neutral waters. So, in the Spanish-American War of 1898 the American commanders cut various cables connecting different parts of Cuba. (3) Where a cable unites the territories of the two belligerents, each is entitled to cut it anywhere except in neutral waters. So, during the Russo-Turkish war of 1877, the cable connecting Constantinople with Odessa was cut by the Turks. But in the Spanish-American War, cable communication between Havana and Key West was allowed to continue subject to military censorship at either end. (4) When the cable unites the territory of one belligerent with that of a neutral State, the other belligerent may cut it only in the territorial waters of the former; although, according to the rules proposed by the Institute, it may also be cut on the high sea, provided the place at which it is cut lies within the limits of an established blockade. In the Spanish-American War the American commanders cut, in the enemy waters all the cables uniting the enemy and neutral countries which they were unable to control; including that between Hongkong and Manila, and that between Cuba and Jamaica, nearly all of these being the property of neutrals; and this, as we have seen, without any admission of liability. The question of belligerent rights in this connection is so important that it will probably come under consideration at the next Hague Conference. Cobbet, pt. II, pp. 269, 270. 18. As soon as possible, and without detriment to the principal operations in which you are engaged, you will endeavor to proceed to the destruction of submarine cables exclusively connecting enemy possessions. 19. You will respect cables exclusively connecting two neutral countries. 20. As to cables which, coming from a neutral country, ground upon enemy territory or cross it, you will put them out of service everywhere except in neutral territorial waters if they are susceptible of being used by the belligerent for the immediate conduct of his operations of war. 21. In none of these cases are you to take into account the nationality of the company or association owning the cable. French Naval Instructions, 1912, secs. 18-21. As to 1, the necessity of interrupting, in many cases, railway, postal, and telegraph communication, of stopping them or, at the least, stringently supervising them, hardly calls for further proof. Human feeling on the part of the commanding officer will know what limits to fix, where the needs of the war and the necessities of the population permit of mutual accommodation. German War Book, p. 152. 72. Existing treaties for the protection of the submarine cable shall in no way infringe upon the freedom of action of the belligerents. 73. Submarine cables connecting any occupied territory with a neutral territory may only in case of absolute necessity be seized or destroyed. After the conclusion of peace they must likewise be returned and the indemnification settled. Austro-Hungarian Manual, 1913, secs. 72, 73. 74. In the case of mobilization or of war, the international telegraph and wireless telegraph service will be either absolutely suspended or suspended only on certain lines and for certain kinds of correspondence, either for a definite or for an indefinite period of time. Austro-Hungarian Manual, 1913, sec. 74. The Atalanta, 1808, 6C, Rob. 440.-Lord Stowell said: "That the simple carrying of dispatches between the colonies and the mother country of the enemy is a service highly injurious to the other belligerent is most obvious. In the present state of the world, in the hostilities of European powers, it is an object of great importance to preserve the connection between the mother country and her colonies; and to interrupt that connection, on the part of the other belligerent, is one of the most energetic operations of war. The importance of keeping up that connection, for the concentration of troops, and for various military purposes, is manifest; and I may add, for the supply of civil assistance, also, and support, because the infliction of civil distress for the purpose of compelling a surrender forms no inconsiderable part of the operations of war. It is not to be argued, therefore, that the importance of these dispatches might relate only to the civil wants of the colony, and that it is necessary to show a military tendency; because the object of compelling a surrender being a measure of war, whatever is conducive to that event must also be considered in the contemplation of law as an object of hostility, although not produced by operations strictly military. How is this intercourse with the mother country kept up in time of peace? by ships of war or by packets in the service of the State. If a war intervenes and the other belligerent prevails to interrupt that communication, any person stepping in to lend himself to effect the same purpose, under the privilege of an ostensible neutral character, does, in fact, place himself in the service of the enemy State, and is justly to be considered in that character; nor let it be supposed that it is an act of light and casual importance. The consequence of such a service is indefinite, infinitely beyond the effect of any contraband that can be conveyed. The carrying of two or three cargoes of stores is necessarily an assistance of a limited nature; but in the transmission of dispatches may be conveyed 110678-19-35 the entire plan of a campaign that may defeat all the projects of the other belligerent in that quarter of the world. It is true, as it has been said, that one ball might take off a Charles the XIIth, and might produce the most disastrous effects in a campaign; but that is a consequence so remote and accidental that, in the contemplation of human events it is a sort of evanescent quantity of which no account is taken; and the practice has been, accordingly, that it is in considerable