Both England and France protested against the principle thus an nounced. In defending it the Secretary of State, Jefferson, stated what still remains the chief reason why neutral governments refuse to attempt to suppress trade in contraband: "It would be hard in principle and impossible in practice." That a contract for the carriage of contraband goods is enforceable was held in Northern Pacific Railway v. American Trading Co. (1904), 195 U. S. 439, 465. One of the best statements of the duty of a neutral state as to trade in contraband is Secretary Lansing's note of August 12, 1915, in reply to the protest of Austria-Hungary of June 29, 1915. Other discussions of particular value may be found in J. W. Garner, "Some True and False Conceptions Regarding the Duty of Neutrals in Respect to the Sale and Exportation of Arms and Munitions to Belligerents," Proceedings of Amer. Soc. Int. Law, 1916, 18; W. C. Morey, "The Sale of Munitions of War," Am. Jour. Int. Law, X, 467; C. N. Gregory, "Neutrality and the Sale of Arms," Ib. X, 543; Sir William Vernon Harcourt, Letters of Historicus (defending the right of British citizens to sell arms to the Confederate States); Pyke, The Law of Contraband of War, ch. vi; Garner, II, ch. xxxv; Hyde, II, 748; Moore, Digest, VII, 748. As to the duty of a neutral state to prevent acts of war within its jurisdiction see The General Armstrong, Moore, Int. Arb. II, 1071. If a neutral is unable or unwilling to enforce its neutrality, a belligerent may be justified in resorting to self-help in order to avert serious injury. Japan appealed to this principle in defense of her conduct in attacking the Russian destroyer Ryeshitelni while lying in the neutral port of Chefoo, China. Whether the facts were such as to sustain the Japanese contention is undetermined. For opposing views see Hershey, International Law and Diplomacy of the RussoJapanese War, 260, and Takahashi, 437. As to whether citizens of neutral states may make loans in support of an insurrection against the government of a friendly state, see De Wütz v. Hendricks (1824), 9 Moore, C. P., 586, and Thompson v. Barclay (1828), 6 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 93 and (1831), 9 L. J. (O. S.) Ch. 215; Garner, II, 408; Cobbett, Cases and Opinions, II, 365; Hyde, II, 755; Moore, Digest, VII, 976. As to offenses under the British Foreign Enlistment Act, see The Gauntlet (1872), L. R. 4 P. C. 184; The Salvador (1870), L. R. 3 P. C. 218; The International (1871), L. R. 3 A. & E. 321; Regina v. Sandoval (1887), 56 L. T. 526; and Regina v. Jameson (1896), L. R. [1896] 2 Q. B. 425. For the construction of the American Neutrality Act, see United States v. Quincy (1832), 6 Peters, 445; Wiborg v. United States (1896), 163 U. S. 632; United States v. Trumbull (1891), 48 Fed. 99; S. C. (1893), 56 Fed. 505. The law as to neutral duties has been largely codified by Convention V respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land, and Convention XIII concerning the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War, both adopted at The Hague Conference of 1907. See Scott, The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907, 133, 209. How far these conventions are binding is in dispute. On the whole subject of neutral duties see Hall, The Rights and Duties of Neutrals; Kleen, Lois et Usages de la Neutralitè; Fenwick, The Neutrality Laws of the United States; Cobbett, Cases and Opinions, II, 