Words at any rate capable of this construction may, no doubt, be quoted from one of Lord Stowell's judgments, now more than a century old; but many things have happened, notably the invention of railways, since the days of that great Judge.

In such a case the neutral has ample warning of the danger to which he would be exposed did he not alter his intended course.

It would, however, be an entirely different affair if he should find himself implicated in belligerent war risks, of the existence of which it was impossible for him to be informed, while pursuing his lawful business in waters over which…

It is certain that no international usage sanctions the employment by one belligerent against the other of mines, or other secret contrivances, which would, without notice, render dangerous the navigation of the high seas.

These, it was pointed out, would superadd to the risk of capture and confiscation, to which a blockade-runner is admittedly liable, the novel penalty of total destruction of the ship and all on board.

The three-mile distance has, no doubt, become inadequate in consequence of the increased range of modern cannon, but no other can be substituted for it without express agreement of the Powers.

They must be restored, and compensation must be arranged for them at the peace.

It would be very useful if the various States would come to an understanding to declare that destruction of, or injury to, submarine cables in the high seas is an offence under the Law of Nations, and to fix precisely the wrongful…

A submarine-telegraph cable uniting two neutral territories is inviolable.

The question is a new one, but, though covered by no precedent, I cannot doubt that it is covered by certain well-established principles of international law, which, it is hardly necessary to remark, is no cut-and-dried system but a body…

It is perhaps reasonable that, in settling these terms, preponderant weight should have been given to the requirements of belligerents, engaged possibly in a life-and-death struggle.

Telegraphic communication with the outside world may well be as important to a State engaged in warfare as similar means of communication between one point and another within its own territory.

Just as an invader would without scruple interrupt messages, and even destroy telegraphic plant, on land, so may he thus act within the enemy's territorial waters, or, perhaps, even so far from shore as he could reasonably place a…

The cutting, elsewhere than in the enemy's waters, of a cable connecting enemy with neutral territory receives no countenance from international law.

Still less permissible would be the cutting of a cable connecting two neutral ports, although messages may pass through it which, by previous and subsequent stages of transmission, may be useful to the enemy.

International precedents are made by diplomatic action (or deliberate inaction) with reference to facts, not by those facts themselves.

Le câble télégraphique sous-marin qui unit deux territoires neutres est inviolable.

It may, however, be doubted whether public opinion is sufficiently well informed to be capable of estimating the comparative gravity of the acts which are just now attracting attention.

On the contrary, the Admiralty Manual of 1888 allows destruction of enemy vessels only; and goes so far in the direction of liberality as to order the release, without ransom, of a neutral prize which either from its condition, or from…

Still more unwarrantable is the Russian claim to interfere with the trade in raw cotton.

It is much to be desired that the practice should be, by future international agreement, absolutely forbidden--- that the lenity of British practice in this respect should become internationally obligatory.

In any case, the owner of neutral property, not proved to be good prize, is entitled to the fullest compensation for his loss.

The destruction of the property may have been a meritorious act towards his own Government; but still the person to whom the property belongs must not be a sufferer ... if the captor has by the act of destruction conferred a benefit upon…

The moral which I would venture to draw is, therefore, that although questions of fact, arising out of capture of a prize, might sometimes be submitted to a tribunal of arbitration, no case, involving rules of law as to which nations take…

The settlement of the law of prize must necessarily precede any general resort to an international prize Court; and if the coming Hague Conference does no more than settle some of the most pressing of these questions, it will have done…