What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
17th century according Admiralty Courts admitted adopted American appeared armed neutrality belligerent powers belligerents and neutrals blockade Britain cargo Coll condemnation confisque Congress Congress of Vienna considered Consolato del Mare Continental system contraband corsairs Crimean war cruisers customs declaration declaration of Paris decrees Denmark documents droit Dumont duty enemy enemy's ships England English judge Europe evidence fact favour France French Holland immunity international law jurists lawful prize maritime capture maritime warfare Marriott Martens ment Murhard neutral commerce neutral flag neutral merchants neutral nations neutral rights neutral ships neutral subjects opinion ordonnance Ortolan papers Pardessus Paris parties peace pirates plunder port Portalis principles of 1780 principles of neutrality private property prize courts prize jurisdiction prize law prize practice put an end question Reddie respect rights of neutral rules Russia seized Sir William Scott Sweden tion treaties treaties of Utrecht United vessels views Wheaton Wurm
Page 103 - ... to administer with indifference that justice which the law of nations holds out, without distinction, to independent States, some happening to be neutral and some to be belligerent. The seat of judicial authority is, indeed, locally here, in the belligerent country, according to the known law and practice of nations; but the law itself has no locality.
Page 117 - Provided, however, and it is hereby agreed, that the stipulations in this article contained, declaring that the flag shall cover the property, shall be understood as applying to those powers only who recognize this principle ; but if either of the two contracting parties shall be at war with a third, and the other neutral, the flag of the neutral shall cover the property of enemies whose governments acknowledge this principle, and not of others.
Page 98 - On the contrary, it is an inherent and settled principle in all cases in which the same question can have come under discussion, that the mere touching at any port without importing the cargo into the common stock of the country will not alter the nature of the voyage, which continues the same in all respects, and must be considered as a voyage to the country to which the vessel is actually going for the purpose of delivering her cargo at the ultimate port.
Page 161 - Blockades, in order to be binding, must be effective; that is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the coast of the enemy.
Page 103 - The seat of judicial authority is indeed locally here,— in the belligerent country, — according to the known law and practice of nations ; but the law itself has no locality. It is the duty of the person who sits here to determine this question exactly as he would determine the same question if sitting at Stockholm ; to assert no pretensions on the part of Great Britain which he would not allow to Sweden in the same circumstances ; and to impose no duties on Sweden as a neutral country which...
Page 158 - ... been searched), or that honest mistake, though occasioned by the act of the government of which they are subjects, can relieve them from their liability to make good to a foreigner and neutral (and with this case alone we are dealing) the damage which, by their conduct, he has sustained.
Page 158 - Or, she may be involved, with little or no fault on her part, in such suspicion as to make it the right, or even the duty, of a belligerent to seize her. There may be no fault either in the captor or the captured, or both may be in fault ; and in such cases there may be damnum absque injurid, and no ground for anything but simple restitution.
Page 67 - ... privateers and neutrals should be settled impartially, without delay, and in conformity with international justice. Should the judgment be considered unjust or oppressive, diplomatic agents are entitled to intervene in behalf of their fellow-countrymen, and to bring the case before the Court of Appeal.1 A privateer, having captured a neutral ship without sufficient grounds, is held liable to damages to the injured party : but unfortunately the amount of compensation is nowhere determined in treaties...
Page 77 - ... judge was the great opponent of neutral commerce; he did not consider the English customs sufficiently severe in checking it, and laid down in the year 1794 an extraordinary rule, according to which neutral nations were only permitted to carry their own produce, and not that of other countries. Jacobsen, Seerecht, i, preface. Marriott defended this arbitrary limitation of trade with the enemy, on the principles of the Navigation Act. which was then adopted by many states in imitation of England.