one of the belligerents, would be found in a case Chapter IV where secrecy regarding further naval operations was essential or desirable, and no other effective guarantee against unauthorized communication seems practicable.

ing marks of hospital ships.

ARTICLE 5. The military hospital ships shall be Distinguishdistinguished by being painted white outside with a horizontal band of green about one metre and a half in width. The ships mentioned in Articles 2 and 3 shall be distinguished by being painted white outside with a horizontal band of red about one metre and a half in breadth. The boats of the ships above mentioned, as also similar craft, which may be used for hospital work, shall be distinguished by similar painting. All hospital ships shall make themselves known by hoisting, together with their national flag, a white flag with a red cross provided by the Geneva Convention.

At the meeting of the full Committee at which the article was adopted, Mirza Riza Khan, First Delegate of Persia, made the following declaration in regard to the last paragraph of Article 5:

"Pursuant to the instructions which I have just Distinctive received from my Government, I am directed to in-flag of Persia form the Committee that the Persian Government

will claim as a distinctive flag a white flag with a

red sun.

The adoption of the red cross as the distinctive flag of hospitals was an act of courtesy on the part of the Signatory Powers of the Geneva Convention toward the Swiss Government, in that the national flag of Switzerland was adopted, simply

Chapter IV changing the order of the colors. We would be happy to extend the same courtesy to the honorable Government of Switzerland, if it were not impossible on account of objections which would be raised in a Mohammedan army. I request the Committee to kindly take notice of this declaration, and to have the same inserted in the minutes of the meeting."

Similar declaration by Siam.

Neutral

temporarily

as hospital

Official notice was taken of this declaration, as well as of another made on behalf of the Siamese Government by M. Rolin, to the effect that the Royal Government of Siam reserved the right to change the sign on the Geneva flag to a symbol sacred in the Buddhistic cult, and calculated to increase the saving authority of the flag.

ARTICLE 6. Neutral merchantmen, yachts, or vessels acting vessels having or taking on board sick, wounded, or shipwrecked of the belligerents, cannot be captured for so doing, but they shall be liable to capture for any violation of neutrality which they may have committed.

ships.

Inviolability

of the staff of

It will be seen that in this article no provision is made for the case of a merchantman belonging to one of the belligerent parties carrying sick wounded. In consequence, such a vessel remains under the provisions of the common law, and is liable to capture. This provision would seem to follow logically from all the principles governing the

case.

ARTICLE 7. The religious, medical, or hospital hospital ships. staff of any captured ship is inviolable, and its mem

On leaving Chapter IV

bers cannot be made prisoners of war.
the ship they shall take with them the effects and
surgical instruments which are their own private
property. The staff shall continue to discharge its
duties while necessary, and may afterward leave the
ship when the commander-in-chief considers it possi-
ble. The belligerents shall guarantee the payment
of their full salaries to the staffs which shall fall
into their hands.

be cared for

ARTICLE 8. Soldiers and sailors who are taken on All sick and board when sick or wounded shall be protected and wounded to looked after by the captors, without regard to the alike. nation to which they belong.

ARTICLE 9. The shipwrecked, wounded, or sick of Status of the one of the belligerents who fall into the hands of the captured. other, shall be prisoners of war. The captor shall decide, according to circumstances, whether it is best to detain them or send them to a port of his own. country, to a neutral port, or even to a hostile port. In the last case, prisoners thus returned to their own country shall not serve again during the continuance of the war.

It is, of course, understood that if the shipwrecked, wounded, or sick who are returned to their own country are so returned in consequence of an exchange, they are no longer regarded as prisoners of war under parole, but regain their own liberty of action.

wounded, or

[ARTICLE 10. The shipwrecked, wounded, or sick Disposition of who shall be landed at a neutral port, with the con- shipwrecked, sent of the local authorities, must, in the absence of a sick, landed contrary arrangement between the neutral State and at a neutral the belligerents, be guarded by the neutral State so

port.

Chapter IV

Article 10.

that they cannot again take part in the military operations. The expense of entertainment and detention shall be borne by the State to which the wounded, shipwrecked, or sick shall belong.]

Discussion of The provisions of this article led to lively discussions. It was finally adopted by a bare majority, as follows:

Ayes: Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, Great Britain, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, and Turkey, (10).

Noes: United States of America, Belgium, China, Denmark, Spain, Japan, Siam, Sweden and Norway, and Switzerland, (9).

According to Professor Zorn (Deutsche Rundschau, January, 1900, p. 136): "It is still questionable whether the true solution has been found." According to Article 10 a neutral State certainly would have the right to receive wounded and shipwrecked without violating its duties as a neutral, provided only that both belligerents were treated alike, but Professor Zorn calls attention to the possibility of a war between Russia and France on the one side and Germany on the other, with the Baltic Sea as the scene of the naval operations. Denmark being a neutral State and receiving shipwrecked and wounded, might by that very act confer upon Russia and France an advantage which might conceivably be of determining importance. Germany, in signing the treaty, reserved special liberty of action under this Article, and the same course was taken by the United States, Great Britain, and Turkey.

In view of these facts, the Netherlands Govern- Chapter IV ment, on January 29, 1900, addressed an identical note to all the Signatory Powers, stating that the Convention had been signed with this reservation by these four Powers, and going on to say: "Under the circumstances, and also by reason of the desirability that there should be a uniformity established in the respective obligations resulting from this Convention for the Contracting Powers-a uniformity which would be endangered by the reservations of four of them, the Government of Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands deems that there should be a means of excluding the ratification of the said Article 10, which of itself, otherwise, is only of secondary interest. It is to be hoped that if this proposal is accepted, and I am happy to be able to inform you that the Imperial Russian Government agrees with us in our views on this, the subject of the exclusion of the above-mentioned Article - the ratification can be made with no further difficulty of internal form in the different countries, and it could be effected with little delay, which would be highly desirable."1 On April 30, 1900, the Minister of the Netherlands Exclusion of in Washington informed the State Department that "the proposition of the Government of the Netherlands, which formed the subject of M. de Beaufort's communication of January 29, suggesting the exclusion of the ratification of Article 10 of the Convention, has received the assent of all the States which up to 1 Note by M. de Beaufort to Minister Newel. Mss. State Depart

ment.

Article 10.

K