Similarlyapopulationwhichrisesenmasseinacountrynotalreadyoccupied
bytheenemyareentitledtobetreatedasprisonersofwar，andnotasmarauders，
butinsuchcasetheymustbeformedintoorganizedbodies。Again，whenthe
regularGovernmentofacountryhasbeenoverthrownbyciviltumult，the
absenceoftheauthorityofarecognizedGovernmenttomakepeacewouldnot
ofitselfdisentitleorganizedbodiesofmen，clearlydistinguishableas
foesandfightinginconformitywiththecustomsofwaragainstaforeign
enemy，tobetreatedoncaptureasprisonersofwar。Everycasemustbejudged
byitsowncircumstances，havingregardtotheprinciplethatpersonsother
thanregulartroopsinuniform，whosedressshowstheircharacter，committing
actsofhostilityagainstanenemy，must，iftheyexpectwhencapturedto
betreatedasprisonersofwar，beorganisedinsuchamannerorfightunder
suchcircumstancesastogivetheiropponentsduenoticethattheyareopenenemiesfromwhomresistanceistobeexpected。Theextremedifficultyofarrivingatcompleteagreementastoanewset
ofrulesonthisvexedsubjectprovedinsurmountableattheBrusselsConference;
andinpointoffactthedebatesshowedthatatthebottomofthediscussion
themattersatstalewerethedifferencesintheinterestsofstateswho
possesssuchvastarmiesasservedunderthecoloursoftheGermansorthe
French，andthosesmallerstateswhich，eitherfrompolicyorfrompoverty
orfromsmallness，declinedorwereunabletokeeponfootarmiesonthat
scale。Thefollowingremarksaretobefoundinthedespatchinwhichthe
EnglishSecretaryofState，LordDerby，summeduptheresultsofthismost
remarkablecontroversy。Hesaysatthefifthpageofhisdespatch，published
in1876：’ThesecondchapterofthereportoftheConferencerelatingto
combatantsandnon—combatantsshowedanequaldifferenceofopinion，smoothed
over，inthelongrun，byacompromise。TheSwissdelegate，inhisobservations
onthearticlerequiringtheuseofadistinctivebadge，recognizableat
adistance，remarkedthatacountrymightriseenmasse，asSwitzerlandhad
formerlydone，anddefenditselfwithoutorganizationandundernocommand。
Thepatrioticfeelingwhichledtosucharisingcouldnotbekeptdown;
andalthoughthesepatriots，ifdefeated，mightnotbetreatedaspeaceful
citizens，itcouldnotbeadmittedindefencethattheywerenotbelligerent。’
TheEnglishdelegatealsoreportedthatduringthegeneraldiscussionon
thesubjectofthischaptertheNetherlandsdelegateremarkedthatifthe
planlaiddownbytheGermandelegatewastobesanctioned，ontheadoption
ofthosearticleswhichrelatetobelligerentsasdrawnupintheproject，
itwouldhavetheeffectofdiminishingthedefensiveforceoftheNetherlands，
orrenderuniversalandobligatoryservicenecessary——amilitaryrevolution
towhichthepublicopinionoftheNetherlandswasopposed。Hetherefore
reservedmorethanevertheopinionofhisGovernment。TheBelgiandelegate
alsomadeadeclarationofreservation。IntheopinionoftheBelgiandelegate
nocountrycouldpossiblyadmitthatifthepopulationofadefactooccupied
districtshouldriseinarmsagainsttheestablishedauthorityofaninvader，
theyshouldbesubjecttothelawsinforceintheoccupyingarmy。Headmitted
thatintimeofwartheoccupiermightoccasionallybeforcedtotreatwith
severityapopulationwhomightrise，andthatfromitsweaknessthepopulation
mightbeforcedtosubmit;butherepudiatedtherightofanyGovernment
torequirethedeliveringovertothejusticeoftheenemyofthosemenwho
frompatrioticmotivesandattheirownriskmightexposethemselvestothe
dangersconsequentuponarising。TheSwissdelegate，whohadpreviously
pointedoutthattheConferencewasnowengageduponthecardinalpoints
ofthewholeproject，openlydeclaredthattwoquestions，diametricallyopposed
