NOTES
[1: See Justice Story's Judgment in the Case of the La Jeune Eugenie. Life, Vol. i. 341.]
[2: The Law of Reprisals; Vide note (A.)]
[3: Rutherford's Institutes, vol. ii. p. 509.]
[4: 2 Wheaton, p. 11; 1 Kent, p. 54.]
[5: Per Sir W. Scott—Case of the Eliza Ann, 4 Rob. Adm. Rep. 247.]
[6: Wildman's International Law, vol. ii. p. 5.]
[7: 1 Kent, p. 54; Vattel, book 3, chap. iv. sec. 64.]
[8: 1 Kent, p. 55.]
[9: 2 Wheaton, p. 12; 1 Kent, p. 55; Rutherford's Institutes, book 2, chap. 9, sec. 10.]
[10: 2 Wheaton, p. 12-25; 1 Kent's Com. p. 55-6; Brown v. United States, 2 Cranch, 110; see also 228, 229.]
[11: Idem.]
[12: Grot, book 3, chap. 20, sec. 16.]
[13: 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. 64.]
[14: 2 Wheaton, p. 19.]
[15: Lindo v. Rodney, Doug. 612; The Boedes Lust, 5 Rob. Rep. 233.]
[16: Per Lord Mansfield, Lindo v. Rodney.]
[17: Wolff v. Oxholm, 6 M. and S. 92.]
[18: Grot. book 2, chap. 18, sec. 344; book 3, chap. 5, sec. 77.]
[19: Whewell, Grot. vol. 3, p. 151, sec. 4; p. 165, sec. 4 (2).]
[20: 1 Kent's Com. p. 65.]
[21: Bynkersheok, Quæst. Sur. Pub. lib. i. cap. 3; 2 Wheaton, p. 26.]
[22: Robinson's Adm. Rep. p. 196.]
[23: The Hoop.]
[24: The Rapid, 8 Cranche's Rep. p. 155.]
[25: The St. Lawrence, 8 Cranche's Rep. p. 434.]
[26: The Juffrow Catharina, 5 Rob. 141.]
[27: 2 Wheaton, p. 37.]
[28: 1 Kent's Com. p. 67.]
[29: The Rendsborg, 4 Rob. Adm. Rep. 132.]
[30: Park, p. 497.]
[31: Toulmin v. Anderson, 1 Taunt. 227.]
[32: Potter v. Bell, T. Rep. 548; The Hoop, supra.]
[33: Vandyck v. Whitmore, 1 East, 475.]
[34: Park, 502.]
[35: Park on Insurance; Arnold on Insurance; Gist v. Mason, I T. R. 84.]
[36: Idem.]
[37: The Immanuel, 2 Rob. Adm. Rep. 198.]
[38: Park, 502; Sewell v. Royal Exchange Assurance Co. 4 Taunt. 856; Wilson v. Marryat, 8 T. Rep. 31.]
[39: Willison v. Patterson, 7 Taunt. 439; Vide Note on the War Bill Act, at the end of this part.]
[40: Per Gibbs, C.J. Antoine v. Morshead, 6 Taunt. 238. According to Mr. Serjeant Byles, a bill drawn by a British prisoner in favour of an alien enemy cannot be enforced by the payee. He cites no case in support of this assertion; but on the principle of the last case cited, if it were drawn for subsistence and not for trade, there seems to be no reason why it should not be legal.]
[41: Duhamel v. Pickering, 2 Starkie, 92.]
[42: Barker v. Hodgson, 3 M. & S. 270.]
[43: Liddard v. Lopes, 10 East. 526; Abbot, on Shipping, 596.]
[44: 1 Kent's Com. 248; The Hiram, 3 Rob. Adm. 189.]
[45: 1 Kent's Com., 249.]
[46: Hadley v. Clarke, 8 T.R. 259; 3 Kent's Com. 249.]
[47: Abbot, on Shipping, 599.]
[48: Pothier, Trait du Cout. de Joc. No. 140.]
[49: Story, on Partnership, pp. 447, 448.]
[50: Griswold v. Waddington, 16 Johns. Rep. U.S.]
[51: Story, on Partnership, 447.]
[52: Story, on Partnership, 449; Griswold v. Waddington, 15 Johns, 57; 16 Johns, 438.]
[53: Platt, on Covenants, 588; Doe d. Lord Anglesea v. Ch. Wardens of Rugely, 6 Q.B. 113, and cases there cited.]
