instructions or warnings with the purpose of prejudicn.

there

This seems to go too far, since suppression of the information usually given of the movement of shipping, however intended to deny as sistance to one belligerent, might operate as an assistance to the other.

Westlake, vol. 2, pp. 253, 254.

In 1898 "the cables from neutral points during the Spanish American War ** * did much in furnishing information which the scouting vessels were unable to obtain." We are told this on American authority |U. S. Naval War College, International Law Situations, 1904, p. 99], and it shows conclusively that neutral powers would do well to exercise the discretion given them by the Second Hague Conference in favor of such regulation and restriction as proves to be possible. The prevention of open and unrestricted use of telegraphic or wireless communication would surely be feasible though it would probably prove a hopeless task to stop the sending of warlike information in the guise of apparently harmless messages.

Lawrence, p. 647.

Since, therefore, everything is left to the discretion of the neutral concerned he will have to take the merits and needs of every case into consideration, and act accordingly. But so much is certain that a belligerent may not categorically request neutrals to forbid or restrict such employment of their telegraph wires and the like on the part of his adversary.

Oppenheim, vol. 2, p. 435.

Article 8. Hague Convention V. 1907, is substantially identical with section 235, Austro-Hungarian Manual, 1913.

Contra to some extent.

On May 2, 1898, the consul of the United States at Barbados, British West Indies, telegraphed that the governor of the colony, under instructions from the home Government, controlled the cable office and would not permit messages to be sent out relative to the movements of war ships, whether Spanish or American.

Moore's Digest, vol. vii. p. 941; Mr. Adee. Sesond Assistant Secretary of State, to Secretary of Navy, May 3, 1898.

RESTRICTIONS OR PROHIBITIONS ENFORCED BY NEUTRAL AS TO EXPORT OR TRANSPORT OF WAR-SUPPLIES TO BELLIGERENTS AS WELL AS TO USE OF APPARATUS OF COMMUNICATION MUST BE IMPARTIALLY APPLIED.

Every measure of restriction or prohibition taken by a neutral Power in regard to the matters referred to in Articles VII and VIII must be impartially applied by it to both belligerents.

A neutral Power must see to the same obligation being observed by Companies or private individuals owning telegraph or telephone cables or wireless telegraphy apparatus.-Ilague Convention V, 1907, Article 9:

The neutral is not to favor one belligerent party] to the detriment of the other; and it is an essential character of neutrality to furnish no aids to one party which the neutral is not equally ready to furnish to the other.

Kent, vol. 1, p. 122.

The rights of neutrality are connected with correspondent duties. Among these duties is that of impartiality between the contending parties. The neutral is the common friend of both parties, and consequently is not at liberty to favor one party to the detriment of the other.

Dana's Wheaton, p. 509.

To furnish succors, or auxiliaries, or to extend privileges to one belligerent, to the detriment of the other, is undoubtedly a violation of strict neutrality, and, as such, is a just cause of complaint, if not of war.

Halleck, p. 515.

It is true that any national enactment, whether exceeding or not the limits of international duty, must be enforced in favour of both belligerents if it is enforced in favour of either. A neutral must be impartial, though it is not enough that he should be impartial if he does not abstain from particpation in the war. But he is within his right if he declines to enforce in favour of either belligerent an enactment with which he has armed himself only in pursuance of his own policy or for his own greater security.

Westlake, vol. 2, p. 209.

The effect of all these provisions [Articles 3, 5, 8, and 9 of Convention V, and Articles 5 and 25 of Convention XIII of the Second Hague Conference] when taken together is to draw a broad line of

distinction between means of information owned and controlled by the belligerent himself on neutral territory or in neutral territorial waters, and similar means owned and controlled by the neutral state or by private persons and companies within its jurisdiction. Neutral governments are bound to prevent the erection of the former during the war, and the use of anything of the kind established before the war and not previously opened to the public for the transmission of messages. The latter they are free to deal with as they please on the sole condition that they act impartially as between the belligerents. Lawrence, pp. 646-647.

