3. Bombardment of Greytown. § 1168. 5. Bombardment of Valparaiso. § 1170. 6. British-French discussions, 1882-1888. § 1171. 7. Chilean revolution, 1891. § 1172. 8. Rules of the Institute of International Law, 1896. 9. Discussions in The Hague Conference. § 1174. II. MINES AND TORPEDOES. § 1175. III. CUTTING OF CABLES. § 1176. IV. PRISONERS. § 1177. V. TREATMENT OF SICK AND WOUNDED. § 1178. VI. COMMERCIAL INTERCOURSE. § 1180. 1. Right of neutrals to trade. § 1179. VII. ENEMY'S PROPERTY. 1. Liability to seizure. § 1183. 2. Title to property in transit. § 1184. 3. Produce of the enemy's soil. § 1185. 4. Property in the enemy's service. § 1186. 5. Transfer of enemy ships to neutrals. (1) Public ship. § 1187. (2) Merchant vessels. § 1188. VIII. ENEMY CHARACTER. 1. Belligerent domicil. § 1189. 2. Immateriality of personal disposition. § 1190. 6. Corporations. § 1194. IX. EXEMPTIONS FROM CAPTURE. 1. Goods on neutral vessels. § 1195. 2. Vessels in or sailing for port at outbreak of war. 3. Particular exemptions. § 1197. 4. Proposed general immunity. § 1198. X. VISIT AND SEARCH. 1. A belligerent right. § 1199. 2. Mode of exercise. § 1200. 3. Mail steamers and mails. § 1201. § 1173. § 1196. 6. Capture in neutral territory. § 1211. 7. Sending in of prize; duty to send in ; question of destruction. § 1212. During the year 1776 John Paul Jones, in command of the sloopof-war Providence, 14 guns and 107 men, on a cruise ranging from the Bermudas to Nova Scotia, made several incursions ashore for the purpose of seizing British stores, releasing American prisoners, and destroying British shipping." Two descents were made by Jones on the British isles, at Whitehaven and St. Mary's Island. The purpose of the descent at Whitehaven was the destruction of the shipping; of that at St. Mary's Island, the seizure of the Earl of Selkirk as a hostage for the better treatment of American prisoners then in England. The Earl was not at home at the time. Plate, taken from his castle by some of the landing party, was afterwards restored by Jones at his own expense. Whitehaven was defended by two small forts. As to the case of the Earl of Selkirk, Mr. Buell, Jones's biographer, expresses the opinion that "a project to seize the person of a noncombatant nobleman with a view of holding him as a hostage or of coercing him to use his Buell, Paul Jones, Founder of the American Navy, I. 52; Captain Mahan, Scribner's Magazine, July, 1898, XXIV. 22. H. Doc. 551-vol 7-23 influence with his government for the better treatment of prisoners of war, fairly captured, can hardly be brought within the most liberal definition of civilized warfare," and that "the fact that it had many examples in the conduct of British landing parties on our own coast is no justification," as "two wrongs do not make one right." • 2. WAR OF 1812. § 1167. a The later stages of the war of 1812 were marked by incursions of the British naval forces at various points on the coast of the Chesapeake Bay, in retaliation for acts of the United States troops in Canada. The threat of Admiral Cochrane to enter upon such a course was the subject of a correspondence between him and Mr. Monroe, then Secretary of State, in August and September, 1814. But in April and May, 1813, several towns along the Chesapeake were devastated by the forces under Rear-Admiral Cockburn, when the plea of retaliation was not alleged. It appeared that Cockburn's orders were to destroy everything that could serve a warlike purpose, and to interrupt, as far as possible, communication along the shore." On April 28 he reached Frenchtown, a village of a dozen buildings, where he drove away the few Americans who made a show of resist ance and burned a quantity of property, "consisting of much flour, a large quantity of army clothing, of saddles, bridles, and other equipments for cavalry, etc., together with various articles of merchandise," besides five vessels lying near the place. The first destruction of the town itself took place at Havre de Grace, a place of some sixty houses. The immediate object of the attack was the destruction of a battery lately erected there. The British forces "met with only resistance enough to offer an excuse for pillage." The battery was soon silenced, and the boat's crew, having landed, drove the militia to the further extremity of the town, where, according to Cockburn's report, "no longer feeling themselves equal to an open and manly resistance, they commenced a teasing and irritating fire from behind the houses, walls, trees, etc., from which, I a Buell, I. 109-114. Landings at different points on the British coast were planned for the expedition in the Bon Homme Richard in 1779, but in deference to French wishes these were abandoned and a cruise against commerce in the open sea made instead. (Captain Mahan, Scribner's Mag., XXIV. 34.) Adams's History of the United States, VIII. 124-128. Am. State Papers, For. Rel., III. 693–694. d Report of Rear-Admiral Cockburn to Admiral Warren, James's History of the War in America, II. 404-411. e Adams, VII. 266, citing London Gazette, July 6, 1813. 1 Adams, VII. 266–267, citing the London Gazette. 