[54: Cosmopolite, 4 Rob. 10, 11, in note.]
[55: 1 Term. R. Gist. v. Mason.]
[56: Per Buller, J. Bell v. Gilson, 1 Bos. v.. Pull.]
[57: Case of Bella Guidita, cited 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. 207.]
[58: 1 Kent, p. 73]
[58: 1 Kent, p. 73]
[59: Per Eyre, C.J. Sparenburgh v. Bannatyne, 1 B. & P. 168.]
[60: Sparenburgh v. Bannatyne, 1 B. & P. 163.]
[61: Maria v. Hall, 2 B.&P. 236.]
[62: Derry v. Duchess of Mazarin, 1 Taunt. 147.]
[63: 7 & 8 Vic. c. 66, sec. 16; Mrs. Manning's Case, 2 D.C.C. 468.]
[64: The Vriendchap, 6 Rob. 166; the Embden, 1 Rob. 17; the Endraught, 1 Rob. 23.]
[65: Kent's Com. vol. i. 74.]
[66: Case of the Emmanuel, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. 302.]
[67: Case of Dos Hermanos, 2 Wheaton, 76.]
[68: 1 Wheaton, 46; Rob. Adm, Rep. iii. 324; the Harmony, the Indian Chief, 3 Rob. 12.]
[69: The Ocean, 5 Rob. p. 91.]
[70: The Vigilantia, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 1.]
[71: The Susa, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. ii. p. 255.]
[72: Wheaton, vol. ii. p. 71, citing Cranch's Rep. vol viii. p. 253.]
[73: 1 Kent's Com. 82, citing Berens v. Rucker, I W. Bl. 313; and vide infra Chap. iii. under title "Rule of 1756.">[
[74: The Vigilantia, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. 15.]
[75: The Success, I Dodson's Adm. Rep. 132.]
[76: I Kent's Com., p. 85.]
[77: I Kent's Com. p. 85.]
[78: Vrow Margaretha, I Rob. Adm. Rep. 338.]
[79: Esprit des Loix, book 15, c. 2.]
[80: Vattel, Idem.]
[81: Wheaton, vol. 2, p. 79.]
[82: Wheaton, vol. 2, p. 8; Kent, vol. 1, p. 91.]
[83: Not so, however, in the late Declaration, March 28,1854; sed vide App.]
[84: Vattel, book 3, chap. 15.]
[85: Kent, vol. I, sec. 5, p. 94.]
[86: 4 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 262 (n).]
[87: Prize Acts, 45 Geo. III. c. 75.]
[88: Order of Council, 1665; the Maria Francaise, 6 Rob. Adm. Rep. 282; Rebekah, 1 Rob. 229.]
[89: Vattel, book 3, chap. 15, sec. 229.]
[90: The Elsebe, 5 Rob. 176.]
[91: The Thorshaven, Edw. Rep. 102; 45 Goo. III. c. 72.]
[92: 45 Geo. III. c. 72, sec. 25.]
[93: The Vryheid, 2 Rob. 16.]
[94: Martens, on Privateering, p. 2.]
[95: But see the Introduction.]
[96: Act of Congress, April 20, 1818, chap. 83.]
[97: Kent, vol. I, p. 100.]
[98: Wheaton, vol. 2, p. 88-9.]
[99: Kent, sec. 5, p. 102; Rutherford's Institutes, book 2, chap. 9.]
[100: This description of the preliminary proceedings in Prize is taken from the second volume of Wildman's Institutes of International Law, p. 355; cited "by that author from a letter from Sir W. Scott and Dr. Nicholl to Mr. Jay, the American Minister.">[
[101: Lindo v. Rodney, Doug. 614, note.]
[102: Brymer v. Atkins, I. H. Black.]
[103: Brymer v. Atkins, I. H. Black, p. 189.]
[104: Floy Owen, I Rob. Adm. Rep. 136; Oddy v. Bovill, 2 East. 470.]
[105: 4 Rob. Rep. 43.]
[106: Wheaton, vol. 2, p. 97.]
[107: Vattel, book 3, chap. 13, sec. 197.]
[108: Wheaton, vol. 2, p. 112.]
[109: Vattel, book 3, chap. 17, sec. 265-268.]
[110: Page 6, ante.]
[111: The Cosmopolite, 4 Bob. Kep. 8.]
