27.12.2012 Views

WHO ARE THE HUNS?

WHO ARE THE HUNS?

WHO ARE THE HUNS?

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

England, Naval Laws and Ourselves. 275<br />

sailing-vessel "Môwe," the President of the Prize Court, Sir<br />

S. Evans, owned that the parties belonging to the hostile nation,<br />

under certain circumstances, were also permitted to appear<br />

before the Prize Court, and the more so if they believed themselves<br />

to have, on the basis of one of the Hague Agreements,<br />

a claim to protection, to a privilege, or to compensation. It<br />

is further necessary that the grounds upon which the claim<br />

is based should be set forth in a sworn declaration and laid<br />

before the Court, as is required by the Regulation of the Prize<br />

Courts Act of 1914. With this decision the Court departs from<br />

its earlier standpoint. The permission, in the case of the "Môwe,"<br />

was rendered illusory, however, by the fact that the Court<br />

held the bringing forward of the German witnesses to be of<br />

no importance, and in an additional observation further<br />

amplified this*by declaring that according to the evidence on<br />

hand, the German objections could not have held good, as they<br />

were disputed by an Englishman and the statements before<br />

the court were considered sufficiently determinative!<br />

Another case concerns the German trawler "Berlin," which<br />

was captured by an English trading steamer. No evidence was<br />

brought to prove that the capture of the ship was a justifiable<br />

measure; no prize-crew, no entry in the ship's log; the confirmation<br />

of the moment of the capture was likewise impossible.<br />

Nevertheless the confiscation of the ship was decreed. The<br />

Court declared that it was on the whole, "fortunately," not<br />

bound to any rule of proof, and could pass judgment as it<br />

seemed good and proper to do. The Prize Court could not be<br />

compared to other courts, and was on that account free from<br />

the "narrow restrictions" of other tribunals. On these grounds<br />

the court presumed the legality of the capture of the ship,<br />

and that this took place after the outbreak of war. The result<br />

was the confiscation of the ship ("Frankfurter Zeitung" of the<br />

7th of December, 1914). Such a hollow pretense as this is<br />

called "Law"—in England.<br />

It is particularly necessary that the International Prize<br />

Court as discussed at the Second Hague Conference should be<br />

established to control such judges. But who controls England ?<br />

The opinion that England's stubborn adherence to the<br />

right of seizure at sea is one of the chief causes of the present<br />

18*

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!