236
¡
"service of the enemy, according to whether the vessel
"is a regulation mail ship, or, finally according to
"the place of departure or of destination. The result
"is, in point of fact, seizure, opening of the mall-
"bags, spoliation, in case of need, confiscation. In
"every case delay or even loss is the lot ordinarily
"reserved to mail-bags travelling by sea in time of war".
Monsieur Fromageot wrote with no eye to the present
war, but deliberately as a lawyer. Had the United
States or any of the countries represented at the Hague Conference objected to his summary of the then existing
state of International Law, then and there was the time
and place to record their dissent. But his interpreta-
tion went unchallenged the, just as it remains un- challenged in Mr. Scott's work on the Conference. It
must, therefore, be accepted as conclusively proving,
contrary to the claim made in the American note, that
the right of interference with mails had not in theory
or in practice been abandoned. It cannot be claimed
that the position is in any way altered by the terms of the Rome Postal Convention since that deals merely with administrative matters in time of peace and was moreover in existence when Monsieur Fromageot wrote his report to
the Hague Conference.
It follows, therefore, that postal correspondence
by sea is not immune from seizure, or even from
confiscation, and that the action of the British
Government is not open to objection on the score of
illegality.
The moment this is established, the complaint of
the United States Government falls to the ground. Since
however, the exercise of the censorship necessarily
involves/
Page 240Page 241
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.