[112: The Abigail, Stewart's Adm. Rep. p. 360.]
[113: Shroeder v. Vaux, 15 East. Rep. 52; 3 Camp. N.P. Rep. p. 83; the Cosmopolite, 4 Rob. 8.]
[114: The Dauk Vaarhirt, 1 Dod. Adm. Rep. 187.]
[115: The Dauk Vaarhirt, 1 Dod. Adm. Rep. 187.]
[116: Idem.]
[117: The Jonge Arend, 5 Rob. 14.]
[118: The Henrietta, 1 Dod. Adm. Rep. 173.]
[119: The Jonge Johannes, 4 Rob. Adm. Rep. 268.]
[120: Idem.]
[121: The Jonge Klassina, 5 Rob. Adm. Rep. 297.]
[122: The Cousinne Marianne, Edw. 346.]
[123: The Twee Gebroeders, Edw. Adm. Rep. 95.]
[124: The Manly, I Dod. 257.]
[125: Europa, Edw. 42.]
[126: Golden Hoop, Nov. 7, 1809, 1 Edw. Rep.]
[127: The St. Ivan, Edw. 376.]
[128: 1 Kent, 103. The statutes are, 22 Geo. 3, c. 25; 35 Geo. 3, c. 66, sections 35, 36; 45 Geo. 3, c. 72, sections 16, 17, 18, and 19.]
[129: There are a few other general points with respect to ransoms, which will be found infra under recaptures. Valin is the principal authority, and his law will be found well summed up in the 2nd volume of Wildman's Institutes of International Law. There are few cases on the subject; the chief are, Ricard v. Bellenham, 3 Burr, 1734; Yates v. Hall, 3 T.R. 76, 80; Authon v. Fisher, Corner v. Blackburn, 2 Doug.]
[130: Martens on Privateers and Recaptures.]
[131: The Ceylon, I Dod. 105; l'Actif, Edw. 185, vide etiam; the Nostra Signora, 3 Bob. 10; the Georgiana, I Dod. 397; the Horatio, 6 Rob. 320.]
[132: The Edward and Mary, 3 Rob. 305.]
[133: The Pensamento Felix, Edw. 115.]
[134: The Charlotte Caroline, 1 Dod. 194.]
[135: Santa Cruz, 1 Rob. 63.]
[136: The War Onskan, 2 Rob. 300.]
[137: 1 Kent, Com. 108.]
[138: The William, 6 Rob. 316.]
[139: Idem.]
[140: Vattel, book iii. c. 7.]
[141: Idem.]
[142: 2 Wheaton, chap. iii. sec. i. p. 133.]
[143: Wheaton, vol. ii. 137; Kent's Com. vol. i. p. 116.]
[144: Vrow Anna Catharina, 5 Rob. 18.]
[145: Idem.]
[146: 1 Kent's Com. p. 117; The Anna, 5 Rob. Adm. Rep. 373.]
[147: Vrow Anna Catharina, 5 Rob. 18.]
[148: The Anna, 5 Rob. 385 c.]
[149: The Twee Gebroeders, 3 Rob. A. R. 162.]
[150: The Etrusco, 3 Rob. Adm. Rep.]
[151: 1 Kent Com. p. 116; Vattel, book in, chap, vii, sec. 115. See also, The Immanuel, 2 Rob. Adm. Rep. 198, and the Notes on the Declarations, in Appendix.]
[152: Vattel, book in, chap. vii, sec. 116.]
[153: The Fortuna, 4 Rob. Rep. p. 278.]
[154: The Diana, 5 Rob. Rep. 57.]
[155: The Fortuna.]
[156: Vide Vattel.]
[157: Kent's Com. 123; The Copenhagen, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. 290.]
[158: Vide post. Section IV, and Notes on the Declarations. Appendix.]
[159: The Fancy, 1 Dod. Adm. Rep. 448.]
[160: The Nereid, 9 Cranch Rep. 398.]
[161: The Fancy, 1 Dodson's Adm. Rep. 448.]
[162: The Sachs Gesawhistern, 4 Rob. Adm. Rep. 100.]
[163: The Minerva, 6 Rob. Adm. Rep. 399.]
[164: The Noydt Gedart. 2 Rob. 137, (n.)]
[165: 4 Rob. 100.]
[166: See in the Appendix a table of articles of commerce that have been declared contraband.]