9 Adams, VII. 267. am sorry to say, my gallant first lieutenant received a shot through his hand whilst leading the pursuing party; he, however, continued to head the advance, with which he soon succeeded in dislodging the whole of the enemy from their lurking places and driving them for shelter to the neighboring woods. After setting fire to some of the houses, to cause the proprietors (who had deserted them and formed part of the militia who had fled to the woods) to understand and feel what they were liable to bring upon themselves by building batteries and acting towards us with so much useless rancor, I embarked." According to an American account. of the affair the militia, on the killing of a man by a rocket, fled precipitately, and the marines then proceeded to plunder and burn the houses, of which about forty were destroyed. This account gives the impression that there was little, if any, firing from the houses," Subsequently the villages of Georgetown and Fredericktown were destroyed. In his report concerning them Admiral Cockburn makes no mention of irregular firing. He says: "I sent forward the two Americans in their boat to warn their countrymen against acting in the same rash manner the people of Havre de Grace had done, assuring them, if they did, that their towns would inevitably meet with a similar fate; but, on the contrary, if they did not attempt resistance, no injury should be done to them or their towns; that vessels and public property only would be seized; that the strictest discipline would be maintained; and that, whatever provisions or other property of individuals I might require for the use of the squadron, should be instantly paid for in its fullest value. . . . I am sorry to say, I soon found the more unwise alternative was adopted; for on our reaching within about a mile of the town, between two projecting elevated points of the river, a most heavy fire of musketry was opened on us from about 400 men. divided and entrenched on the two opposite banks, aided by one long gun. The launches and rocket boats smartly returned this fire with good effect, and with the other boats and marines, I pushed ashore immediately above the enemy's position, thereby ensuring the capture of the town or the bringing him to a decided action. He determined, however, not to risk the latter, for the moment he discerned we had gained the shore, and that the marines had fixed their bayonets, he fled with his whole force to the woods, and was neither seen nor heard of afterwards, although several parties were sent out to ascertain whether he had taken up any new position, or what had become of him. I gave him, however, the mortification of seeing, from wherever he had hid himself, that I was keeping my word with respect to the towns, which (excepting the houses of those who had • James, II. 406. North Am. Rev., V. (July, 1817) 157. continued peaceably in them, and had taken no part in the attack made upon us) were forthwith destroyed." In these affairs Admiral Cockburn seemed to have acted on the old idea that where a useless defense is made, those who resist are not entitled to the privileges of belligerents. "Where he met no resistance he paid in part for what private property he took." • 3. BOMBARDMENT OF GREYTOWN. § 1168. In March, 1852, the Mosquito authorities, by a proclamation issued by the British consul, called on the people of "Greytown,” a name which had been given to the town of San Juan del Norte, in Nicaragua, to form a constitution and set up a government. This government came into power on May 1, 1852, the Mosquito authorities surrendering their functions and retiring from office. A controversy soon broke out between the new authorities and the Accessory Transit Company, an organization composed of citizens of the United States who held a charter from Nicaragua, as to the occupation by the company of a portion of land on the north side of the harbor known as Punta Arenas, over which jurisdiction was claimed by the municipality. Greytown was regarded by the United States as being within the limits of Nicaragua. It was understood to claim independence under a charter from the Mosquito King; but the United States never recognized the Mosquito King nor the independence of the town, though American naval officers were instructed to respect the police regulations of any de facto authorities there, and not to molest such authorities unless they should attempt to disturb the rights of American citizens. February 8, 1853, the city council passed a resolution notifying the Accessory Transit Company to remove certain buildings within five days and its entire establishment within thirty days, and declaring that if this was not done summary measures would be taken, as the land was needed for public uses. The buildings were not removed; and on February 21 they were demolished by a party of armed men, who, accompanied by the marshal of Greytown, and under the joint command of a member of the city council and "Major" Lyons, a colored resident, "acted in a most outrageous manner, not even permitting the clerks of the company to save the property in the house, and actually imprisoned and fined one of them for attempting to rescue some valuable articles from destruction.” › When, a few days a Adams, Hist. of the United States, VII. 269; North Am. Rev. V. 157, July, 1817. Capt. Hollins to the Secretary of the Navy, March 30, 1853, Br. & For. State Papers, XLVII. 1033–1044. |