toeachother，werebeforetheCommission：theinterest，ontheonehand，
ofgreatarmiesinanenemy’scountry，whichdemandssecurityfortheircommunication
andfortheirrayonofoccupation;and，ontheother，theprinciplesofwar
andtheinterestsoftheinvaded，whichcannotadmitthatapopulationshould
behandedoverascriminalstojusticeforhavingtakenuparmsagainstthe
enemy。Thereconciliationoftheseconflictinginterestswasatthisperiod
impossibleinthecaseofalevéeenmasseintheoccupiedcountry，
andinthefaceoftheoppositeopinionsexpressed，untilaprovisionalmodification
ofthemwasacceptedbythemeeting，passingoverthispoint，onwhichthegreatestdisagreementhadbeenshown。Thesedifficulties，whichpreventedtheprojectoftheBrusselsConference
frombecomingpartoftheInternationalLawofcivilization，arenodoubt
tobeattributedtothefactthatreminiscencesofthegreatwarbetween
FranceandGermanydominatedthewholeofthesedebates。Itisoneamong
manyexamplesofatruthofconsiderableimportance，thatthepropertime
foramelioratingthecriticalpartsofInternationalLawisnotatimeimmediately
orshortlysucceedingagreatcrisis。HereafterIshallpointouttoyousomeconclusionstowhichthistruthseemstometopoint。Thereisanotherpart，however，ofInternationalLawuponwhich，ifit
bepossible，itisextremelydesirabletohaveasystematicsetofrules。
Itisperhapsaninevitablebutcertainlyafrequentresultofthepresent
wantofrules，thatwhenenemiesarefightinginthesamecountry，andone
sidecomplainsofthemeasuresadoptedbytheother，thereisnomeansof
punishingwhatisthoughttobeaninfractionofruleexceptretaliation
or，asthetechnicalwordis，reprisals。Retaliation，wearetold，ismilitary
vengeance。Ittakesplacewhereanoutragecommittedononesideisavenged
bythecommissionofasimilaractontheother。Forexample，anunjustexecution
ofprisonersbytheenemymaybefollowedbytheexecutionofanequalnumber
ofprisonersbytheiropponents。Retaliationisanextremerightofwar，
andshouldonlyberesortedtointhelastnecessity。’Itmaybewellto
notice，’saysthewriterIamquoting，incidentallyforthepurposeofreprobating
it，’theideaonceprevailedthatagarrisonwhichobstinatelydefendeda
placewhenithad，intheopinionoftheenemy，becomeuntenable，mightbe
puttothesword。’ThereisnodoubtthatduringtheFranco—Germanwarreprisals
werecarriedtounjustifiablelengthsonbothsides。TheFrenchGovernment
haspublishedacuriousvolumewhichreproducesalltheplacardswhicheither
theyorothershadaffixedtothewallsduringthecontestinFrance。At
onepointtheGermansgrantednoquarterduringanattackonavillage，on
thepleathattwenty—fivefrancs—tireurs（riflemen）hadhiddeninawood
nearit，withoutanyregularofficeroruniform，andhadshotdownasmany
Germansascamewithinrangeoftheirguns。Onanotheroftheseplacards
isanoticebyaFrenchofficertothePrussiancommanderofChâtellerault
inreferencetotheallegedresolveofthelattertopunishtheinhabitants
ofthatplacefortheactsofsomeofthefrancs—tireurs。’Igiveyoumy
assurance，threatforthreat，thatIwillnotspareoneofthetwohundred
Prussiansoldierswhomyouknowtobeinmyhands。’AndindeedGeneralChanzy，
himselfagallantofficerinhighplace，wrotetothePrussiancommander
ofVendorne，andstatedthatheintendedtofightwithouttruceormercy
becauseitisaquestionnownotoffightingloyalenemiesbuthordesof
devastators。OnthisgreatsubjecttheBrusselsConferencewasabletodo
butlittleexcepttosuggestthatretaliationshouldonlyberesortedto
inthemostextremecases，andshouldbeconductedwiththegreatestpossible
humanity。
LECTUREX。
MENTIONSOFBELLIGERENTSONLAND。TheBrusselsConferencefailedtosolveanumberofquestionsofmodern
