68 INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PEACE 



Italy-Spain . . . , -... . Sept. 2. *Bolivia-Peru . - . . ,. . ....- .Mar. 31. 



Argentina-France . . >. Sept. 7. Italy-Sweden ,....-;., "... Apr. 30. 



*Argentina-Chile . . . Sept. 13. Argentina-Ecuador : . . July 16: ; 



Austria Hungary-Brazil . Oct. 19. Argentina-Venezuela . . July 24. 



Italy-Russia . . . . Oct. 27. *United States-France . Aug. 3. 



Belgium-Italy . . . . Nov. 18. United States-Great Britain Aug. 3. 



Italy-Norway . .. ,. . .. Dec. 4. *Denmark-France . .,. ... .Aug. 9. 



1911. Brazil-Denmark . ..' . .'Nov. 27. 



Brazil-Uruguay . . . Jan. 12. 1912. 



Brazil-Paraguay . . . Feb. 24. Argentina-Colombia . . Jan. 20. 



VII. Restrictions on War. 



The next best condition of things to avoiding war is to restrict its area and effects 

 when it unfortunately break ouJt to the minimum consistent with its object. Such a 

 restriction was one of the features of the Turco-Italian war. Thus simultaneously with 

 the despatch of the ultimatum to Constantinople, the Marquis di San Giuliano despatched 

 a note to the Italian Legations and Consulates in the Balkan States of which the 

 following passage is significant : 



... The Italian Government is determined to settle the Tripoli question in con- 

 formity with the interests and dignity of Italy; but, whatever the means she may have to 

 employ in order to secure this end, the basis of her policy will continue to be the maintenance 

 of the territorial status quo in the Balkan Peninsula and the consolidation of European 

 Turkey. Not only, therefore, does the Royal Government not wish to encourage any 

 movement against Turkey in the Balkan Peninsula, but it is firmly resolved to redouble its 

 efforts to prevent, particularly at this moment, anything of the kind happening, and if any 

 hopes or illusions have been formed or are likely to be formed in that sense they must be 

 dispelled immediately, and you will suit your conduct and language to these ends directly 

 the opportunity presents itself to do so. 



At the beginning of the war, Italy also declared her intention not to land any troops 

 in any part of the Ottoman Empire except Tripoli and Cyrenaica. The extinction of the 

 lights along the Adriatic, Mediterranean and Red Sea coasts of Turkey, nevertheless, 

 became a very serious matter. Italy's undertaking not to carry operations of war be- 

 yond the coast of the territory in question did not overcome the difficulty, inasmuch as 

 it was to be presumed that she would only so bind herself provided Turkey entered into 

 an engagement not to invade her Red Sea possessions. Nor did she restrict herself 

 absolutely in accordance with her engagements, but, later on, landed troops on Greek 

 islands, and threatened, and, in certain cases fired upon, different cities on the coast of 

 Asia Minor, though she explained that this was solely for the purpose of destroying Turk- 

 ish war vessels, which might otherwise have attacked Italian merchant ships. 



The neutralization of the Red Sea was also mooted in the course of the war, arid in- 

 deed the reason which led to the neutralization of the Suez Canal seems to be almost as 

 strongly in favour of the Red Sea, as a more or less narrow highway of navigation, being 

 assimilated to it. The inconvenience of the extinction of lights on the Turkish coast 

 brought the need of such neutralization home to the shipping interests using the canal. 



Incidentally it may be mentioned that, neutralized as the canal is, it is still legally 

 on Turkish soil, as was admitted in the " Kaissari " incident at the beginning of the 

 war. The vessel in question was conveying troops to replace others in the Yemen whose 

 terms of service had expired. It was considered as not affected by the twenty- four hours 

 rule imposed by Art. 4 of the Suez Canal Convention, and allowed to remain at Port 

 Said under cover of the canal being a part of Turkey as well as neutralized. 



VIII. The Malecka Case. 



Of isolated international incidents, the only truly interesting one of late years has 

 been that of the arrest in Poland of Miss Malecka, which once more raised the vexed 

 question of mixed nationalities. This lady was Russian by descent under Russian law 

 and British by reason of her birth in England under British law. She was arrested early 

 in 1911 on a charge of abetting a political conspiracy, and seemed exposed to being de- 

 tained in prison without trial for an indefinite time. But owing to pressure from the 

 British government she was at last put on trial at Warsaw, and on May 10, 1912 was 



