land force and a fleet, or to the laying of a cable to be used chiefly or exclusively for hostile purposes. (International Public Law, p. 754, sec. 670.)

Of the nature of such service Lawrence well says:

We are now in a position to distinguish clearly between the offense of carrying contraband and the offense of engaging in unneutral service. They are unlike in nature, unlike in proof, and unlike in penalty. To carry contraband is to engage in an ordinary trading transaction which is directed toward a belligerent community simply because a better market is likely to be found there than elsewhere. To perform unneutral service is to interfere in the struggle by doing in aid of a belligerent acts which are in themselves not mercantile, but warlike. In order that a cargo of contraband may be condemned as good prize, the captors must show that it was on the way to a belligerent destination. If without subterfuge it is bound to a neutral port, the voyage is innocent, whatever may be the nature of the goods. In the case of unneutral service the destination of the captured vessel is immaterial. The nature of her mission is the all-important point. She may be seized and confiscated when sailing betwen two neutral ports. The penalty for carrying contraband is the forfeiture of the forbidden goods, the ship being retained as prize of war only under special circumstances. The penalty for unneutral service is first and foremost the confiscation of the vessel, the goods on board being condemned when the owner is involved or when fraud and concealment have been resorted to.

Nothing but confusion can arise from attempting to treat together offenses so widely divergent as the two now under consideration. (Principles of International Law, p. 633.)

The liability to seizure attaches to the vessel in consequence of the act performed, not because of the possession of the dispatches (which in case of wireless telegraphic dispatches might be outside of the vessel almost immediately). The nature of the act is or may be more noxious than that of breaking a blockade or any other act for which liability attaches to the vessel till the completion of the voyage and return to the home port. Liability therefore to seizure attaches to the vessel guilty of the transmission of such dispatches till return to the home port.

(b) Under Article 20, would repetition by a neutral vessel of signals made by a belligerent vessel to a remote belligerent vessel make the neutral vessel liable to seizure, all the vessels being on the high sea?

Yes, as above under clause allowing seizure on ground of unneutral service.

(c) Should the Naval War Code contain an article upon unneutral service? If so, what should it cover and how should it read?

No. It is better to leave that to the progress of opinion as the range of action to be considered under unneutral service will continually change. Lawrence, after mentioning that—

A neutral ship is forbidden to

(1) Transmit certain kinds of signals or messages for a belligerent; (2) Carry certain kinds of dispatches for a belligerent;

(3) Transport certain kinds of persons in the service of a belligerent;

says:

The most important and the most frequently performed unneutral services are arranged under the three heads we have just enumerated. But the classification is by no means exhaustive. There are other ways of giving unlawful aid to belligerents besides those we have been considering. The exigencies of warfare are so numerous and so changeful that no one can describe beforehand every possible mode in which a neutral ship may make herself into a transport in the service of one or other of the belligerents. The principle of the law is clear. It forbids anything approaching to an actual participation in the war. The application of the principle must be settled in each case as it arises. Among the acts which it assuredly covers we may mention transferring provisions, coals, or ammunition from one belligerent ship to another at sea, and showing the channel to a fleet advancing for a hostile attack. (Principles of International Law, pp. 625 and 629.)

(d) Should the code contain an article in regard to the transfer of vessels from a belligerent to a neutral flag in the time of war?

No. This is in the main a matter of domestic law and may change with the change of national policy, therefore the code should contain no provision in regard to such transfer. It would be advisable, however, that some more definite regulations on the matter of such transfer should be made by international agreement in so far as this transfer affects international relations. (See Duboc, Le Droit de Visite, Chap. IV.)

SECTION IV.-HOSPITAL SHIPS-THE SHIPWRECKED, SICK, AND WOUNDED.

Article 21.

Military hospital ships-that is to say, vessels constructed or fitted out by the belligerent States for the special and sole purpose of assisting the wounded, sick, or shipwrecked, and whose names have been communicated to the respective Powers at the opening or in the course of hostilities, and in any case before they are so employed, shall be respected, and are not liable to capture during the period of hostilities.

Such ships shall not be classed with war ships with respect to the matter of sojourn in a neutral port.