originwhichhavearisenastothestatusofthecivilpopulationofacountry
when，byrisingenmasse，theytakeuponthemselvesmilitarydutyinresistance
toaninvader。ThetrenchantGermanscheme，whichwassubmittedtotheConference，
failedtocommandsupport，andanumberofrules，whichwerenotopento
thesameobjectionsasthosewhichtheGermandelegateproposed，werenot
universallyacceptable。But，asinthecaseofmanyotherrecommendations
emanatingfromtheConference，alargenumberoftheirproposalsarefound
intheManualsofwarfarewhichsomanycivilisedGovernmentshavenowplaced
inthehandsoftheirofficers。Asregardsthemostimportantpointwhich
hadtobesettled，thereisageneraltendencytoadvisethatauniformof
somekindshallbeadoptedbythenon—militarypopulation，andthatthecorps
whichtheyformshallbetreatedwithhumanity，andnotshotorhangedasmeremarauders。Thesequestionsdonotbecomeofmuchpracticalimportancetillalarge
partoftheinvadedcountryhasbeenoccupiedbytheforcesoftheinvader。
IntheformerlectureItooktheinvestmentofParisbytheGermantroops
asexemplifyingthepointofawaratwhichthisbranchoflawassumesa
newimportance。Wehavenowtoconsiderthelegalpositionofthatpartof
theinvadedcountrywhichisundermilitaryoccupationbytheenemy。The
viewofacountryinsuchapositionhasmuchchangedinmoderntinges。Of
oldthetheoryofthepositionofaninvadedcountrywasmuchaffectedby
theRomanLaw。Land，likeeverythingelse，mightbecapturedbyoccupancy
（occupatio）subjecttowhattheRomanscalledpost—liminium，alegalrule
whichisgenerallydescribedasembodyingalegalfictionunderwhichacitizen
whoshouldaftercaptivityreturntohiscountry，orpropertywhichafter
captureshouldfallagainintothehandsoftherestoredowner，revertsto
hisoritsantecedentposition。Thusterritorymilitarilyoccupiedwasregarded
aspassingtotheoccupantsubjecttotheill—definedrisksarisingfrom
thereturnoftheformersovereign。FredericktheGreat，whenhehadinvaded
acountry，usuallycompelledthepopulationtosupplyhimwithrecruits;
andthereisoneinstanceinwhichtheKingofDenmarksoldwhatwerethen
twoSwedishprovinces——BremenandVerden——toHanover。Theinconvenience
ofthisconditionofthelawwasmuchfeltafterthecloseoftheSevenYears’
War，andthepositionofacountryonceinvaded，fromwhichtheenemyhas
retired，wasalwayssettledbyparticulartreaty。Manifoldashavebeenthe
variationsofboundaryinEurope，theyarenowalwaysregulatedbytreaty
attheendofawar，andevenintheEastitisnownoteasytofindterritory
heldbytherightsarisingfromsimpleconquest。Theonlyinstanceofanew
provinceheldonthemeretitleofconquest，andincorporatedwiththeother
territoriesoftheconqueringcountry，istheIndianprovincelongknown
asLowerBurmah。TheKing，whostillretainedapartofhisterritories，
whichhereignedoveratMandalay，refused，eventhoughutterlydefeated，
toenterintoanytreatyofcession，andafterthesecondwarLowerBurmahwastreatedasalreadypartofthegeneralIndianterritory。Ihavesaidthatthemostcriticalmomentingreatwarsofinvasionis
thatatwhichalargepartoftheterritoryismilitarilyoccupied。There
isverymuchonthesubjectinthemodernManualsofwar。Thefollowingisasummaryofthelaw。Aninvaderissaidtobeinmilitaryoccupationofsomuchofacountry
asiswhollyabandonedbytheforcesoftheenemy。Theoccupationmustbe
realandnotnominal，anditislaiddownthata’paper’occupationiseven
moreobjectionableinitscharacterandeffectsthana’paper’blockadeOn
theotherhand，theoccupationofpartofadistrictfromthewholeofwhich
theenemyhasretired，isnecessarilyanoccupationofthatdistrict，as
itisimpossibleinanyotherwaytooccupyanyconsiderableextentofterritory。
