Conseguir este libro impreso
Acerca de este libro
Libros en Google Play
III. ARGUMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER-Continued.
They followed up all information received by proper inquiries.
Necessity and propriety of seeking evidence from those who
Mr. Jefferson's letter of September 5, 1793
Onus imposed on British claimants against the United States
under the Treaty of 1794...
Uniform reference of the Executive Authorities of the United
States in similar cases to legal procedure and the necessity for
Of the suggestion that the belief of the consuls of the United
States in British ports should be treated as sufficient prima-
The preventive efficacy of the American law tried by the test of
The general result proves that many failures may happen, with-
out want of due diligence, from causes for which Governments
cannot be held responsible....
Attempt of the United States to change the onus probandi in this
It is a transgression of the Rules of the Treaty
The law of nations does not justify this attempt.
The decision in the case of the Elizabeth against it..
Special questions remaining to be considered..
The alleged duty of pursuit. The Terceira expedition.
2. The effect of the commissions of the Confederate ships of war on their en-
trance into British ports.
The true construction of the first Rule of the Treaty
The privileges of public ships of war in neutral ports..
The case of the Exchange.
The Rule cannot require an act wrongful by international law...
There is no rule obliging a neutral to exclude from his ports ships
of this description....
In any view the latter part of Rule I cannot apply to the Georgia or
The distinction suggested by the United States between ships of war
of recognized nations and ships of a non-recognized State.....
All the ships in question were duly commissioned ships of war..
3. On supplies of coal to Confederate vessels in British ports..
Both parties in the war equally received such supplies...
Such supplies are not within the rule as to not using neutral terri-
tory as a base of operations..
What is meant by the words "a base of naval operations"
What is not meant by those words..........
Consequences of a lax use of the phrase.
Effect of the addition of the words "renewal or augmentation of
military supplies or arms".
Doctrine of Chancellor Kent..
President Washington's rules and other authorities..
Acts of Congress of 1794 and 1818..
British Foreign-Enlistment Act of 1819.
Universal understanding and practice..
Intention of the second Rule of the Treaty on this point..
British regulations of January 31, 1862.
4. Principles of construction applicable to the Rules of the Treaty.
Importance of the second and third questions, as to the principles of
construction applicable to the three Rules...
Rules for the interpretation of public conventions and treaties....
Applications of these principles to the interpretation of the three
Rules as to the points in controversy.
Influence on the construction of the retrospective terms of the
The admitted intention of both parties as to the second Rule...
Influence upon the construction of the agreement to propose the
three Rules for general adoption to other maritime nations....
IV. ARGUMENT OF MR. EVARTS IN REPLY TO THE SPECIAL ARGUMENT OF SIR
Scope of the discussion.
IV.—ÂRGUMENT OF MR. EVARTS, &c.—Continued.
The Rules of the Treaty the law of this Case....
Sir R. Palmer's attempt to disparage the Rules examined.
How far the Tribunal may resort to the Rules of International Law..
Sir R. Palmer's principles for the construction of Treaties examined.
Effect of a commission....
United States construction of the first Rule.
Effect of the words "reasonable ground to believe",
The rules of law respecting the effect of a commission.
Extent of the right of exterritoriality granted to ships of war.
Recognition of belligerency not a recognition of sovereignty.
Application of the principles....
Acts done in violation of neutrality are hostile acts..
The neutral whose neutrality has been violated is under no obligation
of comity to the violator...
Authorities to show that the construction in neutral territories of a ship
intended to carry on war against a belligerent is forbidden by the law
The applicability of the rule to the Georgia and
The question of coaling is a branch of the greater question of the use
of British ports as bases of hostile operations.
The doctrine of asylum considered.
Analogy between the duties of a neutral on land and his duties at sea..
Limitation of the right of commercial dealings in contraband of war..
Use of a neutral port as a base of hostile operations; what it is
In the case of the Nashville...
In the case of the Shenandoah.
The question of the use of the neutral port as a base of hostile opera-
tions being established, there remains the inquiry whether the neutral
did or did not exercise due diligence to prevent it..
Such proceedings are not mere dealings in contraband of war.
Statement of the British argument on this point...
The arming and equipping the cruisers forbidden by the law of nations..
They should therefore have been disarmed when they came again within
The construction of the Rules of the Treaty..
