1

and along their coasts; (2) that enemy goods on neutral vessels, contraband excepted, should not be seized by belligerents; (3) that, with regard to contraband, Articles 10 and 11 of the Treaty of 1766 between Russia and Great Britain should be applied in all cases; (4) that a port should only be considered blockaded if the blockading belligerent had stationed vessels there, so as to create an obvious danger for neutral vessels entering the port; (5) that these principles should be applied in the proceedings and judgments on the legality of prizes. In July 1780 Russia 1 entered into a treaty with Denmark, and in August 1780 with Sweden, for the purpose of enforcing those principles by equipping a number of men-of-war. Thus the Armed Neutrality' made its appearance. In 1781 the Netherlands, Prussia, and Austria, in 1782 Portugal, and in 1783 the Two Sicilies joined the league. France, Spain, and the United States of America accepted its principles without formally joining. The war between England, the United States, France, and Spain was terminated in 1783, and the war between England and the Netherlands in 1784; but in the treaties of peace the principles of the 'Armed Neutrality' were not mentioned. This league had no direct practical consequences, since England retained her former standpoint. Moreover, some of the States that had joined it acted contrary to some of its principles when they themselves went to warSweden, for example, during her war with Russia in 1788-1790, and France and Russia in 1793-and some of them concluded treaties in which were stipulations at variance with those principles. Nevertheless, the First Armed Neutrality has proved of great importance, because its principles furnished the basis of the Declaration of Paris of 1856.

1 Martens, R., iii. pp. 189, 198.

2 See Albrecht in Z.V., vi. (1912), pp. 436-449.

French

the

Armed

§ 290. The wars of the French Revolution and the The Napoleonic Wars showed that the time was not yet ripe Revolu for the progress1aimed at by the First Armed Neutrality. tion and Russia, the very same Power which had initiated the Second Armed Neutrality in 1780 under the Empress NeuCatharine II. (1762-1796), joined Great Britain in 1793 trality. in order to interdict all neutral navigation into ports of France, with the intention of subduing France by famine. Russia and England justified their attitude by the exceptional character of their war against France, which had proved to be the enemy of the security of all other nations. The French Convention answered with an order to the French fleet to capture all neutral ships carrying provisions to enemy ports, or carrying enemy goods.

But although Russia had herself acted in defiance of the principles of the First Armed Neutrality, she called a Second Armed Neutrality into existence in 1800, during the reign of the Emperor Paul. The Second Armed Neutrality was caused by the refusal of England to concede immunity from visit and search to neutral merchantmen under convoy.2 Sweden was the first to claim in 1653, during war between Holland and Great Britain, that the belligerents should not visit and search Swedish merchantmen under convoy of Swedish men-of-war, provided that a declaration was made by the men-of-war that the merchantmen had no contraband on board. Other States later raised the same claim, and many treaties were concluded which stipulated the immunity from visit and search of neutral merchantmen under convoy. But Great Britain refused to recognise the principle, and when, in July 1800, a British squadron captured a Danish man-of-war and her convoy of several merchantmen for having resisted

1 See Reddie, Researches, i. pp. * See below, § 417. 418-468, ii. pp. 1-232.

visit and search, Russia invited Sweden, Denmark, and Prussia to renew the Armed Neutrality,' and to add to its principles the further principle, that belligerents should not have a right of visit and search in case the commanding officer of the man-of-war, under whose convoy neutral merchantmen were sailing, should declare that the convoyed vessels did not carry contraband of war. In December 1800 Russia concluded treaties with Sweden, Denmark, and Prussia consecutively, by which the 'Second Armed Neutrality' became a fact.1 But it lasted only a year on account of the assassination of the Emperor Paul of Russia on March 23, and the defeat of the Danish fleet by Nelson on April 2, 1801, in the battle of Copenhagen. Nevertheless, the Second Armed Neutrality likewise proved of importance, for it led to a compromise in the 'Maritime Convention' concluded between England and Russia under the Emperor Alexander I, on June 17, 1801, at St. Petersburg, 2 to which Denmark and Sweden acceded on October 23, 1801. By Article 3 of this treaty, England recognised, as far as Russia was concerned, the rules that neutral vessels might navigate from port to port, and on the coasts, of belligerents, and that blockades must be effective. But in the same article England forced Russia to recognise the rule that enemy goods on neutral vessels might be seized, and did not recognise the immunity of neutral vessels under convoy from visit and search, although, by Article 4, she conceded that the right should in that case be exercised only by men-of-war, and not by privateers.