302; Hyde, II, 692; Moore, Digest, VII, ch. xxviii. For discussions suggested by the circumstances peculiar to particular wars see for the Boer war, Campbell, Neutral Rights and Obligations in the AngloBoer War; for the Russo-Japanese War, Ariga, La Guerre Russo-Jap onaise au Point de Vue Continental; Hershey, International Law and Diplomacy of the Russo-Japanese War; Lawrence, War and Neutrality in the Far East; Smith and Sibley, International Law as Interpreted During the Russo-Japanese War; Takahashi, International Law as Applied to the Russo-Japanese War; for the Great War, Alvarez, La Grand Guerre et la Neutralitè du Chili; Garner, International Law and the World War; Mérignhac and Lémonon, Le Droit des Gens et la Guerre de 1914-1918; Naval War College, International Law Documents, 1916, 1917, 1918; Scott, Survey of International Relations between the United States and Germany, August, 1914—April 6, 1917. TABLE OF CASES In this table of cases are included (1) the principal cases of which the body of the collection is composed; (2) all the cases which are described or from which extracts are given in the principal cases; (3) all the cases cited in the editor's notes. The names of the principal cases and the pages of this volume on which they may be found are printed in italics. A Abdallah v. Rickards, 4 T. L. R. 622: 137. Abd-ul-Messih v. Farra, 13 A. C. 431: 65, 128, 137. Abouloff v. Oppenheimer, 10 Q. B. D. 295: 21. Achaia (No. 2), The, 1 Br. & Col. P. C. 635: 627. Actaeon, The, 2 Dodson, 48: 630. Adela, The, 6 Wallace, 266: 659, 786, 787. Adelaide, The, 2 C. Robinson, 111n: 665. Admiral, The, 3 Wallace, 603: 659. Adonis, The, 5 C. Robinson, 256: 660. Adula, The, 176 U. S. 361: 575, 659, 661, 665, 671. Advocate-General v. Ranee Surnomoye Dossee, 2 Moore, P. C. (N. S.), 22: 306. Aeolus, The, 3 Wheaton, 392: 660. Africa, The, Burrell, 228: 429, 776. Agency of American Car & Alciator v. Smith, 3 Campbell, 245: 518. Alcinous v. Nigreu, 4 E. & B. 217: 496, 511, 518. Aldworth, The, 31 T. L. R. 36: 576. Alexander v. Pfau, Transvaal L. R. [1902] T. S. 155: 135. Alexander, The, 4 C. Robinson, 93: 660. Alexander, The, 60 Fed. 914: 171. Alexander, The, 2 Hurst & Bray, 86: 604. Alleganean, The, Moore, Int. Arb., IV, 4332: 156. Altman v. United States, 224 U. S. 583: 345. Alvarez Y Sanchez V. United States, 216 U. S. 167: 104, 322, 325. Alwina, The, L. R. [1916] P. 131: 701. Ambrose Light, The, 25 Fed., 408: 73, 75. Amelia, The, 4 Philadelphia, 417: 604. American, The, Burrell, 210: 637. American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 213 U. S. 347: 116. American Insurance Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511: 297, 302, 313. Amistad, The, 15 Peters, 518: 345. Amsinck's Estate, In re, 169 N. Y. Supp. 336: 398. Amy Warwick, The, 2 Black, 635: 32. Amy Warwick, The, 2 Sprague, 123: 74. Amy Warwick, The, 2 Sprague, 150: 601. Anastassios Koroneos, The, 1 Br. Anderson v. The Edam, 13 Fed. 135: 20. Andromeda, The, 2 Wallace, 481: 595, 671. Anglo-Mexican, The, L. R. [1916] P. 112: 475. Anglo-Mexican, The, L. R. [1918] A. C. 422: 418. Ann, The, 1 Dodson, 221: 430. Ann, The, 1 Gallison, 62: 153. Anichab, The L. R. [1922] 1 A. C. 235: 627. Anna, The, 5 C. Robinson, 373: 148, 153. Annaberg, The, 2 Br. & Col. P. C. 241: 430. Anna Catharina, The, 4 C. Robinson, 107: 637. Anna Christiana, The, H. & M. 161: 629. Anna Maria, The, 2 Wheaton, 327: 575. Annapolis, The, 30 L. J. P. & M., 201: 