Quære, whether a belligerent Power which has violated many of the provisions of the Hague Convention can claim the protection of any of its provisions from other contracting parties.

Cause for condemnation of a yacht as enemy property.

On July 30, 1914, the racing yacht Germania, owned by Herr Gustav Krupp von Bohlen, a German subject, arrived at Cowes to take part in the Cowes Regatta.

On August 4 war broke out between Great Britain and Germany, and on August 6 the yacht was seized by the Customs authorities, a writ in prize was issued, and on September 24 an order for detention, as in THE CHILE (ante, p. 1), was made. To prevent the deterioration of the Germania leave was given by the authorities to the owner's agents to dry dock and paint her; but there was an express stipulation that the contractors were to have no lien against the Admiralty Marshal for the work done.

The Crown now asked for an order for condemnation. Appearances were entered on behalf of (1) Baron F. von Bülow (a German subject now interned in this country), as agent for Herr Krupp von Bohlen; (2) Summers & Payne, Lim., in respect of work done and money advanced; and (3) Ratsey & Lapthorn, Lim., and Pascall, Atkey & Son, Lim., in respect of work done and materials supplied to the yacht before the outbreak ' of war.

The claim of Summers & Payne, Lim., amounted to 1,0281., 1761. 2s. 6d. of which was in respect of docking and overhauling the yacht before the outbreak of war, and 2521. for dry docking and attending to her afterwards. They had advanced 4001. against a cheque of the master on the Dresdner Bank to pay the wages of the crew, and a portion of this sum was spent on repatriating the crew. Owing to the outbreak of war the cheque was not met.

The claims of Ratsey & Lapthorn, Lim., and Pascall, Atkey & Son, Lim., were in respect of sails, gear, and other necessaries supplied to the Germania before the outbreak of war.

The Solicitor-General (Sir F. E. E. Smith, K.C.) and A. B. Marten (for G. T. Simonds, serving with H.M. Forces), for the Crown.

Bateson, K.C., and C. R. Dunlop, for Baron F. von Bülow and Summers & Payne, Lim.

W. N. Raeburn, for Ratsey & Lapthorn, Lim., and Pascall, Atkey & Son, Lim.

The Solicitor-General (Sir F. E. Smith, K.C.).-Without making any admission that the claimants, Ratsey & Lapthorn, Lim., and Pascall, Atkey & Son, Lim., are entitled to anything according to strict legal principles, inasmuch as the sails, &c., in respect of which they claim were supplied before the outbreak of war, the Crown will consent to a reference to ascertain the amounts due to these two claimants.

The yacht should be condemned as a droit of Admiralty. The Sixth Hague Convention in terms only purports to protect merchant vessels engaged in commerce, and does not apply to yachts. Article 1 provides that: "When a merchant ship belonging to one of the belligerent Powers is at the commencement of hostilities in an enemy port, it is desirable that it should be allowed to depart freely, either immediately, or after a reasonable number of days of grace, and to proceed, after being furnished with a pass, direct to its port of destination or any other port indicated to it. The same principle applies in the case of a ship which has left its last port of departure before the commencement of the war, and has entered a port belonging to the enemy while still ignorant that hostilities had broken out." And article 5 provides that: "The present Convention does not refer to merchant ships which shew by their build that they are intended for conversion into warships."

It is suggested by the claimants that the Germania is of no naval or commercial value, but it is obvious that she could be used for auxiliary naval purposes, such as observation. In THE ORIENTAL,1 where days of grace were given to a Hungarian

(1) THE ORIENTAL.-In this case, tried before the PRESIDENT on March 8, 1915, the Crown claimed the condemnation of the steam yacht Oriental, 327 tons, seized at Cowes after the outbreak of war between Great Britain and Austria, on the ground that she belonged to a Hungarian subject.

SIR SAMUEL EVANS (THE PRESIDENT), in the course of his judgment, said: The Oriental was allowed a certain number of days of grace to leave because she was a Hungarian vessel. The Crown contends that, although days of grace were accorded, in truth and in fact she is not a vessel to which the Hague Convention applies at all. The

yacht seized at Cowes, the Court pointed out that the vessel was not one to which the Sixth Hague Convention applied. Days of grace were given in that case because the AustroHungarian Government had granted days of grace to British vessels.

Bateson, K.C.-Although not a merchant vessel, the Germania is within the spirit of the Hague Convention. Yachts are not specifically mentioned, because no one could have imagined that private property of such a kind found in a belligerent port on the outbreak of war would be condemned. By the comity of nations days of grace have been granted to enemy merchant vessels since 1854, and a fortiori a racing yacht, which had come practically as a guest to Cowes Regatta, should have been given an opportunity to leave.

