Power shall have stationed its ships sufficiently near to render access thereto clearly dangerous.

(7) The vessels of a neutral Power may not be arrested except for just cause and self-evident acts. They are adjudicated without delay, and the procedure shall be uniform, prompt, and legal.

Denmark and Sweden were forced to accede to this convention, which laid down, among other things, the principles to be followed in the searching of merchant ships. The former of these States did so by the Treaty of Moscow of October 23, 1801; the latter by the Convention of St. Petersburg dated March 18/30, 1802.

In this way, by making concessions, which were, on the whole, rather slight, the London Cabinet secured recognition of two principles which it considered of great importance, namely, that the flag does not cover the goods and that vessels under convoy may be searched.

PHILLIMORE: Commentaries upon International Law. Third edition, London, 1885.

Sir Robert Phillimore, British publicist born in 1810, died in 1885. His Authoritative Commentaries upon International Law appeared in four volumes from 1854-1861, third edition, 1879-1885. By reason of its extent and careful treatment this work is regarded as the leading English treatise. The author is well known as a highly respected admiralty judge.

Volume III, page 335. CLXXXVI. The year 1780 opens a new chapter in the history of the intercourse of nations,

"Longa est injuria, longae

"Ambages, sed summa sequar fastigia rerum.”1

In 1780, an accident brought into the field an unexpected and remarkable champion of the new doctrine-a then semi-barbarous Power of gigantic dimensions, touching at one extremity the farthest bounds of

14En. i, 341-2.

civilization, but gradually developing at the other extremity forces and resources in the European hemisphere which made her opinion weigh heavily in the scale into which it was thrown. The vast Empire of Russia was governed at this time by Catharine II. Under her auspices arose the first of the associations known in history by the name of the two armed neutralities.

3

It is rather the province of the historian than of the jurist to trace the origin and lay bare the causes of this event. But it must be observed that the memoir of Count Goertz,' the diary of Lord Malmesbury, the records of De Flassan2 and of Von Dohm, establish, beyond the possibility of a reasonable doubt, three things respecting it. First, that it was the result of a cabinet intrigue (which meant nothing less than the welfare of nations), availing itself of an accident. Secondly, that originally the Empress had fully adopted and meant to carry into effect the principles of international law contended for by England. Thirdly, that to the last she never clearly understood what she had done, or why she had given offense to Great Britain. Count Panin was Chancellor of the Empire; Prince Potemkin the reigning favorite of the Empress. England, in her war with her colonies, France, and Spain, sought aid in an alliance with Russia. Potemkin favored, Panin opposed it. The seizure of two Russian ships by Spain at this time incensed the Empress: Potemkin availed himself of her wrath to induce her to order the equipment of a fleet, destined to cooperate with England against Spain, if redress were denied. Panin discovered both that the fleet was ordered, and its destination. He saw in these facts, however, the opportunity

1Mémoire sur la Neutralité armée, p. 104.

2Hist. Gén. et Raisonnée de la Dipl. Française, vol. vii, p. 266. 3Denkwürdigkeiten meiner Zeit, vol. ii, p. 100.

"L'Impératrice Marie-Thérèse, s'extasiant sur le rare bonheur de Catherine, tint au Baron de Breteuil un discours qui confirme ce que rapporte le Baron de Goertz. 'Il n'y a pas,' lui dit-elle, à l'occasion de la neutralité armée, 'il n'y a pas jusqu'à ses vues les plus mal combinées, qui ne tournent à son profit et à sa gloire; car vous savez sans doute que la déclaration qu'elle vient de faire pour sa neutralité maritime, avait d'abord été arrêtée dans les termes les plus favorables à l'Angleterre. Cet ouvrage avait été fait par la seule influence de M. le Prince Potemkin, et à l'insu de M. le Comte de Panin; et cette déclaration, inspirée par l'Angleterre, était au moment de paraître, lorsque M. de Panin, qui en a été instruit, a trouvé moyen de la faire entièrement changer, et de la tourner absolument en votre faveur.'"-De Flassan, vol. vii, p. 272, note (1).

"Professor Wurm (the author of many tracts on maritime law) tells us that Catherine said to Lord Malmesbury (18th December, 1783), "Mais quel mal vous fait cette neutralité armée, ou plutôt, nullité armée?"-Die Politik der Seemächte, p. 314. (Hamburg, 1855.)

of crushing his rival, and he seized it with great adroitness. He applauded the determination of the Empress, but artfully suggested that an occasion now presented itself to her of appearing in the magnificent character of the lawgiver of the seas, and the protectress of neutrals, and at the same time of avenging the injury to herself. The flattery was so specious and so well applied, that the Empress placed herself in the hands of her wily and successful courtier. Panin drew up a manifesto of neutral rights, and the Empress communicated it to France, Spain, and England.

Seldom has a more important event grown from a more despicable origin. It is not, perhaps, with any unnatural reluctance, that we hear in these days that Europe acquired for the first time, towards the end of the last century, an acquaintance with the true doctrines of international justice from a quarrel between the unprincipled courtiers of a vain, profligate woman, whom the inscrutable decrees of Providence had permitted to be the absolute sovereign of a half-civilized empire. CLXXXVII. The propositions of the new Russian International Code were as follows:1

1. That neutral ships might freely trade from port to port, and upon the coasts of nations at war.

2. That the property of the subjects of belligerent Powers should be free on board neutral ships, excepting goods that were contraband.

