ALABAMA CLAIMS. , 181 
of fact. When the United States and Great Britain 
shall, in conformity with the Treaty, bring the new 
Rules to the knowledge of other maritime Powers, 
such Powers will of course present for consideration 
all proper objections or qualifications to those Rules. 
Count von Beust goes on to speak of the declara- 
tion made by Austria, Prussia, and Italy in 1866, 
which indicates that he was considering the subject 
in the relation of contraband rather than of simple re- 
fitting in neutral ports. 
But the precise question of the supply of coal in 
neutral ports is not prejudged by the Treaty of 
Washington, nor by the opinions of the Tribunal of 
Arbitration. The United States are quite as much 
interested in having access to supplies of coal “at neu- 
tral stations in all parts of the world” as Austria, or 
Prussia, or Italy; and we may presume that Count 
Sclopis did not fail to reflect on the interests of Italy 
in this behalf. 
One of the “Considérants” of the Award had for 
its special object to prevent misconstruction of the 
second Rule. We quote it as follows: 
“In order to impart to any supplies of coal a character in- 
consistent with the second Rule, prohibiting the use of neu- 
tral ports or waters as a base of naval operations for a Bellig- 
erent, it is necessary that the said supplies should be connect- 
ed with special circumstances of time, of persons, of place, 
which may combine to give them such character.” 
Count Sclopis explains the force of the Decision as 
follows: 
“Quant 4 la question de Vapprovisionnement: et du charge- 
ment de charbon, je ne saurais la traiter que sous le point de 
