cette dénomination le bois de construction. Si, par l'arrêté du directoire, du 12 Ventôse de l'an V., ils ont été rangés parmi les objets prohibés, ce n'a été que relativement aux Américains, qui avaient souffert, par leur Traité de 1794 avec les Anglais, que ces objets fussent regardés comme de Contrebande; et la disposition de cet *arrêté est de droit annulée par la convention du 8 Vendémiaire de l'an IX., passée entre la France et les Etats-Unis d'Amérique, qui, en spécifiant tous les articles de Contrebande, n'y a point compris les bois de construction. Lors même que l'on aurait pu soutenir avec quelque fondement que la prohibition contenue dans le arrête du 12 Ventôse de l'an V., eût été applicable â tous les Neutres, elle se trouverait implicitement rapportée par l'arrêté du 29 Frimaire de l'an VIII., qui, à l'égard de la navigation des Neutres, a rétabli les dispositions du réglement du 26 Juillet, 1778, dont l'art. 15, ordonne l'exécution de l'ordonnance de la marine de 1681, laquelle, dans l'énumération des objets de contrebande de guerre, ne place point les bois de construction; d'où il faut conclure que la destination pour un port ennemi des planches chargées sur le navire Il Volante, quel qu'en dût être l'emploi, ne les a point rendues confiscables, et que tout au plus elle serait susceptible, avec les autres circonstances de la prise, d'exempter les capteurs des dommages et intérêts;

"Le conseil décide que la prise faite par le corsaire Français, l'Etoile de Bonaparte, du navire Autrichien Il Volante, est invalide; en faite pleine et entiére main-levée au profit des propriétaires; en conséquence, ordonne que le dit navire, ensemble les marchandises de son chargement,

seront remis avec les pièces de bord, à la disposition du capitaine Natali Hort; à quoi faire, tous gardiens, séquestres et dépositaires seront contraints par toutes voies, même par corps, quoi faisant déchargés. Sur la demande en dommage-intérêts, met les parties hors de cause."(u.)

CCLX. It is to be observed, however, that France in her Treaty with Denmark of 1742, which has been *subsequently confirmed by [*357] her Convention of 1842, has comprised in the category of Contraband, tar, pitch, rosin, sail-cloth, hemp, cordage, masts, and timber for purposes of war (bois de construction.)

CCLXI. Sail-cloth, (x) masts, anchors, (y) tar,(z) and pitch going to the enemy's use, are liable, under the modern Law of Nations to be seized as Contraband in their own nature, and without respect to the character of the port to which they are destined. In 1750, the Judges of the British Court of Appeal in matters of prize, declared pitch and tar, the produce of Sweden, on board a French ship bound to a French port, to be Contraband, and subject to confiscation. In the more modern understanding of this matter, however, goods of this nature being the produce of Sweden, the actual property of Swedes, and conveyed by their own navigation, have been deemed, in British Courts of Prize, subject only to the milder rights of Pre-occupancy and Pre-emption ;(a) and it may be said that though pitch and tar are now generally Contraband in a maritime war, the rule is so far relaxed as to allow the carrying of these articles when they are the produce of the claimant's country.(b) This *relaxation is understood with a condition that it may be brought [*358] in, not for confiscation but for Pre-emption: to entitle the party to the benefit of this rule, however, a perfect bona fides is required.(c) On the other hand, the carrying of pitch and tar to a legal port, with an intention of selling them there, and, if not, of carrying them on to an enemy's port for sale, is illegal, and the intention of so doing being proved, and that the ulterior destination was concealed, the vessel, being the property of the same owners, is liable to condemnation.(d) But tar

(u) Merlin, Répertoire de Jurisprudence, vol. xiii. p. 94. Such too it appears is the present law:-"Peuvent-ils (les Neutres) transporter des objets de matériel naval? Oui, s'ils interrogent la législation Française; non, s'ils interrogent la loi Anglaise.”—De Pist. et Duverdy, t. 1. p. 405. (Paris, 1855.)

(x) The Neptunus, 3 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 108.

(y) The Staat Embden, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 29. The Charlotte, 5 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 314.

