BLOCKADE OF CUBAN PORTS.
Contraband of War--Confiscation of Cargoes--Establishment of a
Blockade--Notice to Other Nations--Prizes, Lawful and Unlawful--
Privateering Abolished--Distribution of Prize Money--The Use the
Government Makes of Its Share.
While the great blockade was in progress the air was full of talk
about "prizes," "contraband," "search," and "seizure," and some of
the terms proved rather puzzling to the average citizen who had
never had occasion to study the rules of war.
First about "contraband." It is one of the strictest rules of war
that neutral nations must not interfere nor in any way give help
to either party. To furnish ships or arms or ammunition might
greatly prolong the conflict or even change its result, especially
where this assistance is extended to a nation--like Spain to-day--
ill supplied and of small resources. This would be manifestly
unfair, and for a neutral to offer or abet such aid is a grave
offense. For remissness in an aggravated case of this sort (that
of the Alabama) England was forced to pay us heavy damages.
Neither national sympathy nor national interests afford any
excuse.
That is why we restrained and punished those who organized
expeditions to help the Cubans while we were still at peace with
Spain. But nations engaged in war must not ask too much. They may
insist that a neutral shall allow no hostile operations to be
carried on within its territory, but they have no right to demand
that it shall punish its private citizens for engaging in trade in
articles that may be helpful to the enemy, for that would be
imposing too much trouble and expense upon a nation which has no
concern in the quarrel. Such trade is punishable, but it is the
business of the nation injured by it to catch the ships engaged in
it and enforce the penalty--which is usually confiscation of the
goods as "contraband of war." To do this it may stop and search
any ships--except warships--which it finds at sea; and so long as
no outrages are committed the neutral must submit and has no
ground for complaint. Trade in contraband goods is tolerated, but
it is carried on at the trader's own risk. His government will not
undertake to protect him from the legitimate consequences of his
venture.
As has been stated, the contraband goods are confiscated by the
captor. The vessel, however, must be captured while the guilty
goods are still on board; to seize the proceeds after the cargo
has been sold and landed is not allowable, though it has sometimes
been done. If the ship belongs to the same owner as the forfeited
goods, it, too, is confiscated; otherwise it goes free after the
goods are taken off.
It is very important to know just what articles are contraband and
what are not; but this is often hard to decide. There is no
question about weapons, military equipments and ammunition. These
are plainly contraband, and the materials from which they are made
are classed with them whenever they seem intended for military
uses. Thus sulphur and saltpeter are always contraband. The
detached parts of cannon and naval engines do escape by the trick
of separation.
Cloth is not contraband in itself, but if of a quality evidently
designed for the manufacture of uniform it would probably be
seized. Horses are so useful in war that most nations treat them
as contraband--though, oddly enough, Russia has never done so.
Still more objectionable, nowadays, is coal, which will never be
allowed to reach the bunkers of hostile warships if it can be
prevented. This shows plainly how uncertain and changeful is the
list, for fifty years ago coal was as free as provisions, though
even food must not be run through the lines of a blockade.
Articles, such as coal, which are of great value in war, but are
also largely used for peaceful purposes, are called "occasional
contraband" and their seizure has given rise to endless disputes.
There is no justice in treating them as contraband except when
they are obviously destined for hostile use. Sometimes, in
doubtful cases, such goods, instead of being confiscated, are
seized and paid for to prevent their reaching the enemy. This is
called "pre-emption;" but, fair as it seems, there is much danger
that it will be made a pretext for appropriating goods which ought
to go quite free, and the practice is generally condemned.
Search at sea is extremely annoying, and ships entirely innocent
of contraband are often subjected to great inconvenience. That
must be endured; to attempt to resist or escape would make them
liable to confiscation, whatever their cargo might prove to be.
Only properly commissioned vessels, however, are entitled to hold
up merchantmen for this purpose. Another kind of meddling in war
for which a neutral citizen may be punished by confiscation, but
for which his government is not held responsible, is blockade
running.
A blockade, such as we maintained around Cuba, is established by
stationing war vessels at the entrances of harbors and at
intervals along the blockaded coast. Its purpose is to cut off
supplies and stop all communication with the enemy by sea. The
merchant ships of all nations are therefore forbidden to pass or
even to approach the line, and the penalty for disobedience is the
confiscation of both ship and cargo--whether the latter is
contraband or not here makes no difference. If the ship does not
stop when hailed she may be fired upon, and if she is sunk while
endeavoring to escape it is her own fault. And unlike vessels
merely guilty of carrying contraband, she is no less liable to
seizure on her return voyage, after her cargo has been disposed
of. Altogether, blockade running is perilous business. It is
usually attempted under cover of night or stormy weather, and it
is as full of excitement and adventure as war itself. The motive
is usually either to take advantage of famine prices, or to aid
the enemy by bringing supplies or carrying dispatches.
