Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T00:27:46.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Proposed International Prize Court and some of its Difficulties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Charles Noble Gregory
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The twelfth convention adopted by the Hague Conference of 1907 provides for the establishment of an International Prize Court to which appeals may be carried in certain instances from the prize courts of the captors. The proposal for such a convention was presented very early in the proceedings of the conference.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , July 1908 , pp. 458 - 475
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1908 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Weekly edition of the London Times, June 21, 1907, p. 2, supplement.

2 Weekly London Times, June 23, 1907, p. 405.

3 Same, July 12, 1907, p. 2, supplement.

4 Same, July 19, 1907, pp. 458–459; July 26, 1907, p. 468.

5 Same, August 2, 1907, p. 2, supplement.

6 Same, September 27, 1907, p. 613, and Green Bag, November, 1907, pp. 654–658.

7 Weekly London Times, August 30, 1907, p. 549. See also the excellent article by Prof. Amos S. Hershey concerning this court, giving full details of the nine articles of the convention. Green Bag for November, 1907, p. 652.

8 The Circassian, 2 Wall., 135; The Hiawatha (Prize Cases), 2 Black, 677; The Admiral, 3 Wall., 603; 7 Moore’s Dig. Inter. Law, 821; and Scott’s Cases Inter. Law, note, pp. 820 and 828.

9 176 United States, 361.

10 The court cites, in support of such doctrine, Yeaton v. Fry, 5 Cranch, 335; 3 L. Ed. 117; The Circassian, 2 Wall., 135, sub. nom., Hunter v. United States, 17 L. Ed., 796; The Frederick Molke, 1 C. Rob., 86; The Columbia, 1 C. Rob., 154; The Fortune, 2 C. Rob., 94; Wheaton Captures, 196. And as to approaching the port exposing to capture, The Admiral, 3 Wall., 603, sub nom., The Admiral v. United States, 18 L. Ed., 58; Prize Cases, 2 Black, 635, 677, sub. nom., Preciat v. United States, 17 L. Ed., 459, 479; Duer, Marine Ins., 661; The Cheshire, 3 Wall., 231, sub. nom., The Cheshire v. United States, 18 L. Ed., 175; The James Cook, Edw. Adm., 261; The Josephine, 3 Wall., 83, sub. nom., Queyrouze v. United States, 18 L. Ed., 65; The Spes, 5, C. Rob., 76; The Betsy, 1, C. Rob., 334; The Neptunus, 2, C. Rob., 110; The Little William, 1 Acton, 141, 161; Sperry v. Delaware Ins. Co., 2 Wash. C. C, 243; Fed. Cas. No, 13236.

11 7 Moore’s Dig., Inter. Law, p. 822, Mr. Hill, Acting Secretary State, to Attorney-General, February 13, 1901.

12 See Hall’s Inter. Law (ed. 1904), p. 708; Wheaton’s Inter. Law, 4th Eng. ed. (1904), notes by J. Beresford Atlay, p. 700, citing and relying on the case of The Adula, supra; 3 Phillimore’s Inter. Law, p. 501; 2 Halleck’s Inter. Law, pp. 224–225 and 230; International Law as Interpreted during Russo-Japanese war, Smith and Sibley, pp. 330 and 351; 2 Oppenheim Inter. Law, p. 405 (1905).

13 Smith and Sibley (supra), p. 331; Diplomatie de la Mer, tome 2, p. 307.

14 Inter . Law, pp. 108–109; Hall–s Inter. Law, p. 698; Smith and Sibley, p. 358.

15 Smith and Sibley, p. 358.

16 Same, p. 363; see also 2 Oppenheim Inter. Law, p. 405.

17 Same, pp. 365–366; citing expressly the instructions of the French Government, 1870, and Ortolan and Hautefeuille.

18 Hall’s Inter. Law, 5th ed, (1904), pp. 718’725.

19 Hall’s Inter. Law, 5th ed., p. 724, citing Admiralty Manual of Prize Law (Holland, p. 2) for the English rule. See also Calvo, Le Droit International, tome 5 (§ 2972 to § 2981), where he gives the history of the rule and collects the opinion of writers of Europe and America.

20 Taylor’s Inter. Law, S. 677, citing Hautefeuille Droits des Nations Neutres, Tit. IX, ch. 1, § 1. Ortolan Diplomatic de La Mer 11, Ch. IX; Calvo, § 2567.

21 Inter. Law, 5th ed., p. 704.

22 Hall’s Inter. Law, 5th ed., p. 698.

23 2 Wallace, 151.

24 Smith and Sibley, p. 333.

25 Id., Inter. Law, Russo-Japanese War, p . 321, quoting London Times December 9, 1904.

26 Smith and Sibley, p. 322.

27 Id., p. 322 and note 1.

28 Smith and Sibley, p. 322.

29 War and Diplomacy in the Far East, p. 58.

30 Page 704.

31 Peters, p. 1.

32 100 United States, 239.

33 102 United States, 14.

34 107 United States, 20.

35 Sup. Ct. R., 914.

36 23 Sup. Ct. R., 811.

37 Inter. Law, S. 676.

38 Pages 357–358.

39 Citing “ Per Dr. Stephen Lushington in the Leucade ” (1885), 2 Spinks, 228, 238.

40 Sibley, Smith, p. 322, citing the London Times, January 24, 1905.Google Scholar

41 Smith and Sibley, p. 322.

42 Oppenheim Inter. Law, p. 412, citing Japanese Prize Law, article 30.

43 The Maria, 1, C. Robinson, 340; Scott’s Cases, 858.

44 Columbia Law Rev., February, 1908, p. 113; Amer. Pol. Sc. Quart., February, 1908, p. 209; Quarterly Rev., January, 1908, p. 240; Edinburgh Rev., January, 1908, p. 246; Green Bag, November, 1907, p. 655, where Prof. Hershey sets out the remarks of M. Renault in presenting the report. See also Editorial, London Times, September 30, 1907.

45 Problems of Inter. Practice and Diplomacy, by Sir T. Barclay, p. 105.

46 Same, p. 105.

47 Dr. Paul S. Reinsch, Pol. So. Rev., February, 1908, p. 218.

48 The Hon. Henry Billings Brown, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (retired), has recently expressed a weighty doubt as to the constitutionality of any convention giving an appeal from the Supreme Court of the United States, since the Constitution vests the judicial power of the United States “ in the Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”