stituted prize court rests upon the general law of nations. But this obligation under the common law of nations exists only with respect to vessels navigated under a neutral flag, the object of an inquiry before a prize court being to ascertain whether the cap tured property in each case belongs to a neutral or an enemy, and to restore the property if it belongs to a neutral, and so to restrain the captor in the. eager pursuit of gain from doing injustice to innocent merchants whereby national complications might arise. Enemies, on the other hand, have no locus standi in a prize court under the general law of nations, and they can not claim that their property, upon capture by a belligerent cruiser, should be taken into port for investigation and judicial action. Capture, of itself, divests an enemy of his property jure belli. Upon the surrender of a ship under an enemy's flag at sea, a bellig erent may destroy her under the general law of nations, and if the captor is unable to bring her into port, he will be justified tow ards his own government in destroying her. The instruction of his own government may require him to bring into port every capture which he may make, but he may be actually engaged in a service which will not allow him to put a prize crew on board the vessel which he has captured in order that she may be taken into port. In such a conflict of duties, it would appear that nothing is left to the belligerent vessel but to destroy the hostile ship which she has seized, for she cannot consistently with her general duty tc her own country, or under its express instructions, allow an enemy's ship to sail away unmolested. If it is certain that a vessel belongs to an enemy, and if it is not practicable to bring her to port, there is no option but to destroy her. When it is doubtful whether she is an enemy's prop erty or not, and she cannot be taken to port, no obligation to destroy her exists, and the proper and safe course is to allow her to go on her voyage. When a ship is neutral, the act of destruction cannot be justified to the neutral owner and the neutral nation to
which he belongs by the great importance of the act to the captor's own government. The neutral owner has a legal right to demand restitution in value. An act of taking possession is not abso lutely necessary in order to constitute a cap ture at sea. The real surrender of the cap tured ship is held to take place when she lowers her flag. It is the general rule for the commander of the vessel which has made a capture at sea to put a prize-master and prize crew aboard the seized ship; but many captures have been held to be effectual when this has not been done. But it is competent for a captor, if he places confidence in the promise of the captain of a captured ship, to retain possession of the prize again?t all subsequent captors by placing a single man on board of her. The captor, when he restores a seized vessel to her commander under a contract of ransom, takes from the latter what is known as a ransom bill. The procedure under this contract, indeed the contract it self, is somewhat out of date at the present clay. In this ransom bill the commander of the captured vessel binds himself and his owner, as well as the owner of the cargo, to pay a certain sum of money on some future day. The ransomed ship is allowed to proceed, after the bill has been signed, by a prescribed route and within a limited time. The captain of the ransomed ship. at the same time, delivers up to his captor one of his crew—usually his first mate—as a hostage for the payment of the money stipu lated in the ransom bill. The practice of releasing captured ships on ransom being generally considered less beneficial to the belligerent nation to which the captor be longs than their detention and conveyance as prizes into port, and the power of ran soming vessels being liable to be abused by the captors to the detriment of neutral trade, it has been the policy of most nations for many years to restrain the liberty of the captors to ransom their captures. LAWRENCE IRWELL. Buffalo, N. Y., June 16. 1904.