1 Martens, R., vii. pp. 127-202. See also Martens, Causes célèbres, iv. pp. 219-302.

* Martens, R., vii. p. 260, and Krauel in Festschrift der Berliner Juristenfakultät für Heinrich Brunner (1914), pp. 69-107. Krauel (op. cit.,

p. 97) denies that the stipulations of the Maritime Convention' contained a compromise, because they did not concern all maritime Powers; but surely they did constitute a compromise between England on the one hand, and, on the other, Russia, Denmark, and Sweden.

But this compromise did not last long. When, in November 1807, war broke out between Russia and England, Russia, in her declaration of war,1 annulled the Maritime Convention of 1801, proclaimed anew the principles of the First Armed Neutrality, and asserted that she would never again drop them. Great Britain, in her counter-declaration,2 proclaimed her return to those principles against which the First and the Second Armed Neutralities were directed, and she was able to point out that no Power had applied these principles more severely than had Russia under the Empress Catharine II. after she had initiated the First Armed Neutrality.

Thus all progress made by the Maritime Convention of 1801 fell to the ground. Times were not favourable to any progress. After Napoleon's Berlin Decrees in 1806, ordering the boycott of all English goods, England declared all French ports, and all the ports of the allies of France, blockaded, and ordered her fleet to capture all ships destined to them. Russia, after having solemnly asserted in her declaration of war against England in 1807 that she would never again drop the principles of the First Armed Neutrality, by Article 2 of an ukase 3 published on August 1, 1809, violated one of the most important of these principles, by ordering neutral vessels carrying enemy (English) goods to be stopped, and the enemy goods seized, together with the vessels themselves if more than half their cargoes consisted of enemy goods.

§ 291. The development of the rules of neutrality Neuduring the nineteenth century was due to four trality

factors.

during

the Nine

teenth

(1) The most prominent and influential factor was Century. the attitude of the United States of America towards

1 Martens, R., viii. p. 706. Martens, R., viii. p. 710.

'Martens, N.R., i. p. 484.

neutrality from 1793 to 1818. When England in 1793 joined the war which had broken out in 1792 between the so-called First Coalition and France, Genêt, the French diplomatic envoy accredited to the United States, granted letters of marque to American merchantmen manned by American citizens in American ports. These privateers were destined to cruise against English vessels, and French Prize Courts were set up by the French minister in connection with French consulates in American ports. On the complaint of Great Britain, the Government of the United States ordered these privateers to be disarmed and the French Prize Courts to be closed down.1 As the trial of Gideon Henfield,2 who was acquitted, proved that the Municipal Law of the United States did not prohibit the enlistment of American citizens in the service of a foreign belligerent, Congress in 1794 passed an Act temporarily forbidding American citizens from accepting letters of marque from a foreign belligerent or enlisting in the army or navy of a foreign State, and forbidding the fitting out and arming of vessels intended as privateers for foreign belligerents. Other Acts were passed from time to time. Finally, on April 20, 1818, Congress passed a Foreign Enlistment Act, which contained provisions intended to be permanent, and was the basis of the British Foreign Enlistment Act of 1819. Thus the United States initiated the present practice, according to which it is the duty of neutrals to prevent the fitting out and arming on their territory of cruisers for belligerents, to prevent enlistment on their territory for belligerents, and the like.

(2) Of great importance became the permanent neutralisation of Switzerland and Belgium. These States naturally adopted, and retained, throughout every war during that century an exemplary attitude

1 See Wharton, iii. §§ 395-396.

2 See Taylor, § 609.