"On the expression de plein droit (without notice) the same remark must be made as with regard to Article XXII. The articles enumerated are only conditional contraband if they have the destination specified in Article XXX.

Foodstuffs include products necessary or useful for sustaining man, whether solid or liquid.

Paper money only includes inconvertible paper money, i.e. banknotes which may or not be legal tender. Bills of exchange and cheques are excluded. Engines and boilers are included in 6.

Railway material includes fixtures (such as rails, sleepers, turntables, parts of bridges), and rolling stock (such as locomotives, carriages, and trucks). This provision corresponds, as regards conditional contraband, to that in Article XXIII. as regards absolute contraband.

"A belligerent may not wish to use the right to treat as contraband of war all the articles included in the above lists. It may suit him to add to conditional contraband an article included in absolute contraband or to declare free, so far as he is concerned, the trade in some article included in one class or the other. It is desirable that he should make known his intention on this subject, and he will probably do so in order to have the credit of the measure. If he does not do so, but confines himself to giving instructions to his cruisers, the vessels searched will be agreeably surprised if the searcher does not reproach them with carrying what they themselves consider contraband. Nothing can prevent a Power from making such a declaration in time of peace. See what is said as regards Article XXIII.

"The existence of a so-called free list (Article XXVIII.) makes it useful thus to put on record that articles which cannot be used for the purposes of war may not be declared contraband of war. It might have been thought that articles not included in that list might at least be declared conditional contraband.

28 To lessen the drawbacks of war as regards neutral trade it has been thought useful to draw up this so-called free list, but been explained above, that all articles outside it might be declared contraband of war.

The ores here referred to are the product of mines from which metals are derived.

There was a demand that dyestuffs should be included in 10, but this seemed too general, for there are materials from whic as coal, which also have other uses. Products only used for making colours enjoy the exemption. "Articles de Paris," an expression the meaning of which is universally understood, come under 15.

16 refers to the hair of certain animals, such as pigs and wild boars. Carpets and mats come under household furniture and ornaments (17).

29 The articles enumerated in Article XXIX. are also excluded from treatment as contraband, but for reasons different from th inclusion of the list in Article XXVIII. Motives of humanity have exempted articles exclusively used to aid the sick and wounded, which, of course, include drug This does not refer to hospital ships, which enjoy special immunity under the convention of The Hague of the 18th October 1907 vessels, whose cargo includes articles of the kind mentioned. The cruiser has, however, the right, in case of urgent necessity, to the needs of her crew or of the fleet to which she belongs, but they can only be requisitioned on payment of compensation. It that this right of requisition may not be exercised in all cases. The articles in question must have the destination specified in Articl enemy destination. Otherwise, the ordinary law regains its sway; a belligerent could not have the right of requisition as rega high seas.

Articles intended for the use of the vessel, which might in themselves and by their nature be contraband of war, may not be so intended for the defence of the vessel against pirates, or for making signals. The same is true of articles intended for the use during the voyage; the crew here includes all persons in the service of the vessel in general.

Destination of Contraband.—As has been said, the second element in the notion of contraband is destination. Great difficulties which find expression in the theory of continuous voyage, so often attacked or adduced without a clear comprehension of its exact me be considered on their merits so as to see how they can be settled without unnecessarily annoying neutrals or sacrificing the legitimate In order to effect a compromise between conflicting theories and practices, absolute and conditional contraband have been connection.

Articles XXX. to XXXII. refer to absolute, and Articles XXXIII. to XXXVI. to conditional contraband.

30 The articles included in the list in Article XXII. are absolute contraband when they are destined for territory belonging to or for his armed military or naval forces. These articles are liable to capture as soon as a final destination of this kind can be sho It is not, therefore, the destination of the vessel which is decisive, but that of the goods. It makes no difference if these goods are to discharge them in a neutral port; as soon as the captor is able to show that they are to be forwarded from there by land or sea enough to justify the capture and subsequent condemnation of the cargo. The very principle of continuous voyage, as regards absolute by Article XXX. The journey made by the goods is regarded as a whole.

31 As has been said, the obligation of proving that the contraband goods really have the destination specified in Article XXX. certain cases proof of the destination specified in Article XXXI. is conclusive, that is to say, the proof may not be rebutted.

First Case. The goods are documented for discharge in an enemy port, that is to say, according to the ship's papers referring to discharged there. In this case there is a real admission of enemy destination on the part of the interested parties themselves.

Second Case.-The vessel is to touch at enemy ports only; or she is to touch at an enemy port before reaching the neutral po documented, so that although these goods, according to the papers referring to them, are to be discharged in a neutral port, the touch at an enemy port before reaching that neutral port. They will be liable to capture, and the possibility of proving that their and in accordance with the intentions of the parties interested is not admitted. The fact that, before reaching that destination, t enemy port, would occasion too great a risk for the belligerent whose cruiser searches the vessel. Even without assuming that there might be a strong temptation for the master of the merchant vessel to discharge the contraband, for which he would get a goo authorities to requisition the goods.

The same case arises where the vessel, before reaching the neutral port, is to join the armed forces of the enemy.

For the sake of simplicity, the provision only speaks of an enemy port, but it is understood that a port occupied by the enemy mus port, as follows from the general rule in Article XXX.

*The papers, therefore, are conclusive proof of the course of the vessel unless she is encountered in circumstances which show that their statements are not to be trusted. See also the explanations given as regards Article XXXV.