Article 22.

Hospital ships fitted out, in whole or in part, at the expense of private individuals or of officially recognized relief societies, shall likewise be respected and exempt from capture, provided the belligerent Power to whom they are subject has given them an official commission and has notified the hostile Power of the names of such ships at the beginning or in the course of hostilities, and in any case before they are employed.

These ships should be furnished with a certificate, issued by the proper authorities, setting forth that they were under the control of such authorities during their equipment and at the time of their final departure.

Article 23.

The vessels mentioned in Articles 21 and 22 shall afford relief and assistance to the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked of the belligerents without distinction of nationality.

It is strictly forbidden to use these vessels for any military purpose.

These vessels must not in any way hamper the movements of the combatants.

During and immediately after engagements they act at their own risk and peril.

The belligerents have the right to control and visit such vessels; they may decline their cooperation, require them to withdraw, prescribe for them a fixed course, and place a commissioner on board; they may even detain them, if required by military necessity.

When practicable, the belligerents shall enter upon the log of hospital ships such orders as they may give them.

Article 24.

Military hospital ships shall be distinguished by being painted white outside, with a horizontal band of green about 1 meters wide.

The ships designated in Article 22 shall be distinguished by being painted white outside, with a horizontal band of red about 1 meters wide.

The boats of hospital ships, as well as small craft that may be devoted to hospital service, shall be distinguished by being painted in the same colors.

Hospital ships shall, in general, make themselves known by hoisting, with their national flag, the white flag with a red cross prescribed by the Geneva Convention.

Article 25.

Merchant vessels, yachts, or neutral vessels that happen to be in the vicinity of active maritime hostilities, may gather up the wounded, sick, or shipwrecked of the belligerents. Such vessels, after this service has been performed, shall report to the belligerent commander controlling the waters thereabouts, for future directions, and while accompanying a belligerent will be, in all cases, under his orders; and, if a neutral, be designated by the national flag of that belligerent carried at the foremasthead, with the red-cross flag flying immediately under it.

These vessels are subject to capture for any violation of neutrality that they may commit. Any attempt to carry off such wounded, sick, and shipwrecked, without permission, is a violation of neutrality. They are also subject, in general, to the provisions of Article 23.

Article 26.

The religious, medical, and hospital personnel of any vessel captured during hostilities shall be inviolable and not subject to be made prisoners of war. They shall be permitted, upon leaving the ship, to carry with them those articles and instruments of surgery which are their private property.

Such personnel shall continue to exercise their functions as long as may be necessary, whereupon they may withdraw when the commander in chief deems it possible to do so.

The belligerents shall insure to such personnel, when falling into their hands, the free exercise of their functions, the receipt of salaries, and entire freedom of movement, unless a military necessity prevents.

Article 27.

Sailors and soldiers, embarked when sick or wounded, shall be protected and cared for by the captors, no matter to what nation they may belong.

Article 28.

The shipwrecked, wounded, or sick of the enemy, who are captured, are considered prisoners of war. The captor must decide, according to circumstances, whether it is expedient to keep them or send them to a port of his own country, to a neutral port, or even to a port of the enemy. In the last case, the prisoners thus returned to their country can not serve again during the period of the war.

Article 29.

The shipwrecked, wounded, or sick who are landed at a neutral port with the consent of the local authorities, shall, unless there exist an agreement to the contrary between the neutral State and the belligerent States, agree that they will not again take part in the operations of war.

The expenses of hospital care and of internment shall be borne by the State to which such shipwrecked, wounded, or sick belong.

(a) Should there be inserted after Article 22 an article which is as follows: "Hospital ships, fitted out in whole or in part at the expense of private individuals or of officially recognized societies of neutral states, shall be respected and exempt from capture, provided the neutral power to whom they are subject has given them an official commission and has notified the belligerent powers of the names of such ships at the beginning or in the course of hostilities and in any case before they are employed?"

An article embodying the provisions of Article 3 of The Hague Convention for the Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the Principles of the Geneva Convention of August 22, 1864, which is to the intent of the article as stated in situation 21 (a), should be inserted, as the article is binding upon the Navy of the United States in