Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T14:27:12.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Diversion of Merchantmen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Philip C. Jessup
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , April 1940 , pp. 312 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © by the American Society of International Law 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Harvard Research in International Law, Draft Convention on Rights and Duties of Neutral States in Naval and Aerial War, this Journal, Supplement, Vol. 33 (1939), at p. 578 ff. The comment on this subject was written by the Assistant Reporter, Mr. Oliver J. Lissitzyn.

2 Great Britain, War Compensation Court, 6th Report, 1926, p. 14.

3 Loc. cit., p. 21.

4 See Order V, Prize Court Rules, 1914, Great Britain, Manual of Emergency Legislation (1914), p. 266.

5 Cf. the report in the New York Times, March 7,1940, that the German Government has taken this position. On belligerent convoy, see the Harvard Draft, loc. cit., p. 674 ff. On neutral acquiescence in illegal belligerent measures, see ibid., p. 420.

6 See notice issued through the British Consulate General, New York, Sept. 11, 1939, CCH War Law Service, No. 65,551.

7 Cf. Department of State Bulletin, Vol. II, p. 5; Commerce Reports, Jan. 13,1940, p. 25; CCH War Law Service, Nos. 40, 620, 65,556, 66,005, 66,015. For a description of the navicert system during the World War, see Ritchie, The “Navicert” System During the World War (1938).

8 So called from the name of the steamship line whose vessels first utilized this procedure in the present war. There are, however, examples of similar practices in the past.

9 It has been stated that such officials operate, for example, in Italian ports; see Life magazine, Jan. 15, 1940, p. 47.

10 Department of State Bulletin, Vol. II, p. 4. See also the protest of Nov. 20, 1939, against the British Order in Council of Nov. 27, 1939, ibid., Vol. I, p. 651. The text of the British Order is in CCH War Law Service, No. 65,557. See the further protest of Jan. 20, 1940, Department of State Bulletin, Vol. II, p. 94. In their protest of Dec. 27, 1939, regarding the treatment of American mails, the United States objected particularly to the “practice of taking mails from vessels which ply directly between American and neutral European ports and which through some form of duress are induced to call at designated British control bases.” Ibid., p. 3.

11 Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 50 and 69.

12 Cf. The Bemisse and The Elve, (1921) 1 A. C. 458.

13 Harvard Draft, loc. cit., pp. 599–600.

14 Suggestions for a system of certification are elaborated in the Harvard Draft, loc. cit.,pp. 500–504, 506 ff. and 775 ff.