** *

the duty of impartiality includes the equal treatment of both belligerents regarding such facilities as do not directly concern military or naval operations, and which may, therefore, be granted or not to belligerents, according to the discretion of a neutral. If a neutral grants such facilities to one belligerent, he must grant them to the other in the same degree.

Oppenheim, vol. 2. p. 382.

What is principally required of a neutral State is equal treatment of both belligerents.

German War Book, p. 187.

Article 9, Hague Convention V. 1907, is substantially identical with section 236, Austro-Hungarian Manual, 1913.

NEUTRAL'S RESISTANCE TO VIOLATION OF ITS NEUTRALITY NOT HOSTILE ACT.

The fact of a neutral Power resisting, even by force, attempts to violate its neutrality cannot be regarded as a hostile act.-Hague Convention V, 1907, Article 10.

It is not lawful to make neutral territory the scene of hostility, or to attack an enemy while within it; and if the enemy be attacked, or any capture made, under neutral protection, the neutral is bound to redress the injury, and effect restitution.

Kent, vol. 1, p. 124.

If the respect due to neutral territory be violated by one party, without being promptly punished by just animadversion, it would soon provoke a similar treatment from the other party, and the neutral ground would become the theatre of war.

Kent, vol. 1, p. 126.

If, however, a neutral does not attack a belligerent, but only repulses him by force when he violates or attempts to violate the neutrality of the neutral, such repulse does not comprise hostilities. Oppenheim, vol. 2, p. 387.

It was stated by the Attorney General of the United States in 1855, that every neutral nation has a right to exact by force, if need be, that belligerent powers shall not make use of its territory for the purposes of their war.

7 Op. Atty. Gen., 122.

If the territory of a neutral State is trespassed upon by one of the belligerent parties for the purpose of its military operations, then this State has the right to proceed against this violation of its territory with all the means in its power and to disarm the trespassers. If the trespass has been committed on the orders of the Army Staff, then the State concerned is bound to give satisfaction and compensation: if it has been committed on their own responsibility, then the individual offenders can be punished as criminals. If the violation of the neutral territory is due to ignorance of its frontiers and not to evil intention, then the neutral State can demand the immediate removal of the wrong, and can insist on necessary measures being taken to prevent a repetition of such contempts.

German War Book, pp. 197, 198.

Article 10, Hague Convention V, 1907, is substantially identical with section 237, Austro-Hungarian Manual, 1913.

RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NEUTRAL WITH RESPECT TO BELLIGERENT TROOPS ON ITS

TERRITORY.

A neutral Power which receives on its territory troops belonging to the belligerent armies shall intern them, as far as possible, at a distance from the theatre of war.

It may keep them in camps and even confine them in fortresses or in places set apart for this purpose.

It shall decide whether officers can be left at liberty on giving their parole not to leave the neutral territory without permission.

In the absence of a special Convention to the contrary, the neutral Power shall supply the interned with the food, clothing, and relief required by humanity.

At the conclusion of peace the expenses caused by the internment shall be made good.-Ilague Convention V, 1907, Articles 11 and 12.

A neutral State which receives in its territory troops belonging to the belligerent armies shall intern them, as far as possible, at a distance from the theatre of war.

It can keep them in camps, and even confine them in fortresses or locations assigned for this purpose.

It shall decide whether officers may be left at liberty on giving their parole that they will not leave the neutral territory without authorization.

Hague Convention II, 1899, Article 57.

Failing a special convention, the neutral State shall supply the interned with the food, clothing, and relief required by humanity. At the conclusion of peace, the expenses caused by the internment shall be made good.

Hague Convention II, 1899, Article 58,

The neutral state receiving in its territory troops belonging to the belligerent armies will intern them, so far as it may be possible, away from the theater of war.

They may be kept in camps, or even confined in fortresses or in places appropriated to this purpose.

It will decide whether the officers may be released on giving their parole not to quit the neutral territory without authority.

Project of Brussels Conference, 1874, Article LIII.