contraband of war. There has been a recent tendency to extend widely the list of articles to be treated as contraband; and it is probable that if the belligerents themselves are to determine at the beginning of a war what shall be contraband, this tendency will continue until the list of contraband is made to include a large proportion of all the articles which are the subject of commerce, upon the ground that they will be useful to the enemy. When this result is reached, especially if the doctrine of continuous voyages is applied at the same time, the doctrine that free ships make free goods and the doctrine that blockades in order to be binding must be effective, as well as any rule giving immunity to the property of belligerents at sea, will be deprived of a large part of their effect, and we shall find ourselves going backward instead of forward in the effort to prevent every war from becoming universally disastrous. The exception of contraband of war in the Declaration of Paris will be so expanded as to very largely destroy the effect of the declaration. On the other hand, resistance to this tendency toward the expansion of the list of contraband ought not to be left to the neutrals affected by it at the very moment when war exists because that is the process by which neutrals become themselves involved in You should do all in your power to bring about an agreement upon what is to constitute contraband; and it is very desirable that the list should be limited as narrowly as possible. war. With these instructions there will be furnished to you copies of the diplomatic correspondence relating to the Conference, the instructions to the delegates to the First Conference which are in all respects reaffirmed and their report, the international law discussions of the Naval War College of 1903, the report of the American delegates to the Conference of the American Republics at Rio de Janeiro in 1906, and the report of the American delegates to the Geneva Conference of 1906 for the revision of the Red Cross Convention of 1864. Following the precedent established by the commission to the First Conference, all your reports and communications to this Government will be made to the Department of State for proper consideration and eventual preservation in the archives. The records of your commission will be kept by your secretary, Mr. Chandler Hale. Should you be in doubt at any time regarding the meaning or effect of these instructions, or should you con sider at any time that there is occasion for special instructions, you will communicate freely with the Department of State by telegraph. It is the President's earnest wish that you may contribute materially to the effective work of the Conference and that its deliberations may result in making international justice more certain and international peace more secure. I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant, ELIHU ROOT. REPORT OF THE DELEGATES OF THE UNITED STATES TO THE SECOND IN- HON. ELIHU ROOT, Secretary of State. Sir: Pursuant to a request of the Interparliamentary Union, held at St. Louis, in 1904, that a future peace conference be held and that the President of the United States invite all nations to send representatives to such a conference, the late Secretary of State, at the direction of the President, instructed, on October 21, 1904, the representatives of the United States accredited to each of the signatories to the acts of the Hague Conference of 1899 to present overtures for a second conference to the ministers for foreign affairs of the respective countries. The replies received to this circular instruction of October 21, 1904, indicated that the proposition for the calling of a second conference met with general favor. At a later period it was intimated by Russia that the initiator of the First Conference was, owing to the restoration of peace in the Orient, disposed to undertake the calling of a new conference to continue as well to supplement the work of the first. The offer of the Czar to take steps requisite to convene a second international peace conference was gladly welcomed by the President, and the Final Act of the Conference only recites in its preamble the invitation of the President. The Russian Government thus assumed the calling of the Conference, and on April 12, 1906, submitted the following programme, which was acceptable to the Powers generally and which served as the basis of the work of the Conference: 1. Improvements to be made in the provisions of the convention relative to the peaceful settlement of international disputes as regards the Court of Arbitration and the international commissions of inquiry. 2. Additions to be made to the provisions of the convention of 1899 relative to the laws and customs of war on land-among others, those con cerning the opening of hostilities, the rights of neutrals on land, etc. Declaration of 1899. One of these having expired, question of its being revived. 3. Framing of a convention relative to the laws and customs of maritime warfare, concerning: The special operations of maritime warfare, such as the bombardment of ports, cities, and villages by a naval force; the laying of torpedoes, etc. The transformation of merchant vessels into warships. The private property of belligerents at sea. The length of time to be granted to merchant ships for their departure from ports of neutrals or of the enemy after the opening of hostilities. The rights and duties of neutrals at sea, among others the questions of contraband, the rules applicable to belligerent vessels in neutral ports; destruction, in cases of vis major, of neutral merchant vessels captured as prizes. In the said convention to be drafted there would be introduced the provisions relative to war on land that would be also applicable to maritime warfare. 4. Additions to be made to the convention of 1899 for the adaptation to maritime warfare of the principles of the Geneva Convention of 1864. The United States, however, reserved the right to bring to discussion two matters of great importance not included in the programme, namely, the reduction or limitation of armaments and restrictions or limitations upon the use of force for the collection of ordinary public debts arising out of contracts. It was finally decided that the Conference should meet at The Hague on the 15th day of June, 1907, and thus the Conference proposed by the President of the United States, and convoked by Her Majesty the Queen of The Netherlands upon the invitation of the Emperor of All the Russias, assumed definite shape and form. It will be recalled that the First Peace Conference, although international, was not universal, for only a fraction of the Powers recognizing and applying international law in their mutual relations were invited to The Hague. The fact that the uninvited might adhere to the conventions was foreseen by the Conference itself, and the conventions concerning the laws and customs of land warfare and the adaptation to maritime warfare of the principles of the Geneva Convention of the 22d of August, 1864, provided that nonsignatory Powers by adhering became admitted to the privileges as well as bound by the liabilities of the various conventions. The convention for the peaceful adjustment of international difficulties (Article 60) sug gested eventual adherence of such countries, but made this conditioned upon an understanding to be reached by the contracting Powers. In the circulars of October 21 and December 16, 1904, it was suggested as desirable to consider and adopt a procedure by which States nonsignatory to the original acts of The Hague Conference may become adhering parties. This suggestion was taken note of by the Russian Government and invitations were issued to forty-seven countries, in response to which the representatives of forty-four nations assembled at The Hague and took part in the Conference. No opposition was made to the admission of the nonsignatory States to the benefits of the convention of 1899 for the peaceful adjustment of international difficulties, and on the 14th day of June, 1907, the signatories of the First Conference formally consented under their hands and seals to the adhesion of the nonsignatory States invited to the Second Conference. The delegation of the United States to the Conference was composed of the following members: Commissioners plenipotentiary with the rank of ambassador extraordinary: Joseph H. Choate, of New York. Horace Porter, of New York. Uriah M. Rose, of Arkansas. Commissioner plenipotentiary: David Jayne Hill, of New York, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States to the Netherlands. Commissioners Plenipotentiary with rank of minister plenipotentiary: Brig. Gen. George B. Davis, Judge-Advocate-General, Rear-Admiral Charles S. Sperry, U. S. Navy. William I. Buchanan, of New York. Technical delegate and expert in international law: James Brown Scott, of California. Technical delegate and expert attaché to the Commission: Charles Henry Butler, of New York. Secretary to the Commission; Chandler Hale, of Maine. |