5cjxburmr

Attempted breach of a blockade occurs from the time a vessel or aircraft leaves a port orairfield with the intention of evading the blockade and, for vessels exiting the blockaded area,continues until the voyage is completed. 173 A temporary anchorage in waters occupied by theblockading vessels does not justify capture, in the absence of other grounds. 174A presumption arises that certain merchant vessels or aircraft are attempting to breach ablockade where those vessels or aircraft are bound for a neutral port or airfield serving as a pointof transit to the blockaded area. 17513.10.4.2 Knowledge of the Existence of Blockade. Knowledge of the existenceof the blockade is essential to the offenses of breach of blockade and attempted breach ofblockade; presumed knowledge is sufficient. 176Knowledge may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriatenotification provided to affected governments. 177 For example, a vessel in a blockaded port ispresumed to have notice of the blockade as soon as it commences. 178172 2007 NWP 1-14M 7.7.4 (“Breach of blockade is the passage of a vessel or aircraft through a blockade withoutspecial entry or exit authorization from the blockading belligerent.”); 1997 NWP 9 7.7.4 (same); 1989 NWP 97.7.4 (same); 1955 NWIP 10-2 632g (“Breach of blockade is the passage of a vessel or aircraft through theblockade.”).173 2007 NWP 1-14M 7.7.4 (“Attempted breach of blockade occurs from the time a vessel or aircraft leaves a portor airfield with the intention of evading the blockade, and for vessels exiting the blockaded area, continues until thevoyage is completed.”); 1997 NWP 9 7.7.4 (same); 1989 NWP 9 7.7.4 (substantially similar); 1955 NWIP 10-2632g(2) (“Attempted breach of blockade occurs from the time a vessel or aircraft leaves a port or air take-off pointwith the intent of evading the blockade.”).174 The Teresita, 72 U.S. 180, 182 (1867) (“We are of opinion that, under such circumstances, temporary anchoragein waters occupied by the blockading vessels, does not justify capture, in the absence of other grounds.”).175 2007 NWP 1-14M 7.7.4 (“There is a presumption of attempted breach of blockade where vessels or aircraft arebound for a neutral port or airfield serving as a point of transit to the blockaded area.”); 1955 NWIP 10-2 632g(1)(“There is a presumption of attempted breach of blockade where vessels and aircraft are bound to a neutral port orairfield serving as a point of transit to the blockaded area.”); The Peterhoff, 72 U.S. 28, 55 (1867) (“It is anundoubted general principle, recognized by this court in the case of The Bermuda, and in several other cases, that anulterior destination to a blockaded port will infect the primary voyage to a neutral port with liability for intendedviolation of blockade.”). Compare § 15.12.2 (Requirement of Enemy Destination).176 2007 NWP 1-14M 7.7.4 (“Knowledge of the existence of the blockade is essential to the offenses of breach ofblockade and attempted breach of blockade.”); 1997 NWP 9 7.7.4 (same); 1989 NWP 9 7.7.4 (same); 1955 NWIP10-2 632g (“Knowledge of the existence of a blockade is essential to the offenses of breach of blockade andattempted breach of blockade; presumed knowledge is sufficient.”). Consider 1909 DECLARATION OF LONDON art.14 (“The liability of a neutral vessel to capture for breach of blockade is contingent on her knowledge, actual orpresumptive, of the blockade.”).177 2007 NWP 1-14M 7.7.4 (“Knowledge may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriatenotification provided to affected governments.”); 1997 NWP 9 7.7.4 (same); 1989 NWP 9 7.7.4 (same). Consider1909 DECLARATION OF LONDON art. 15 (“Failing proof to the contrary, knowledge of the blockade is presumed ifthe vessel left a neutral port subsequently to the notification of the blockade to the Power to which such portbelongs, provided that such notification was made in sufficient time.”).178 The Prize Cases, 67 U.S. 635, 677 (1863) (“A vessel being in a blockaded port is presumed to have notice of theblockade as soon as it commences. This is a settled rule in the law of nations.”).891