from St. Pierre, Martinique, to the Secretary of the Navy that the Spanish torpedo-boat destroyer Furor had touched during the afternoon at Fort de France, Martinique, and had afterwards left, destination unknown, and that the Governor had ordered him not to sail within twenty-four hours from the time of the Furor's departure. At noon on the 12th of May, Captain Cotton was informed by the captain of the port at St. Pierre that the Furor had about 8 A.M. again called at Fort de France and would leave about noon and that he might go to sea at 8 P.M.; but that if he did not do so he would be required to give the Governor twenty-four hours' notice of his intention to leave the port. On the same day Captain Cotton received information which led him to telegraph to the Secretary of the Navy that he was closely observed and blockaded at St. Pierre by the Spanish fleet, and that the Spanish torpedoboat destroyer Terror was at Fort de France. Later Captain Cotton cabled that the Spanish Consul protested against his stay at St. Pierre, and that he had requested permission to remain a week to make necessary repairs to machinery. Replying to these reports, the Secretary of the Navy telegraphed to Captain Cotton as follows: "Vigorously protest against being forced out of the port in the face of superior blockading force, especially as you were detained previously in the port by the French authorities because Spanish men-of-war had sailed from another port. Also state that the United States Government will bring the matter to the attention of the French Government. Urge the United States Consul to protest vigorously." It proved to be unnecessary to take further action. Captain Cotton's request for time was granted. The Governor showed no disposition to force him out of port, only requiring twenty-four hours' notice of an intention to sail; and the dangers to which the Harvard seemed to be exposed soon disappeared. It may be observed, however, that as the enforcement, under circumstances such as were described, of the twenty-four hours' limit would constitute a negation of the admitted privilege of asylum, it is not likely that it would be held to be applicable in such a situation.

(Taken textually from Moore: Digest of International Law, vol. VII, pp. 990-91, citing Naval Operations of the War with Spain, pp. 383-89, 407-10.)

THE SOJOURN OF THE RUSSIAN FLEET IN FRENCH WATERS (1904-05)

ON October 16, 1904, the first division of the Baltic fleet sailed under the command of Admiral Rojestvensky from Libau for Vladivostock. On February 15, 1905, the second division, made up of less effective vessels, followed, under command of Admiral Nebogatoff. Admiral Rojestvensky's fleet coaled from colliers at Cherbourg in France, October 24, and arrived in Vigo in Spain October 26, where it was delayed four or five days, pending the settlement of preliminaries of the Dogger bank incident. After the Russian vessels had taken on a supply of coal at Tangier, the fleet was divided. One fleet was sent through the Suez Canal, the other proceeded southward along the West coast of Africa, no secret being made that the two divisions were to reunite at some point on or near the coast of Madagascar. The reunion did in fact take place off North Madagascar early in January 1905. The entire fleet remained at Nossi-Be, a small island off the northern coast of Madagascar from January 5 to March 16. The vessels appear to have engaged in drilling and gun practice, but to have been anchored outside the three mile limit, though they maintained close connection with the shore and thence obtained abundant supplies. They were furnished coal from colliers, which either accompanied them, or had been sent thither from European ports.

The sojourn of the Russian fleet in French waters aroused great indignation in Japan, where the opinion was widely entertained that Madagascar was being used as a base of operations against the Japanese. After departing from Nossi-Be the Russian fleet reached Kamranh Bay in French Indo-China April 12, remaining ten days, and took on coal from German and Russian transports. Excitement in Japan became intense, and the Government made representations at Paris on or about April 19. The French Government requested that the Russian vessels depart, and by April 26 Admiral Rojestvensky's fleet had left Kamranh Bay. On May 8 Admiral Rojestvensky's fleet was joined by Nebogatoff's squadron at some point off the Indo-China coast, and the entire fleet

continued on toward Tsushima in the Korean Straits, where, on May 27, 1905, it suffered defeat and destruction.

The use of French waters gave rise to further discussion between the two Governments. Although Japan recognized the existence of the French rules in regard to the stay of warships in her waters, the Mikado's Government considered that the surveillance had been lax, and that Admiral Rojestvensky had been greatly assisted in the accomplishment of his mission and cruise to the Chinese seas.

