Show t MM tt t t t t 8 4 I I M 4 M M f f M 4 M I MM t I I 4 M 4 MM 4 4 i CONTRABAND OF W WAR J i MM t t MM MM M M M M M MM t t t t M 6 M t M t t M M t t 4 Mr Mv Peter leter Van of Chicago has ad all addressed addressed dressed an open letter to President Roosevelt in bl which he lie seeks to show siow by argument and citation of authorities that the sale sale and and shipment of American American Amer Arner- ican jean horses and mules to to South Africa to be used usell by Great Br Britain ta n for I military 1 purposes is trade in contraband of war under the Treaty of Washington of 1871 and according to the terms of various other treaties into which the United States has entered with South American n countries In Ill some respects Mr 11 Va Van i. i n appears appears' rs- rs to make out a a. strong case In others hi his logic w will ll not appeal favorably to students of international law W Referring to the precedents upon which he be depends for the defence of his thesis he says Article six of the treaty of Washington lays down three rules by which arbitrators are to be bo governed The second rule declares A neutral government is bound not to permit or suffer suffer suffer suf suf- fer either belligerent to make use uso of ot its ports or waters as the basis of ot naval operations against the other or 01 for the purpose ot renewal or augmentation of military supplies or arms or the recruitment of men Great Britain made no scruple of asserting the terms of the tr treaty aty of ot Washington against this country Upon the first and only occasion when ur q-ur government was at war with a foreign foreign for tor- eign state April 26 1898 the day after war was declared between between between be be- tween the United States and Spain Spam Queen Victoria Issued a proclamation of neutrality insisting upon the observance of the treaty In this s proclamation o Great e Britain insists n that her ports and fl ata and waters at s shall not na be used s to abet the h military activity 1 of belligerent powers and we now request the enforcement of this rUI rule By the classification prepared b by the State Department Department published by Secretary Long July 1 1898 8 in his instructions to bl blockading vessels and cruisers' cruisers general order paragraph 19 horses are arc designated as absolutely contraband or ot war It If additional arguments were needed to prove that horses h have ve been considered contraband of ot war b by the United States Government the following instances in which they h have ve been so classed might be cited S In the treaty between the United States and Bolivia trea trea- tit and conventions y 1889 p. p 90 50 article 1 17 horses with eIth their furniture nl e are comprehended h as contraband i of warIn war In the following treaties a similar specification Is Isi made Treaty between United States and Brazil treaties and conventions conventions conventions conven conven- 1889 p. p ifS 15 article 16 Treaty between United States Slates and Colombia treaties and conventions p. p tL article 17 IV Treaty between United States and Peru trea tl ties l and conventions 1889 p. p 1191 article I 1 Treaty between Ut lied States Stales and Norway treaties and Conventions 1889 1860 p p. p IlL 1142 article 9 Mr 1 Van it must be admitted a clever cleyer centre shot in quoting the Long Lond- cirlat cir cir- lat o of Jul July 1898 How far that may mav be considered consid consid- 9 ered ed d in different circumstances as binding the GOY Gov- to treat animals useful for cavalry or ort t transport service as fIS contraband of war we are not prepared led to say sar On the whole we e hr are tre inclined to think that the circular could have had h-ad no bin binding in effect outside of the case which gave rise to its i is is- sm ance ce However Ho that may be it is a commonplace 0 of of diplomacy lcJ that horses and mules oxen and other cattle and supplies not necessarily of a military C character are arc not yet ge generally accepted as being c The fact that they are arc made so in ins s sOnic some me bf of our om conventions contentions with foreign nations does R pot not cut the smallest figure ure in the general tt h. h International law is not ma made e by the signing of fan agreement between two powers big or ii fc little In the cases cited by Mr 11 Van I tie the United States State and the other parties stipulated they would consider contraband in iii the event ent of ot w war wr r between them and horses and mules seem to toI I have tn ue been included But Hut that is not to say that thai f jJ le must be so rl regarded as a's against reason and anti ill The general practice of this count country y has Ims hasen Hg en to ignore trUffle in animals animals' between animals between its cit cit- z ns and the cit citizens ens or subjects of foreign nations J wu war the one with the other and to assume the l that such commerce ce is not a violation of J Jr r so long a as us both oth belligerents are c open to toV toga V ga e in i and as lon long as it is understood that if pre jre are captured by the foe of the nation jug them there is no redress in case they are to be contraband But the world ha has not opted d the the rule that horses horses' and mules are art to be an and except lathe the Lon Long circular this V government has lias not taken it upon itself tode to decide ec d nt they are contraband International law is iJ rte r-rte IY y treaties but hut not directly There is noth noth- V W mg g t to p prevent pen en a government go from making a treaty treat mId iti limiting itself 11 by the terms of the thc same but would not dL disturb the general rule which Is tat the things under discussion are not contraband at war |