Onderstaande tekst is niet 100% betrouwbaar

§ no.


a cartel, a pass, or some other act of pubhc authority that.gtetamtte King's peace pro hac vice. But otherwise he is totally ex lege ] and Dr. Lushington {The Panaja Drapaniotisa (1856) ; The Trom 1854)]. aÏÏTSnot repeat them. There are other décisions to the hke effect fTexample, in The Falcon (1805) [suivent quelques détails] .. All Srms since the days of Sir James Marriott, Lord Stoweü's predecessor down to the present day, accord with the pnnaple and practice prornulgLdby LorïstoweUin The Hoop (^99). In sorné of the f orms appended to the recent Pnze Court Rules, 1914- See ForTi3 . I wish traveld comphcating this case with any discussioTof the position. or rights of alien enemies in legal P^eedmgs in the King's Bench, or our other municipal Courts. - The pnncipte u^n which the Prize Court in the times of Lord Stowell and DnLushnSon proceeded was that no one who was a subject of the enemycould o?a claimant unless under particular circumstances that £0jfaj-J discharged him from the character of an enemy.... In the words 01 Story in his authoritative „Notes on the Principles and PmctS oiPrL7courts'': „Nor can an enemy interpose aclaim, unkss unoer The protection of a flag of truce, a cartel hcence pass, treaty, or someotLractof^publicauthoritysuspendingh^^

Tn hl argument the Attomey-General submitted two proposrtions as eir^bodyinTthe result of the authorities in this Court namely first, wherTan owner avowed his enemy character wimout quaWication he had not a persona standi in judicia, and was not a person^who had a right to be heard, and secondly, where a person avowed that he was a ïubiect of the enemy state .hi general, but had ground for urging that £hZZ he stood in a position which reüeved him from the pure enemy character, he was entitled to appear and to be heard, and that the real question was under which of these two rules a German owner shouTd be^regarded when he came before the Court. - In my opinion tharsubmi3on is well f ounded and accurate. - Practical lUustrations of the seïond proposition were frequently afforded in the time of the g£^!5 whe'n daimants appeared on the ground of y of their ships from capture by reason of the Order m Councü. teted March 20 i8S4 [days of grace ; suivent quelques details]. . . Reierence wïï mal; in5argurnent to cases in the American courts ansmg duruig AÏspaïsh AmScan War in 1898 ... • [suivent f^g**^sur les captures des navires espagnols Pedro ^Jm^^± Buena Veltura (1899), P^amd (1900 • days of grace, -^ Habana (1900): bateau de pêche exempt de ^P^^^V^^Eed before me counsel for the enemy shipowner also ^^^^T to cases which were heard during the Russ<^aPane^^^ [suivent des détails sur 1'affaire Tetartos (1904), ]ugee partetcouirdes orises russe et sur ceües des Ekaterinoslaw (1905), Mukden (WS),

15 *SrSl^™^r T* Hague Ceuveutiou