[167: Grotius, book in. chap. i. sec. v.; Rutherfurd's Instit. book ii. chap. ix. sec. xix.]
[168: The Commercen, 1 Wheaton's Rep. 241.]
[169: The Commereen, 1 Wheaton's Rep. 241.]
[170: The Jonge Margaretha, Rob. Adm..Rep. vol. i. p. 192.]
[171: The Charlotte, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. v. p. 305.]
[172: 2 Wheaton, 194, 210.]
[173: The Haabet, 2 Rob. Adm. Rep. 182.]
[174: The Carolina, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. iv. p. 256.]
[175: They were officers of distinction.]
[176: The Orozembo, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 434.]
[177: Idem.]
[178: The Atalanta, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. vi. p. 440.]
[179: The Caroline. Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. vi. p. 461.]
[180: The Ringende Jacob, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. i. p. 90.]
[181: The Franklin, Rob. vol. iii, p. 125.]
[182: The Rolla, 6 Rob. 366.]
[183: The Edward, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. iv. p. 70.]
[184: The Tonina, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. iii. p. 168.]
[185: The Betsy, The Columbia, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. pp. 92 and 155.]
[186: The Hoffnung, 6 Rob. 120; see also The Triheton, 6 Rob. 65.]
[187: The Mercurius, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 83.]
[188: 2 Wheaton, p. 233, citing Rob. Adm. Rep.]
[189: Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. i. p. 156.]
[190: Neptunus, Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. i. p. 171; Neptunus, Hempel. Rob. Adm. Rep. vol. ii. p. 112.]
[191: 2 Wheaton, p. 239.]
[192: 2 Wheaton, pp. 242, 244.]
[193: The Betsey, 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 93.]
[194: 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 340.]
[195: See Section iv. on Armed Neutralities.]
[196: 1 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 340.]
[197: 43 Geo. III. c. lvii. sec. 1; Abbot, on Shipping, pp. 353—356.]
[198: This account of armed neutralities has been extracted principally from Kent's Commentaries, vol. i. pp. 126-7; Wheaton on International Law, vol. ii. pp. 165-184; Martens on Privateers, pp. 230-33.
There are also most excellent accounts of these celebrated confederacies to be found in the Annual Register, in volumes 23, (1780,) and 43, (1801,) in the portion called the Historical Chronicle.]
[199: This Note was originally intended to form part of the text, but was accidentally omitted.]
[200: Le Louis.]
[201: Vattel, book ii. chap, xviii. sec. 342.]
[202: The Boedes Lust, 5 Rob. Adm. Rep. p. 244.]
[203: 1 Kent's Com. p. 60.]
[204: Lind. v. Rodney, Dougl. Rep. p. 614. a.]
[205: Lord Stowell argues the principles at length in the Immanuel, 2 Rob. Adm. Rep. 198, 100.]
[206: Vide section ii. chap. iii. Contraband of War.]
[207: Vide p. 84.]
[208: See section ii. chap. ii. Blockades.]
[209: This is the doctrine free ships free goods, for the first time voluntarily adopted by this country, pp. 72, 74.]
[210: According to Vattel, this belligerent right has no existence, and need not therefore be waived, as it could not legally be exercised; but see p. 73.]
[211: This grant of general reprisals, though apparently limited in its address, (as to action in the war) to Her Majesty's fleets and ships, does not exclude non-commissioned captors from taking Russian ships, or goods when called upon by necessity to do so. For example, any of our armed merchantmen, who in the present war will not be allowed letters of marque, would be quite justified when beating off the enemy, in also making a capture if possible, and although her prize would become a Droit of Admiralty, the captor would be entitled to apply to the court for some compensation. The second part of this declaration is intended to proclaim the preliminary step to establishing the court of prize. The declarations with respect to the embargo laid upon Russian goods and ships in our ports require no comment.]
[212: See pages 11 and 12.]
[213: The Neptunus, 6 Robinson's Adm. Rep. p. 406; also the Nayade, 4 Rob. p. 251.]
[214: Vide post.]
[215: See page 74.]
[216: See page 75.]
[217: This allows free commerce in neutral bottoms to our ports, from Russia. It is difficult to see what is meant by "friendly flags." It cannot mean "a flag of the allies," for that would be giving our allies more than we take ourselves. It is, perhaps, intended to include powers that may not be friendly to Russia, but in that position to ourselves, without being allied to us.]
[218: Free trade by British vessels in enemy's property to ports not hostile.]