The rules for conditional contraband differ from those laid down for absolute contraband in two respects: (1) there is no question of destination for the enemy in general, but of destination for the use of his armed forces or government departments; (2) the doctrine of continuous voyage is excluded. Articles XXXIII, and XXXIV. refer to the first, and Article XXXV. to the second principle.

The articles included in the list of conditional contraband may serve for peaceful uses as well as for hostile purposes. If, from the circumstances, the peaceful purpose is clear, their capture is not justified; it is otherwise if a hostile purpose is to be assumed, as, for instance, in the case of foodstuffs destined for an enemy army or fleet, or of coal destined for an enemy fleet. In such a case there is clearly no room for doubt. But what is the solution when the articles are destined for the civil government departments of the enemy State? It may be money sent to a government department, for use in the payment of its official salaries, or rails sent to a department of public works. In these cases there is enemy destination which renders the goods liable in the first place to capture, and in the second to condemnation. The reasons for this are at once legal and practical. The State is one, although it necessarily acts through different departments. If a civil department may freely receive foodstuffs or money, that department is not the only gainer, but the entire State, including its military administration, gains also, since the general resources of the State are thereby increased. Further, the receipts of a civil department may be considered of greater use to the military administration and directly assigned to the latter. Money or foodstuffs really destined for a civil department may thus come to be used directly for the needs of the army. This possibility, which is always present, shows why destination for the departments of the enemy State is assimilated to that for its armed forces.

It is the departments of the State which are dependent on the central power that are in question, and not all the departments which may exist in the enemy State; local and municipal bodies, for instance, are not included, and articles destined for their use would not be contraband.

War may be waged in such circumstances that destination for the use of a civil department cannot be suspect, and consequently cannot make goods contraband. For instance, there is a war in Europe, and the colonies of the belligerent countries are not, in fact, affected by it. Foodstuffs or other articles in the list of conditional contraband destined for the use of the civil government of a colony would not be held to be contraband of war, because the considerations adduced above do not apply to their case; the resources of the civil government cannot be drawn on for the needs of the war. Gold, silver, or paper money are exceptions, because a sum of money can easily be sent from one end of the world to the other. *Contraband articles will not usually be directly addressed to the military authorities or to the government departments of the enemy State. Their true destination will be more or less concealed, and the captor must prove it in order to justify their capture. But it has been thought reasonable to set up presumptions based on the nature of the person to whom, or place for which, the articles are destined. It may be an enemy authority or a trader established in an enemy country who, as a matter of common knowledge, supplies the enemy Government with articles of the kind in question. It may be a fortified place belonging to the enemy or a place used as a base, whether of operations or of supply, for the armed forces of the enemy.

This general presumption may not be applied to the merchant vessel herself on her way to a fortified place, though she may in herself be conditional contraband, but only if her destination for the use of the armed forces or government departments of the enemy State is directly proved.

In the absence of the above presumptions, the destination is presumed to be innocent. That is the ordinary law, according to which the captor must prove the illicit character of the goods which he claims to capture.

Finally, all the presumptions thus set up in the interest of the captor or against him may be rebutted. The national tribunals, in the first place, and, in the second, the International Court, will exercise their judgment.

As has been said above, the doctrine of continuous voyage is excluded for conditional contraband, which is only liable to capture when it is to be discharged in an enemy port. As soon as the goods are documented for discharge in a neutral port they can no longer be contraband, and no examination will be made as to whether they are to be forwarded to the enemy by sea or land from that neutral port. It is here that the case of absolute contraband is essentially different.

The ship's papers furnish complete proof as to the voyage on which the vessel is engaged and as to the place where the cargo is to be discharged; but this would not be so if the vessel were encountered clearly out of the course which she should follow according to her papers, and unable to give adequate reasons to justify such deviation.

This rule as to the proof furnished by the ship's papers is intended to prevent claims frivolously raised by a cruiser and giving rise to unjustifiable captures. It must not be too literally interpreted, for that would make all frauds easy. Thus it does not hold good when the vessel is encountered at sea clearly out of the course which she ought to have followed, and unable to justify such deviation. The ship's papers are then in contradiction with the true facts and lose all value as evidence; the cruiser will be free to decide according to the merits of the case. In the same way, a search of the vessel may reveal facts which irrefutably prove that her destination or the place where the goods are to be discharged is incorrectly entered in the ship's papers. The commander of the cruiser is then free to judge of the circumstances and capture the vessel or not according to his judgment. To resume, the ship's papers are proof, unless facts show their evidence to be false. This qualification of the value of the ship's papers as proof seems self-evident and unworthy of special mention. The aim has been not to appear to weaken the force of the general rule, which forms a safeguard for neutral trade.

It does not follow that, because a single entry in the ship's papers is shown to be false, their evidence loses its value as a whole. The entries which cannot be proved false retain their value.

The case contemplated is certainly rare, but has nevertheless arisen in recent wars. In the case of absolute contraband, there is no difficulty, since destination for the enemy may always be proved, whatever the route by which the goods are sent (Article XXX.). For conditional contraband the case is different, and an exception must be made to the general rule laid down in Article XXXV., paragraph I, so as to allow the captor to prove that the suspected goods really have the special destination referred to in Article XXXIII. without the possibility of being confronted by the objection that they were to be discharged in a neutral port.