(2) Dans la guerre de 1700, le goudron y fut compris, parceque les ennemis le déclarèrent de Contrebande, excepté celui qui étoit trouvé sur les vaisseaux Suédois, parceque c'est une production de leur cru. . . le goudron a aussi été déclaré de Contrebande, avec la poix, résine, les voiles, chanvres, et cordages, les mâts et bois de construction pour les navires. Ainsi en cette partie il n'y auroit à plaindre de la conduite des Anglais, sans leur contravention aux Traités particuliers, car de droit ces choses sont de Contrebande aujourd'hui, et depuis le commencement de ce siècle, ce qui n'étoit pas autrefois néanmoins."-Valin, Ord. de la Mar., t. ii. 1. iii. art. xi. Vattel includes amongst Contraband "les bois, et tout ce qui sert à la construction et à l'armement de vaisseaux de guerre," &c., 1. iii. c. vii. p. 112, in fine. Vide ante, vol. i. p. 41, remarks on this passage from Valin.

(a) The Maria, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep., p. 372. This is the famous case of the Swedish convoy.

(6) The Sarah Christina, ib. p. 241.

(c) The Sarah Christina, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep., p. 241.

(d) The Richmond, 5 Ib., p. 336.

and pitch which are neither the produce of the exporting country nor protected by Treaty, are Contraband.(e)

CCLXII. The British Order in Council of July, 1807, permitting to Sweden the liberty of trade with the common enemy in innocent articles only, was holden under the circumstances to imply a prohibition as to naval stores. A cargo, therefore, on board a Swedish ship, and consisting of pitch and tar, being naval stores, was holden to be of the nature of Contraband, in such a sense as to preclude their falling under the description of innocent articles. The cargo was accordingly condemned, but the ship and innocent articles of cargo were decreed to be restored under the above Order of Council, though in opposition to the general law. (ƒ)

Pitch and tar bona fide intended for the ship's use which carries them, are not Contraband. The bona fides is a question to be determined by all the circumstances of the case, among which the quantity is a very material ingredient.(g)

[*359]

*CCLXIII. With respect to hemp fitted for naval use,(h) the relaxation of the strict rule also prevailed during the last war, and when the produce and property of the exporting country, it was not confiscated, (i) though liable to seizure and pre-emption by the Belligerent. The burden of proof that it is such produce and property lies upon the claimant.(k)

Brimstone may or may not be contraband, according to the circumstances of the case.(7)

Copper in a state fit for sheathing(m) has been condemned. Cargoes of barks, fir planks, battens, and fire-wood, are articles which, if destined for a port of naval equipment, *and pronounced by competent shipwrights to be fit for ship-building, will be con

[*360]

(ƒ) The Neptunus, 6 Ib., 403.

(e) The Twee Juffrowen, 4 Ib., p. 242. (g) The Richmond, 5 Rob., p. 334. Pitch and tar, the property of a Swedish merchant, and the produce of Sweden, taken on board a Swedish ship on a voyage from a Swedish to a Dutch port, were holden not to be Contraband, and restitution ordered, but captors' expenses of taking the depositions allowed. The Christina Maria, 4 Rob., p. 166. In a similar case, restitution having passed on the original evidence, and the cargo having been purchased by Government, the expenses of the claimant and captor were decreed to be paid by Government. The Resolution, ibid., note. A cargo of tar taken going from a port of the country of which it could not be the produce, condemned. The Jonge Tobias, 1 Rob. p. 329. Pitch and tar going on a concealed destination to the enemy's port, the ship and cargo were both condemned, the master being a part owner. The Richmond, 5 Rob., p. 325. A Swedish ship laden with tar, pitch, and deals, sailing under instructions to take British convoy for Lisbon, in case the master should not be able to obtain a purchaser at Copenhagen for the ship and cargo, but afterwards detected entering a Dutch enemy's port: holden by the Lords of Appeal (affirming the decision of High Court of Admiralty,) liable to condemnation with her cargo, notwithstanding the protest of the master, alleging the impossibity of obtaining convoy, and that the deviation was occasioned by his apprehension of capture by French cruisers, the suspicions circumstances in the case being held to remove all favourable construction usually applied with respect to the general trade of Sweden in such articles. The Charlotte, 1 Acton's Rep., p. 201.

(h) Other hemp is not seizable. The Gute Gesellschaft Michael, 4 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 95. The Evert, ib., p. 354.

(i) The Apollo, 4 Rob. Adm. Rep., p. 158. (7) The Ship Carpenter, 2 Acton's (Appeals) was holden not to be Contraband.

(m) The Charlotte, 5 Rob. Adm. Rep., p. 275.

(k) The Evert, ib. p. 354. Reports, p. 11, in which case it