3. That with regard to contraband goods, the Empress bound herself by what was contained in the Articles X and XI2 of her Treaty with Great Britain, extending these obligations to all belligerent Powers.

4. That to determine what characterizes a blockaded port, this term shall be confined to places where there is an evident danger in entering, from the arrangements of the Power which is attacking, with vessels. stationary and sufficiently close.

5. That these principles shall serve for a rule in the proceedings and judgments on the legality of prizes.

CLXXXVIII. France, Spain, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, the two latter in direct violation of the faith of treaties, gave in their adherence

1De Martens, Recueil, vol. iii, p. 158. Actes relatifs à la Neutralité armée. "L'Article XI du Traité de 1766 désigne les seuls objets suivans comme étant de contrebande: 'Les canons, mortiers, armes à feu, pistolets, bombes, grenades, boulets, balles, fusils, pierres à feu, mêches, poudre, salpêtre, soufre, cuirasses, piques, épées, ceinturons, poches à cartouches, selles et brides, audelà de ce qui est nécessaire pour la provision du vaisseau.'"-De Flassan, vol. vii, p. 273 (note 1).

to Russia. At a later period, Prussia and the Emperor of Germany joined the league. Still later, Portugal and the Two Sicilies acceded to the Russian confederacy.

CLXXXIX. As to France, we have seen what were the provisions of her treaty seven months before she joined the Russian League.

As to Spain, in the year 1780, one month before her accession, she had issued the severest ordinances against neutrals, ordering the seizure of vessels which carried enemies' goods or provisions.1

To Denmark and Sweden, Great Britain replied by a vain appeal to the faith of treaties. Yet how did the matter stand between England and Denmark?2

In 1670, a solemn treaty of commerce was concluded between England and Denmark, the third articles of which contained the definition of contraband; but in which, however, the words, "other necessaries for the use of war," were thought' too indefinite. To remedy this, a convention was made to put the matter out of doubt, by an article to be substituted in the place of the other; by which contraband was declared to include the very subjects so often disputed,-ship-timber, tar, pitch, rosin, sheet-copper, hemp, sails, and cordage. This was signed on the 4th July, 1780. On the 8th was signed that declaration of Armed Neutrality, which had long been concerting between its original members, and in which the King of Denmark declares that he understands nothing under contraband, except the articles specified in the third article of the treaty of 1670.

CXC. To Russia, Great Britain made answer as to the general law, that "His Majesty hath acted towards friendly and neutral Powers according to their own procedure respecting Great Britain, and conformably to the clearest principles generally acknowledged as the law of nations, being the only law between Powers where no treaties subsist, and agreeably to the tenor of his different engagements with other Powers, whose engagements have altered this primitive law, by mutual stipulations proportioned to the will and convenience of the contracting parties." She added, "that precise orders had been given respecting the flag and commerce of Russia, according to the laws of nations and the tenor of our treaty of commerce; that it was to be presumed that no irregularity would happen, but that otherwise redress would be afforded

1 De Martens, vol. iv. p. 268. Ward. p. 163.

Ward, p. 155, whose concise and clear statement I have transplanted into my text.

by our Courts of Admiralty, judging according to the laws of nations, in so equitable a manner, that Her Imperial Majesty shall be perfectly satisfied, and acknowledge a like spirit of justice which she herself possesses.

CXCI. But the most remarkable fact connected with the armed neutrality of 1780 remains to be stated, namely, that every one of the Powers composing this hallowed league for the maintenance of international justice upon the principles of the Russian edict, departed from the obligation which they had contracted as neutrals as soon as they became belligerents, and returned without shame or hesitation to the practice of the ancient law.

In the meantime it must be borne in mind that, though this Russian Convention professed to contain an exposition of the principles of universal justice, it took care to provide that its stipulations should be binding only during the present war; it held out, indeed, the prospect of future arrangements in time of peace, and Sweden was particularly anxious to propose a congress in which the question should be finally settled. We shall see what course she pursued a few years afterwards. CXCII. The dispute between Great Britain and the Russian League was not arranged when the war was ended. But the Treaty of Versailles, 1783, between Great Britain, France, and Spain, confirmed the Treaty of Utrecht, and therefore between these contracting Powers established the principle of "free ships free goods."

The treaty between Prussia and the United States of North America, 1785, stipulates that enemies' goods shall be free on board friends' ships, but not that friends' goods shall be seizable on board enemies' ships.2 France and Holland renewed in 1785 the articles of the Treaty of Utrecht, which stipulated that free ships make free goods, and enemies' ships enemies' goods. In the same year, Austria and Russia* renewed the provisions of the Armed Neutrality on this subject.

In the great commercial treaty of 26th September, 1786, negotiated by Mr. Eden, under the auspices of Mr. Pitt, with France, Great Britain. engaged that "free ships should make free goods, and enemies' ships enemies' goods." 5

In the debate which took place in Parliament upon the preliminaries

1 Annual Register. 1780, p. 115.

2De Martens, vol. iv, p. 42.

3Ibid. 68.

4Ibid. 76.

5 Articles XX, XXIX. Chalmers, vol. i, pp. 530-536.