Neutral ships, however, are entitled to some sort of warning that
a blockade exists. Notice is therefore sent to all neutral
governments, announcing the fact and stating exactly the extent of
coast covered. Besides this, until the blockade has lasted for
some time and thus has become generally known it is customary for
the officers of the blockading fleet to visit and warn every ship
that approaches, the warning, with the date, being entered upon
her register. If, after that, she approaches the forbidden coast,
she is liable to confiscation--though possibly great stress of
weather might excuse her provided she landed no cargo.
Instructions of this sort were issued by President McKinley to our
squadron blockading Cuba. A reasonable time, also, was granted to
ships that were lying in the blockaded ports at the time when the
blockade was declared, to make their escape. President McKinley
allowed thirty days for this purpose, which was unusually liberal.
Nations engaged in war have sometimes assumed that they could
establish a blockade by simply issuing a proclamation forbidding
neutrals to approach the enemy's coast, without stationing ships
to enforce it. For example, during the Napoleonic wars, France
declared the whole coast of England to be blockaded at a time when
she scarcely dared send out a ship from her ports, having been
soundly thrashed at Trafalgar. But these "paper blockades" are a
mere waste of time and ink. They are not valid, and except in the
way of angry and contemptuous protest, no nation would consider
them worthy of the slightest attention. If Spain, for instance,
should attempt a desperate game of bluff by declaring New Orleans,
New York and Boston under blockade, all neutral ships would come
and go just the same, and she would meddle with them at her peril.
This question--if it ever was a question--was finally decided by
the epoch-making convention of the powers at the close of the
Crimean war (treaty of Paris, 1856), which, along with other rules
that have revolutionized naval warfare, declared that "blockades
in order to be binding must be effective." This means that they
must be maintained by a force actually stationed on the blockaded
coast, strong enough to make it decidedly dangerous to attempt to
run through. The temporary absence of some of the ships, however,
either in pursuit of an enemy or on account of a violent storm,
would not invalidate the blockade, and ships seeking to take
advantage of such an opening would be liable to the full penalty
if caught.
And now a few words about "prizes"--a particularly interesting and
timely theme, for during the very first week of the war our fleet
captured no fewer than fifteen of them.
In time of war properly commissioned ships are entitled to capture
not only the armed vessels but also the helpless merchantmen of
the enemy. It does seem a good deal like piracy, but it has been
the universal practice from time immemorial. These captured
vessels are taken to some convenient port of the captor's own
country that the courts may pass judgment on them, and if there
has been no mistake made in the seizure they are forthwith
condemned as "lawful prize." Then they are sold, and "prize money"
is awarded the captors in proportion to the value of the prize.
The cargo is treated in the same way, unless it happens to belong
to a neutral, in which case it is free; though the owner must put
up with the inconvenience and delay resulting from the seizure,
since he deliberately took that risk when he placed his goods in a
hostile craft. Formerly his property was sometimes confiscated
under these circumstances, but the treaty of Paris, already
mentioned, put a stop to that. Formerly, too, the goods of enemies
could be taken from neutral ships and confiscated in the same
manner as contraband of war, but the treaty of Paris made an end
of that also.
Another excellent rule adopted on that notable occasion abolished
privateering. Privateers were armed ships belonging to private
citizens who had obtained from their own government a commission
(letter of marque) which authorized them to make prize of the
enemy's merchant vessels and appropriate the proceeds. The
abolition of privateering was a long step in the right direction,
for the privateer's motive was mainly plunder, and the whole
business was really close kin to piracy. Neither the United States
nor Spain signed the original agreement, but both have acceded to
it now--Spain, evidently, very much against her will, for her
citizens thirsted for the rich booty of our commerce, a fact which
makes supremely ridiculous her crazy ravings against our
legitimate captures as "American piracy."
DISTRIBUTION OF PRIZE MONEY.
The prize money adjudged to captors is distributed in the
following proportions:
1. The commander of a fleet or squadron, one-twentieth part of all
prize money awarded to any vessel or vessels under his immediate
command.
2. To the commander of a division of a fleet or squadron, a sum
equal to one-fiftieth of any prize money awarded to a vessel of
the division under his command, to be paid from the moiety due the
United States, if there be such moiety; if not, from the amount
awarded the captors.
3. To the fleet captain, one-hundredth part of all prize money
awarded to any vessel of the fleet in which he is serving, in
which case he shall share in proportion to his pay, with the other
officers and men on board such vessel.
4. To the commander of a single vessel, one-tenth of all the prize
money awarded to the vessel.
5. After the foregoing deductions, the residue is distributed
among the others doing duty on board, and borne upon the books of
the ship, in proportion to their respective rates of pay.
All vessels of the navy within signal distance of the vessel
making the capture, and in such condition as to be able to render
effective aid if required, will share in the prize. Any person
temporarily absent from his vessel may share in the captures made
during his absence. The prize court determines what vessels shall
share in a prize, and also whether a prize was superior or
inferior to the vessel or vessels making the capture.
The share of prize money awarded to the United States is set apart
forever as a fund for the payment of pensions to naval officers,
seamen and marines entitled to pensions.