Review of Sir R. Palmer's criticisms upon the Argument of the United
The prerogative of the Crown..
Preventive and punitive powers of each Government..
The failure of Great Britain to originate investigations or proceedings..
The due diligence required by the Rules is a diligence to prevent a hostile
Comparison between the statutes of the two nations.
The burden of proof..........
The Terceira affair.
V.—ÂRGUMENT OF MR. CUSHING IN REPLY TO THE SPECIAL ARGUMENT OF SIR
A theoretical discussion not wanted.
Views of Sir Robert Phillimore..
Views of Sir Roundell Palmer in the case of Lairds' rams.
Definition of due diligence..
Powers of the Crown..
Obligations imposed by international law as distinguished from muni-
Constitutional form of the British Government
Case of the Russian ships.
Comparative laws of other countries.
The laws of the United States examined.
Jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
VI.-REPLY OF MR. WAITE TO THE ARGUMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER
UPON THE SPECIAL QUESTION AS TO SUPPLIES OF COAL IN BRITISH
PORTS TO CONFEDERATE SHIPS
A base of operations essential to naval warfare.
What it is..
VI.-REPLY OF MR. WAITE, &c.—Continued.
It should not be in neutral territory..
The insurgents had no such base within their own territory.
Great Britain knew this...
The advantages of these facts to the United States..
Efforts of the insurgents to obtain bases of operations in neutral terri-
Toleration of use equivalent to permission
Toleration implies knowledge..
Great Britain had reasonable ground to believe that the insurgents in-
tended to use its ports.
Their effective vessels of war came from Great Britain.
When obtained they were useless without a base of operations.
They might have been excluded from British ports..
This would have prevented the injuries which followed.
The United States requested Great Britain to prevent this abuse of its
Great Britain refused to prevent it...
Great Britain encouraged the use of its ports by the insurgents for re-
pairs and for obtaining provisions and coal
All this constituted a violation of neutrality which entailed responsi-
VII. ARGUMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER ON THE QUESTION OF THE RE-
CRUITMENT OF MEN FOR THE SHENANDOAH AT MELBOURNE.........
VIII. OBSERVATIONS ADDRESSED TO THE TRIBUNAL BY MR. CUSHING, IN THE
NAME OF THE COUNSEL OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE 21ST AUGUST, 1872,
AND MEMORANDUM AS TO THE ENLISTMENTS FOR THE SHENANDOAH AT MEL-
IX.-ARGUMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER ON THE SPECIAL QUESTION AS TO
THE LEGAL EFFECT OF THE ENTRANCE OF THE FLORIDA INTO THE PORT OF
MOBILE, OR THE RESPONSIBILITY, IF ANY, OF GREAT BRITAIN FOR THAT SHIP..
X.-REPLY OF THE COUNSEL OF THE UNITED STATES TO THE ARGUMENT OF HER
BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S COUNSEL ON THE SPECIAL QUESTION OF THE LEGAL EF-
FECT, IF ANY, OF THE ENTRY OF THE FLORIDA INTO THE PORT OF MOBILE, AFTER
LEAVING THE BAHAMAS, AND BEFORE MAKING ANY CAPTURES..
XI. ARGUMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER ON THE CLAIM OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR INTEREST BY WAY OF DAMAGES.
XII.-REPLY ON THE PART OF THE UNITED STATES TO THE ARGUMENT OF HER
BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S COUNSEL ON THE ALLOWANCE OF INTEREST IN THE COM-
PUTATION OF INDEMNITY UNDER THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON.
XIII-COMPARATIVE TABLES PRESENTED BY THE AGENT OF THE UNITED STATES
ON THE 19TH OF AUGUST, 1872, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUEST OF THE
XIV. TABLES PRESENTED BY THE AGENT OF HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY ON THE
19TH OF AUGUST, 1872, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUEST OF THE TRIBUNAL.
XV.-REPLY OF THE AGENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO THE NEW MATTER INTRO-
DUCED BY THE AGENT OF HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY ON THE CALL OF THE
TRIBUNAL FOR ELUCIDATION IN RESPECT TO THE TABLES PRESENTED BY THE
XVI-A NOTE ON SOME OBSERVATIONS PRESENTED BY MR. BANCROFT DAVIS ON
THE 29TH AUGUST..