PROBLEMS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 513 



of blockade, and such persons have been treated in the same way by 

 Russia. 



The rule as quoted from Calvo, that great and authoritative writer 

 on public law, seems, it is submitted, to meet with continued and 

 universal acquiescence. 



Contraband of War 



On the 14th of February, 1904, Russia, by proclamation, an- 

 nounced that in the war with Japan she would treat as contraband 

 combustibles of all kind, such as coal, naphtha, alcohol, and other 

 like materials. Also all materials for the installation of telegraphs, 

 of telephones, or railroads. This proclamation, together with an 

 explanatory instruction of March 6, also declares contraband 

 anything capable of serving as food or forage for the Japanese army, 

 and especially rice and fish and its different products, beans and their 

 oil. 1 By ordinance of April 26, cotton was added to the list. 

 Under these declarations and ordinances, Russian war-ships have 

 seized neutral vessels bound for Japanese ports and claimed as 

 prize of war articles of the character listed. For instance, they have 

 seized and caused to be condemned a cargo of American flour on a 

 neutral ship not consigned to the Japanese Government or in any 

 way ear-marked for belligerent use except by its destination to a port 

 of Japan. 



The doctrine that articles which may serve alike the uses of peace 

 or war are not contraband unless intended for the military uses of 

 a belligerent rests on two broad principles: 



First. That neutrals under modern usage cannot be hindered in 

 their general right to trade in innocent articles of commerce with 

 belligerents except by an actual blockade, never by a proclamation. 



Secondly. International law forbids a belligerent to make war 

 upon the civil or noncombatant population of its opponent, and, as 

 Hall says: " Hence seizure of articles of commerce becomes illegiti- 

 mate so soon as it ceases to aim at enfeebling the naval and military 

 resources of the country and puts immediate pressure upon the civil 

 population." 2 



The claim of Russia has been at once controverted. The Depart- 

 ment of State of the United States, in a communication to the 

 ambassadors of the United States of June 10, took the ground that 

 articles of double use (ancipitis usus) are contraband if they are 

 destined for the military uses of a belligerent. It points out that 

 the principle of the Russian declaration " might ultimately lead to 



1 Revue Generate de Droit International Public, Mai et Juin, Documents, p. 12 

 et seq. 



2 Hallos International Law, (5th ed. 1904), p. 656. 



