Though myself strongly in favour of placing, at the proper time and in an appropriate manner, legislative restrictions upon the general use of the emblem and name, I can hardly think the Bill now before Parliament to be well adapted for…

This requirement is not satisfied by the Bill, which, even if passed in the present Session, would preserve intact till 1915 the rights of proprietors of trade-marks, while somewhat harshly rendering forthwith illegal the user of the…

Is it too much to hope that similar aids to the understanding of complicated legislative proposals will be systematically provided in the future?

Would it not also be desirable to take this opportunity of severing the enlistment articles of the overgrown principal Act from those forbidding the despatch of ships fitted for hostilities and restricting the hospitality which may be…

Upon quite a different subject, I should like to answer the question propounded in your article, as to the weight now to be given to the Declaration of London, by saying that no weight should be given to it, except as between Powers who…

If the visiting, and eventual sinking, of the Kowshing occurred in time of peace, or in time of war before she had notice that war had broken out, a gross outrage has taken place.

Whether or no hostilities had previously occurred upon the mainland, I hold that the acts of the Japanese commander in boarding the Kowshing and threatening her with violence in case of disobedience to his orders were acts of war.

If, as was the fact, it was practically impossible for a Japanese prize crew to be placed on board of her, the Japanese commander was within his rights, in using any amount of force necessary to compel her to obey his orders.

The force employed seems not to have been in excess of what might lawfully be used, either for the arrest of an enemy's neutral transport or for barring the progress of a hostile expedition.

No apology is due to our Government, nor have the owners of the Kowshing, or the relatives of any of her European officers who may have been lost, any claim for compensation.

International law has in modern times spoken with no very certain voice as to the permissible treatment of alien enemies found within the territory of a belligerent at the outbreak of war.

There is, however, little doubt that such persons, although now more usually allowed to remain, during good behaviour, may be expelled, and, if necessary, wholesale, as were Germans from France in 1870.

But may such persons be, for good reasons, arrested, or otherwise prevented from leaving the country, as Germans were prevented from leaving France in the earlier days of the Franco-Prussian War?

The doctrine of Vattel has, in fact, become less plausible than it was before universal liability to military service had become the rule in most Continental countries.

The peaceably engaged foreign resident is now in all probability a trained soldier, and liable to be recalled to the flag of a possible enemy.

It may also be a question of high policy whether resident enemies would not be a greater danger to this country if they were compelled to remain here, than if they were allowed, or compelled, to depart, possibly to return as invaders.

I am only concerned to maintain that, as far as international law is concerned, England has a free hand either to expel resident enemies or to prevent them from leaving the country, as may seem most conducive to her own safety.

If this be indeed the Pope's meaning, his aspirations are now less likely than ever to be realised.

Supposing the convention to have become operative, and supposing the territorial Power to be neutral in a war between States which we may call A and B, the convention would certainly entitle A to claim unmolested passage for its ships of…

I cordially agree, as would, I suppose, most people, with your leading article of some weeks since in deprecating any crude application to the case of the Dardanelles and Bosporus of dicta with reference to freedom of passage through…

It would, indeed, be straining what may be taken to be a general principle of international law to say that Turkey is by it prohibited from protecting her threatened capital by temporarily closing the Straits.

They are of such a character that, in the struggle for existence, Turkey can hardly be blamed for disregarding them.

Such rights, I would again urge, if enjoyed by one Power, should be enjoyed by all; upon terms to be settled, not by any pair of Powers but by the Powers collectively.

It was scandalously not followed in the cases of the Tokomaru, the Ikaria, and the hospital ship (!) Asturias, against which a submarine fired torpedoes, off Havre, without warning or inquiry, and, of course, regardless of the fate of…

The progress of civilisation should have the effect of alleviating as much as possible the calamities of war.