The French Government, for its part, contended that it had scrupulously observed the requirements of neutrality. It pointed to the extent of the coast and the absence of telegraph stations as an excuse for the transactions of the Russian fleet in Indo-Chinese waters. It considered that it had observed its own rules of neutrality, and taken care to preserve the spirit of an absolute impartiality, and that if the Russians had derived any advantage from their use of French ports, under similar circumstances the Japanese would have been assured of the equality of treatment.

(See Amos S. Hershey: International Law and Democracy of Russo-Japanese War [New York, 1906], pp. 190–98; Pitt Cobbett: Leading Cases on International Law, War and Neutrality [3d ed., London, 1913] pp. 315-18. This brief statement does not cover all the questions discussed in these two accounts.)

(c) The supply of coal and provisions

THE LEIPZIG (1914)

OCTOBER 26, 1914, the German cruiser Leipzig took supplies [vivres] at the island of Juan Fernandez, Chile, and in the middle of the month at Valparaiso asked for more. The British Minister asked the Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs to direct the naval authorities not to permit the Leipzig to re-victual, since she had taken on supplies less than three months before in another Chilean port. The Minister of Foreign Affairs took a different view, based upon Article 20 of the 13th Hague Convention, which prohibits

coaling (combustible) before the expiration of three months, but not other supplies. Consequently the naval authorities at Valparaiso permitted the Leipzig to take on supplies up to the normal peace standard, in conformity with Article 19 of the same Convention.

(Translated and taken textually from the account as given by Dr. Alejandro Alvarez: La Grande Guerre Européenne et la Neutralité du Chili [Paris, 1915], pp. 204-05.)

(d) Repairs

THE KRONPRINZ WILHELM (1915)

The Secretary of State to the German Ambassador

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, April 21, 1915.

Excellency: In reply to your note of the 12th instant requesting the hospitality of the port of Norfolk for H.M.S. Kronprinz Wilhelm, I have the honor to inform you that the Department has received the report of the board of naval officers who have made an examination of the cruiser with a view to ascertaining the repairs which the vessel may undergo in American waters. From this report it appears that the time required for repairs will consume a period of six working days, but that the proposed repairs will not cover the damage to the port side of the cruiser incident to the service in which the vessel has been engaged.1

1 [The following instructions of Mr. Clay, Secretary of State, to Mr. McCulloch, April 7, 1828, are quoted by Moore:]

The Buenos Ayrean privateer Juncal put in at Baltimore for the purpose of making repairs after an action at sea with a Brazilian cruiser. Under these circumstances, the collector of customs at Baltimore was instructed: "Whilst you will not fail to allow her the usual hospitality, and to procure the necessary refreshments, the President directs that you will be careful in preventing any augmentation of her force and her making any repairs not warranted by law. With respect to the latter article, the reparation of damages which she may have experienced from the sea is allowable, but the reparation of those which may have been inflicted in the action is inadmissible." (Taken textually from Moore: Digest of International Law, vol. VII, pp. 991–92.)

The Government has concluded, therefore, that H.M.S. Kronprinz Wilhelm will be allowed until midnight of the close of the 29th day of April next to complete the proposed repairs in the port of Norfolk, and that she will be allowed twenty-four hours in addition, or until midnight of 30th day of April, to leave the territorial waters of the United States, or, failing this, that she will be under the necessity of accepting internment within American jurisdiction during the continuance of the wars in which your country is now engaged.

It is expected that in accordance with the President's proclamations of neutrality H.M.S. Kronprinz Wilhelm will not depart from the port of Norfolk within twenty-four hours after a vessel of an opposing belligerent shall have departed therefrom.

This information has been confidentially conveyed to the collector of customs at Norfolk for transmittal to the commander of the Kronprinz Wilhelm.

Accept, etc.,

For the Secretary of State:

ROBERT LANSING.

(American Journal of International Law, Supplement, July, 1915, pp. 351-52.)

THE GEIER (1914)

The Counselor to the German Ambassador

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, October 30, 1914.

My Dear Mr. Ambassador: The Department has been advised that the German gunboat Geier put into the port of Honolulu, and on October 15 the captain requested permission to make repairs to render the vessel seaworthy, and estimated the time for this work to be one week. The naval constructor of the United States at the port of Honolulu examined the vessel on October 20, and recommended that the time be extended eight days, from October 20, in order to place the boilers in a seaworthy condition. On October 27, the German consul at that port requested from eight to ten days additional time in which to make repairs to steam and feed piping and boilers that have been found to be in a leaking condi