PROBLEMS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 517 



almost twice as great again in value as sugar, the second article in 

 value in the list. 



The whole record as to claims and rulings as to contraband is 

 singularly confused and conflicting, but the claim advanced by 

 Secretary Hay seems so clearly within the practice and the weight 

 of authority of the past half -century that it is hoped it may prevail. 

 Neutral rights are the rights of the vast majority, and they should 

 not be lightly prejudiced for those of the belligerents, who are 

 always a small minority. The disturbance to trade, moreover, 

 caused by a state of belligerency between any two maritime nations 

 re now world-wide. Steam and electricity have made us all near 

 neighbors, and exactly as the peace and order of a closely-settled 

 urban community must be kept by far more stringent regulations 

 than that of a community of scattered shepherds and farmers, just 

 so the peace and security of the vastly increased and greatly more 

 connected and interwoven commerce of the modern seas must be 

 preserved by correspondingly adequate rules. 



The St. Petersburg dispatches of September 12 seem to intimate 

 that Russia, upon the advice of the commission of eminent persons 

 appointed by her to consider this matter, is inclined to modify her 

 declaration as to absolute and conditional contraband in substan- 

 tial accord with the American and British notes, except as to cotton, 

 and this is confirmed by those of the 19th. The action is received 

 with very wide satisfaction, and, it is believed, is in accord with 

 the peaceful and beneficent sentiment of the world. Russia is to 

 be congratulated upon the wisdom and humanity of this action, 

 and Secretary Hay upon his successful protest against what he well 

 characterized as " a declaration of war against commerce of every 

 description between the people of a neutral and those of a belligerent 

 state." 



t 



Belligerent Act in a Neutral Harbor l 



The seizure of a Russian vessel of war by the Japanese in the 

 Chinese harbor of Chefoo on August 12 involves most grave 

 questions of international law. The Russian vessel was pursued by 

 Japanese destroyers, but escaped from them in the night. They 

 later found her in the neutral harbor. The Japanese vessels waited 

 outside the port. The Russian failed to come out. The Japanese 

 commander, anticipating his escape by night and a possible attack 

 on merchantmen, entered the port with two destroyers. It is claimed 

 the Russian had been in port twenty-seven hours, and was not yet 



1 A reply to this discussion was printed by Mr. K. K. Kawakami, attached to 

 the Imperial Japanese Commission at St. Louis, in the Japanese-American Com- 

 mercial Weekly, of September 24, 1904. 