32. Anne, The, 3 Wheaton, 435: 231, 334, 775. Annette, The, L. R. [1919] P. 105: 56. Ann Green, The Ship, 1 Gallison, 274: 137, 431. Antares, The, 1 Br. & Col. P. C. 261: 136, 627. Antelope, The, 10 Wheaton, 66: 18, 50, 575. Anthippi, The, Gazzetta Ufficiale, June 2, 1917: 578. Antoine v. Morshead, 6 Taunton, 237: 496. Antonia Johanna, The, 1 Wheaton, 159: 427, 429, 430, 601, 629, 630. Aphrodite, The, 2 Hurst & Bray, 240: 575. Apollo, The, 4 C. Robinson, 158: 680. Apollon, The, 9 Wheaton, 362: 148, 171. Appam, The Steamship, 243 U. S. 124: 779. Apthorpe V. Peter Shoenhofen Brewing Co., 80 L. T. 395: 443. Argun, The, Takahashi, 573: 386. Argus, The, Moore, Int. Arb., IV, 4344: 156. Ariadne, The, 2 Wheaton, 143: 575. Ariel, The, 11 Moore, P. C. 119: 595, 601.. Arkansas v. Tennessee, 246 U. S. 158: 143. Armitz Brown v. United States, 8 Cranch. 110: 383, 522. Arthur, The, 1 Dodson, 423: 669, 670. Aryol, The, Takahashi, 620: 605. Astiazaran v. Santa Rita Land and Mining Co., 148 U. S. 80: 324. Asturian, The, L. R. [1916] P. 150: 457. Atalanta, The, 6 C. Robinson, 440: 640. Atlantic, The Schooner, 37 Ct. Cl. 17; 39 Ct. Cl. 193: 680. Attorney-General for Canada v. Cain, L. R. [1906] A. C. 542: 135. Attualita, The, 238 Fed. 909: 259. Aurora, The, 8 Cranch, 203: 575. Australia, The, 2 Hurst & Bray, 373: 578. Avery v. Bowden, 25 L. J. Q. B. 49: 496. Axel Johnson, The, L. R. [1917] P. 234: 764. Axel Johnson, The, L. R. [1921] 1 A. C. 473: 769. B Baer Brothers Mercantile Co. v. Denver & Rio Grande Ry., 233 U. S. 479: 770. Baigorry, The, 2 Wallace, 474: 575. Baiz, In re, 135 U. S. 403: 231, 328. Baldy v. Hunter, 171 U. S. 388: 74, 83. Baltic, The, 1 Acton, 25: 692. Baltica, The, 11 Moore, P. C. 141: 429, 430, 582, 595. Balto, The, L. R. [1917] P. 79: 749, 769. Bangor, The, L. R. [1916] P. 181: 155, 786, 787. Barbuit's Case, Talbot, 281: 29, 31, 221, 326. Barenfels, The, 1 Br. & Col. P. C. 122: 31, 344. Baring v. Royal Exchange Assurance Co., 5 East, 99: 611. Barker v. Harvey, 181 U. S. 481: 324. Barnett v. Barnett, 9 New Mexico, 205: 320. Baron Stjernblad, The, L. R. [1918] A. C. 173: 746. Barrick v. Buba, 2 C. B. (N. S.), 563: 520. Bartram v. Robertson, 122 U. S. 116: 346. Bas v. Tingy, 4 Dallas, 37: 366, 388. Battle, The, 6 Wallace, 498: 601. Bawean, The, L. R. [1918] P. 58: 591, 595. Bawtry, The, Takahashi, 659: 700. Behring Sea Arbitration, Moore, Bell v. Kennedy, L. R. 1 H. L. (Scotch), 307: 137. Bellas, The, 1 Br. & Col. P. C. 95: 532. Bellefontaine Improvement Co. v. Niedringhaus, 181 Ill. 426: 148. Belli, Ex parte, South African L. R. [1914] C. P. D. Part I, 742: 389. Benito Estenger, The, 176 U. S. 568: 583. Benson v. McMahon, 127 U. S. 457: 357. Berens v. Rucker, 1 W. Bl. 313: 637. Berlin, The, L. R. [1914] P. 265: 604. Bermuda, The, 3 Wallace, 514: 659, 680, 697, 700, 767. Bernhard v. Creene, 3 Sawyer, 230: 170. Bernon, The, 1 C. Robinson, 102: 430, 474, 595. Betsey, The, 1 C. Robinson, 93: 644, 651. Betsey, The, 1 C. Robinson, 332: 664. Betsey, The Brig, 39 Ct. Cl. 452: 642, 701. Betsey, The Brig, 49 Ct. Cl. 125: 642. Betsey and Polly, The Schooner, 38 Ct. Cl. 30: 700. Bird, The Schooner, 38 Ct. Cl. 228: 680. Birge-Forbes Co. v. Heye, 251 U. S. 317: 519. Blain, Ex parte, 12 Ch. Div. 522: 119. Blankard v. Galdy, 2 Salkeld, 411: 319. Blonde, The, L. R. [1922] 1 A. C. 312: 532. Boedes Lust, The, 5 C. Robinson, 233: 374, 496. Bolletta, The, Edwards, 171: 191, 305. Bolmer v. Edsall, 90 N. J. Eq. 299: 153, |