quantities only that the offense of contraband is contemplated. The case of dispatches is very different; it is impossible to limit a letter to so small a compass as not to be capable of producing the most important consequences in the operations of the enemy. It is a service. therefore, which, in whatever degree it exists, can only be considered in one character, as an act of the most noxious and hostile nature. "This country, which-however much its practice may be misrepresented by foreign writers, and sometimes by our own-has always administered the law of nations with lenity, adopts a more indulgent rule, inflicting on the ship only a forfeiture of freight in ordinary cases of contraband. But the offense of carrying dispatches is, it has been observed, greater. To talk of the confiscation of the noxious article, the dispatches, which constitutes the penalty in contraband, would be ridiculous. There would be no freight dependent on it, and therefore the same precise penalty can not, in the nature of things, be applied. It becomes absolutely necessary, as well as just, to resort to some other measure of confiscation, which can be no other than that of the vehicle." PASSPORTS, SAFE CONDUCTS, AND SAFEGUARDS. In order to favour commerce on both sides as much as possible, it is agreed that, in case a war should break out between the said two nations, which God forbid, the term of nine months after the declaration of war shall be allowed to the merchants and subjects respectively on one side and the other, in order that they may withdraw with their effects and movables, which they shall be at liberty to carry off or to sell where they please, without the least obstacle; nor shall any seize their effects, and much less their persons, during the said nine months; but on the contrary, passports which shall be valid for a time necessary for their return, shall be given them for their vessels, and the effects which they shall be willing to carry with them. And if anything is taken from them, or if any injury is done to them by one of the parties, their people and subjects, during the term above prescribed, full and entire satisfaction shall be made to them on that account. The above-mentioned passports shall also serve as a safe conduct against all insults or prizes which privateers may attempt against their persons and effects. Treaty of Amity and Commerce of 1783 between the United States and a safe conduct shall be given them [citizens of the one country who are in the other country at the breaking out of the war between the two countries,] to embark at the ports which they shall themselves select. Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation of 1859 between the * and a safe conduct shall be given them [the citizens of the one country who are in the other country at the time of an interruption of friendly intercourse or of a rupture] to embark at the port which they themselves shall select. Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation of 1864 between the Safe conduct or passport. Some of these usages appear to deserve a fuller consideration. A Safe Conduct, or Passport, is a privilege which ensures safety to those who hold it while passing or repassing from one place to another, or while occupied in the performance of some act specified in, and permitted by the instrument. Such an instrument must emanate from the supreme authority upon the spot, that is, from the officer in command, to whom the sovereign has for these and other purposes delegated his power, either by express commission or as the natural consequences of other powers. Phillimore, vol. III, pp. 165, 166. The grantor of the safe conduct tacitly pledges himself both to protect the grantee and to punish any person subject to his command who may violate it. A safe conduct, strictly construed, does not include more than one person and his reasonable baggage, unless the terms of the instrument expressly admit more. Phillimore, vol. III, p. 166. Transferrence of privilege. The safe conduct for the person cannot be transferred from one man to another; the abuses which might flow from such a permission are manifest. But the safe conduct for goods admits of their being removed by some person other than their owner, unless there be some specific objection against the person employed. The extent of the safe conduct must of course be limited by the extent of the command of the grantor; it would not necessarily be limited by territorial boundary, but would, unless otherwise limited, follow the grantee wherever the forces or troops of the grantor are. Phillimore, vol. III, p. 166. Expiration of privilege. If a safe conduct be granted for a limited time, its virtue expires with the expiration of this time; but if the grantee has been prevented by sickness, or some cause over which he has no control, from returning within the time, the spirit of the promise of security conveyed in the instrument protects him. The case, as Vattel remarks, is different from that of an enemy coming into a country during a truce; to him no particular promise has been made; he has, at his own peril, taken advantage of a general liberty allowed by the suspension of hostilities; all that has been promised to him is forbearance from hostilities during a certain period; it may be a matter of importance to his enemy that at the expiration of that period, the War should in all respects freely take its course. The safe conduct is granted by the public authorities, therefore the grantor in fact never dies; it does not expire with the death of the particular officer who happened to subscribe it. If the safe conduct contains any such limitation as for such time as we shall think fit. it is of course revocable at the discretion of the grantor: but even without such limitation it can hardly be said to be in all circum |