sequent detention. If the vessel should be released, an entry in her log-book should be made to that effect by the boarding officer.

After a capture, under normal circumstances, the prize should be sent in for adjudication, unless otherwise directed, to the nearest suitable port within the territorial jurisdiction of the captor in which a prize-court exists.

The prize should be delivered to the court as nearly as possible in the condition in which she was at the time of capture, and to this end her papers should be carefully sealed at the time of seizure and kept in the custody of the prize-master.

All witnesses whose testimony is necessary to the adjudication of the prize should be detained and sent in, and, if circumstances permit, it is preferable that the officer making the search should act as prize-master. The title to property requiring adjudication as a prize changes only by the decision rendered by the prize-court; hence the national colors of the vessel seized remain her proper flag until such decision is rendered.1

159. Destruction of Enemy Vessels as Prizes.-As a rule, the captured enemy merchantman must not be destroyed but sent in as a prize to port for adjudication by a prize-court. In case of military or other necessity, these vessels may be destroyed or they may be retained for the immediate service of the government of the captor. In such cases they are to be surveyed, appraised, and inventoried and the results sent to the prizecourt where proceedings are to be held.

The laws of the United States as given in Revised Statutes, Section 4624, allow the appropriation of a prize for the use of the United States without adjudication. The papers, etc., with an appraisal of the value of the vessel, are sent to a proper court for the action required as in case of a vessel sent in.

During the War of 1812 repeated instructions were sent out by the government directing the destruction of enemy prizes. "A single cruiser, if ever so successful," said the secretary of 1 Stockton, "Manual of Int. Law for Naval Officers," pp. 173-5.

the navy, "can man but a few prizes, and every prize is a serious diminution of her force." The same practice, and for the same reason, existed during our Revolutionary War.

In the instructions to the United States blockading vessels and cruisers in the Spanish-American War, it was stated that "if there are controlling reasons why vessels may not be sent in for adjudication, as unseaworthiness, the existence of infectious disease, or the lack of a prize-crew, they may be appraised and sold; and if this cannot be done they may be destroyed. The imminent danger of recapture would justify destruction, if there was no doubt that the vessel was good prize. But in all such cases all the papers and other testimony should be sent to the prize-court in order that a decree may be duly entered." Such destruction is also allowed by the Russian, French, and Japanese instructions.1

160. Resistance to Search, Recapture, Ransom, and Safe Conduct. The most authoritative statement as to a resistance to search upon the part of an enemy merchantman as well as the part of a neutral merchant vessel is found in the declaration of London (see Appendix IV), in Article 63, and in the accompanying report made by the draughting committee of the London naval conference. The article states that "forcible resistance to the legitimate exercise of the right of stoppage, search, and capture involves in all cases the condemnation of the vessel. The cargo is also liable to the same treatment as the cargo of an enemy vessel. Goods belonging to the master or owner of the vessel are treated as enemy goods."

The accompanying reports state that, in case the vessel summoned does not stop, the belligerent cruiser may employ force; and if the merchant vessel is damaged or sunk she has no right to complain as she has failed to comply with an obligation imposed upon her by the law of nations.2

The question of recapture of a prize is a matter of prize laws,

1 Moore's "Digest," pp. 517, 518, etc.

* Miscellaneous Parl. Papers, no. 41909, par. 6364.

and by usage requires a firm possession of twenty-four hours. It is a legitimate act of war when done by the crew of the vessel or by her compatriots. The United States act of 1800, providing for salvage in case of recapture, was embodied in the act of June 30, 1864, and the United States Revised Statutes, Section 4652.

Sometimes, instead of being sent in as a prize, the master, as agent of the owner, repurchases his right by a ransom. Ransom bills were taken by Confederate cruisers subject to the recognition of the Southern Confederacy. This practice may be revived on account of the difficulty of furnishing prize-crews from the complement of a modern vessel of war and is better than destruction of prizes.