THE ORIENTAL was not decided on the ground that yachts. were not mentioned in the Sixth Hague Convention, but on the ground that the vessel, having been granted days of grace, did not avail herself of them. If the Germania is condemned, Summers & Payne, Lim., will run the risk of losing the money they have spent upon her. She is housed in their yard, and at least they must have a possessory lien for the expenses of docking and overhauling before the outbreak of war.

The Solicitor-General (Sir F. E. Smith, K.C.), in reply.Although the yacht is in the claimants' yard, she is under the control of the Admiralty Marshal. The sole question is whether she comes within the Sixth Hague Convention, and she clearly does not.

[SIR SAMUEL EVANS (THE PRESIDENT).-Assuming for a moment that this vessel is within the Hague Convention, I

Hague Convention applies only to merchant vessels. The preliminary article to Convention VI. shews that the object was to secure the safety of commerce as far as possible, and the French version-which is the authoritative one-describes vessels which come within the purview of 'that convention as navires de commerce. This is not a vessel coming within that category at all. Nevertheless, this country was willing to give some days of grace as a matter of fairness due to the comity of nations, and certain days of grace were allowed to this vessel. For some reason she was not able to avail herself of them, and she remained there until the days of grace would have expired if she had come under the Hague Convention. It is quite clear on these grounds that this vessel was enemy property at the time of seizure and was confiscable, and therefore I order that she be condemned and sold, and that the proceeds of her sale be paid into Court.

am not sure that a serious question may not arise some day whether Germany can complain of anything that is done in violation of the Hague Convention. An agreement, whether made between individuals or States, must be observed by both sides, and some one may have to determine whether Germany has so far adhered to the Hague Convention that she can call upon any other party to observe it.]

If I am a Law Officer at the time I shall certainly most strenuously contend that a Power, which it would be easy to shew has violated many of its most important provisions, cannot be heard in this or any other Court to contend that we are bound by the remaining provisions.

With regard to the claim of Summers & Payne, Lim., to some extent the Crown has benefited by what has been done to the yacht; and if the claimants ask to have their claim dealt with as a matter of indulgence, without going into the question of liability, the Crown is willing to make some allowance.

[A consultation then took place between the parties, and it was agreed that the two items of 2521. and 1761. 2s. 6d. should be referred to the Registrar.]

SIR SAMUEL EVANS (THE PRESIDENT).-In this case the Crown asks for the condemnation of the German yacht Germania, which belonged at the outbreak of war to Herr Gustav Krupp von Bohlen, a German subject.

The yacht was at Cowes at the end of July, and on the outbreak of war on August 4 was seized by the Customs authorities on behalf of the Crown as a droit of Admiralty. A writ was issued in prize, and on September 24, 1914, an order was made in this Court for the detention of the yacht. That was not a final order, and the present application is that the order should be superseded by another of a more extensive kind-namely, that the yacht should be condemned as enemy property.

The Germania is a racing yacht, and clearly does not come within the terms of the Sixth Hague Convention, which, according to the preamble, is a convention dealing only with matters relating to commerce, and intended only to protect vessels engaged in commerce. The words used in describing vessels in the authoritative French language are navires de

commerce, and counsel for the claimants has not suggested— and no one could suggest-that this yacht comes within those terms. Therefore it is perfectly clear that no defence can be made to the condemnation of the vessel on the ground of the Hague Convention.

It is argued on behalf of the claimants that, according to the spirit of the Hague Convention, this yacht nevertheless ought not to be regarded as confiscable, and ought not to be condemned. I must deal with this matter according to the ordinary law, and according to the ordinary law this property of a German subject, being in port at the outbreak of war, is, I think, clearly confiscable, and I condemn it as a prize of Admiralty in favour of the Crown.

There was a claim here by Messrs. Summers & Payne, Lim., who had done certain work upon the yacht before seizure-that is to say, towards the end of July. Their claim amounted to 1761. 2s. 6d.; and they have done other work to the yacht, and have also housed some of the fittings since the date of the seizure. By the express terms of the arrangement between them and the Marshal, any sums which they might expend upon the repairs of the yacht, and to keep it from deterioration, they were to expend at their own risk in the hope of getting payment for their expenses from the owner of the yacht. In other words, it is perfectly clear that they were not to expend any sums of money so as to found any claim either against the Marshal of the Court or against the captors. So far as the housing of the yacht is concerned the protection of the various parts of the yacht-the suggestion that the claimants should take care of them came from Messrs. Summers & Payne, Lim., in the following letter of October 9, 1914, to the Customs authorities at Southampton:

"Dear Sir, German yacht Germania.-Will you permit us to suggest that the topmasts, rigging and blocks of this yacht, the main gaff, spinaker boom, and boats be brought on shore and housed with other gear which we have belonging to this yacht? The Germania is a very high-class racing yacht, and if neglected will very quickly deteriorate. We already have an account against the yacht. The owner is an old and esteemed customer, and we would be prepared to do this work as we feel sure we should receive the cost from him when at the end