SOME QUESTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ARISING FROM THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR. VII. Questions Relating to Contraband of War. BY AMOS S. HERSHEY, Associate Professor of European History and Politics, Indiana University. IN the last issue of THE GHEEN BAG it was stated that the most important questions arising from the seizure of neutral vessels by Russian crusiers—viz., those connected with the great subject of contraband— would be reserved for a separate discussion in our next paper. This pledge ve shall now attempt to fulfil. The Russo-Japanese war promises to mark an important epoch in the history of neutral rights and obligations, more par ticularly in definitely establishing the rights of neutral commerce in respect to articles ancipitis usus (double or dual use), and in ex tending the duties of neutral Governments in respect to the use of neutral ports by bel ligerent armed vessels.1 On February 10, 1904, Japan published the following list of contraband articles which are divided into two classes corres ponding to the English and American divi sion into absolute and conditional contra band:—(i.) "Military weapons, amnunition, explosives, and materials including lead, salt petre, sulphur, etc., and machinery for mak ing them, uniforms, naval and military, mili tary accoutrements, armour-plated machin ery and materials for construction or equip ment of ships of war, and all other goods which, though not coming under this list, are intended solely for use in war. Abovementioned articles tc'/W be regarded as contra band of war -K'J-.cn passing through or destined for enemas army, navy or territory. (2.) Pro'This subject will be discussed in the next issue of THE GREEN BAG.
visions, drinks, horses, harness, fodder, vehi cles, coal, timber, coins, gold and silver bul lion, and materials for construction of tele graphs, telephones and railways. Abovementioned articles îi'îïï be regarded as contra band of war when, destined for enemy's army or navy, or in such cases where, being goods ar riving at enemy's territory, there is reason to believe they are intended for use of enemy's army or navy." a It will be seen from the above list that Japan recognizes the English and American doctrine of Conditional and Occasional Contraband, so vigorously and (so it seems 'For this list which, so far as I am aware, has not been reprinted by any American newspaper, see London Times (weekly ed.) for February 26. 1904. Cf. list published in Appendix VII. of Takahashi's Cases on International Law During the China-Japanese War. See also lists found in the Manual of Naval Prize Law (p. 20). drawn up by Professor Holland of Oxford in 1888 for the use of the British Admiralty, and Art. 19 of the Instructions to Blockading Vessels and Cruisers, is sued by the United States Government on June 20, 1898. (See Appendix III. in Snow's Inter national Law. The list given in the Instructions has also been incorporated into Stockton's .Verrai War Code.) These lists, which are those of the leading modern maritime nations who have the power to enforce their decrees, may be consid ered as the most authoritative. One looks in vain for agreement or consistency in treaties and amongst the authorities or publicists; but it is certainly fortunate that the leading maritime na tions of the world (excepting France and Ger many, perhaps), are in substantial agreement in regard to the question as to what articles may be dealt with as contraband of war. France can scarcely be cited any longer as favoring the re striction of contraband to arms and ammunition since her attempt to make rice absolute contra band in 1885. In 1870 Germany remonstrated strongly with the English Government for per mitting the export of coal to France.