Safe conducts were issued during the Spanish-American War to the Spanish merchant vessels engaged in transporting Spanish prisoners from Santiago de Cuba to Spain by the United States consuls, under instruction of the Department of State.

161. Bombardments by Naval Forces in Time of War.— The bombardment by naval forces of undefended ports, towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings is forbidden by Convention IX of the second Hague conference. The anchorage of automatic submarine contact mines off the harbor does not render a place liable to such bombardment.

Military works, military or naval establishments, depots of arms or war material, workshops or plants which could be utilized for the needs of the hostile fleet or army, and ships of war in the harbor are not free from attack and destruction.

The commander of a naval force incurs no responsibility for any unavoidable damage which may be caused by a bombardment under such circumstances. The prohibition to bombard the undefended town holds good, however, and the commander is required to take all due measures in order that the town may suffer as little harm as possible.

If the local authorities of an undefended port or town should decline to comply with requisitions for provisions or supplies

necessary for the immediate needs of the naval force and within the resources of the place, after due notice such place may be bombarded. This does not apply, however, to money contributions.1

In any bombardment all necessary steps should be taken to spare all public buildings such as mentioned in the rules for land warfare. These should be marked by visible signs, however.

Unless military exigencies render it impossible, the commander of an attacking naval force must, before commencing the bombardment, do all in his power to warn the authorities. The giving over of a town to pillage is forbidden.

162. Submarine Cables in Time of War.-In Article 54 of the Convention IV upon the laws and customs of war on land it is stated that:

"Submarine cables connecting a territory occupied with a neutral territory shall not be seized or destroyed except in case of absolute necessity. They also must be restored and indemnities for them regulated at the peace."

As the above article is the only one dealing with submarine cables in force at present with the sanction of an internacional obligation, it may be well to quote from the United States Naval code, in Article 5, which has met with general approval by the writers upon the matter. It reads as follows:

"1. Submarine telegraphic cables between points in the territory of an enemy, or between the United States and that of an enemy, are subject to such treatment as the necessities of war may require.

"2. Submarine telegraphic cables between the territory of an enemy and neutral territory may be interrupted within the territorial jurisdiction of the enemy.

"3. Submarine telegraphic cables between two neutral countries shall be held inviolable and free from interruption." During the Spanish-American War the following instructions

'Higgins, "Peace Conferences," pp. 346, 350.

were given by the British Government as to the use of telegraphic cables at that time in British territory:

"Belligerent war vessels should be prevented from using the telegraph for the purpose of sending in cipher or otherwise messages of which the object is to direct or influence warlike operations. A belligerent war vessel may, however, use the telegraph for messages which do not relate to proceedings of the belligerents or for messages which are not in cipher, narrating past operations and intended for general publication as news. Officers in command of belligerent war vessels should be informed that it is a condition of their being permitted to use the telegraph to guarantee and agree that they shall abstain from transmitting or procuring the transmission of any telegrams which concern the conduct of warlike operations. Vessels which merely carry despatches may be permitted the telegraph, and should not, except under special circumstances, be subjected to the same conditions as belligerent war vessels with respect to not using the cable. Consular officers have a right to free communication with their government, whether plain or in cipher."1

"There is no international law established as to submarine cables in time of war, except the vague Article 54 of Convention IV of The Hague conventions. In a study of this question it must be observed that the material of a submarine telegraphic cable is by the declaration of London classed as conditional contraband and is liable to seizure if found on the high seas or within the territorial jurisdiction of the belligerents if it is bound for an enemy destination or for his service. Unless it is strictly censored when laid between a neutral and belligerent, which is difficult, judging from the British instructions just quoted, it will undoubtedly be used for unneutral service. The importance of using a cable to carry vital despatches of the enemy and the equal importance of preventing the delivery of such despatches by the other belligerent renders it a proper 1 Stockton, "Manual Int. Law for Naval Officers," pp. 176, 177.