Thetruetestofmilitaryoccupationisexclusivepossession。Forexample，
thereductionofafortresswhichdominatesthesurroundingcountrygives
militarypossessionofthecountrydominated，butnotofanyotherfortress
whichdoesnotsubmittotheinvader。Militaryoccupationceasesassoon
astheforcesoftheinvaderretreatoradvanceinsuchamannerastoquit
theirholdontheoccupiedterritory。Intheeventofamilitaryoccupation
theauthorityoftheregularGovernmentissupplantedbythatoftheinvading
army。Theruleimposedbytheinvaderisthelawofwar。Itisnotthelaw
oftheinvadingstatenorthelawoftheinvadedterritory。Itmayinits
characterbeeithercivilormilitary，orpartlyoneandpartlytheother。
Ineverycasethesourcefromwhichitderivesitsauthorityisthesame，
namelythecustomsofwar，andnotanymunicipallaw;andtheGeneralenforcing
theruleisresponsibleonlytohisownGovernmentandnottotheinvaded
people。Theruleofmilitaryoccupationhasrelationonlytotheinhabitants
oftheinvadedcountry。Thetroopsandcampfollowersinaforeigncountry
whichhasbeenoccupiedletussaybytheEnglisharmyremainunderEnglish
militarylaw，andareinnorespectsamenabletotheruleofmilitaryoccupation。
Asageneralrule，militaryoccupationextendsonlytosuchmattersasconcern
thesafetyofthearmy，theinvaderusuallypermittingtheordinarycivil
tribunalsofthecountrytodealwithordinarycrimescommittedbytheinhabitants。
Thecourse，however，tobeadoptedinsuchacaseisatthediscretionof
theinvader。Hemayabrogateanylawinthecountry，andsubstituteother
rulesforit。Hemaycreatespecialtribunals，orhemayleavethenative
tribunalstoexercisetheirusualjurisdiction。Thespecialtribunalscreated
byaninvaderforcarryingintoeffecttheruleofmilitaryoccupationin
thecaseofindividualoffendersareusuallymilitarycourts，framedonthe
modelandcarryingontheirproceedingsafterthemannerofcourts—martial;
butofcourse，technically，courtssoestablishedbyanEnglishGeneralwould
notbecourts—martialwithinthemeaningofourArmyActs。Thecourtswould
beregulatedonlybythewilloftheGeneral。Themostimportantpowerexercised
byaninvaderoccupyingaterritoryisthatofpunishing，insuchmanner
ashethinksexpedient，theinhabitantsguiltyofbreakingtheruleslaid
downbyhimforsecuringthesafetyofthearmy。Therightofinflicting
suchpunishmentincaseofnecessityisundoubted;buttheinterestofthe
invadernolessthanthedictatesofhumanitydemandthatinhabitantswho
havebeenguiltyofanactwhichisonlyacrimeinconsequenceofitsbeing
injurioustotheenemy，shouldbetreatedwiththegreatestleniencyconsistentwiththesafetyandwell—beingoftheinvadingarmy。TheAmericanrulesonthesubjectofthegovernmentofarmiesinthefield
say;Martiallaw，orinotherwordsthelawofmilitaryoccupation，should
belessstringentinplacesandcountriesfullyoccupiedandfairlyconquered。
Greaterseveritymaybeexercisedinplacesorregionswhereactualhostilities
exist，orareexpectedandmustbepreparedfor。Itsmostcompleteswayis
allowedeveninthecommander’sowncountrywhenfacetofacewithanenemy，
becauseoftheabsolutenecessitiesofthecaseandoftheparamountduty
ofdefendingthecountryagainstinvasion。Tosavethecountryisofcourseparamounttoallotherconsiderations。Inconclusion，itmustbeborneinmindthataninvadercannot，according
tothecustomsofwar，callontheinhabitantstoenlistassoldiersorto
engageactivelyinmilitaryoperationsagainsttheirowncountry。Thetheory
initsfullswayisthis。Inacountrymilitarilyoccupiedallexecutive
andlegislativepowerpassestotheinvader。Itdoesnotfollowthatheexercises
thesepowers，buttheoreticallytheybelongtohim。TheDukeofWellington
madesomeobservationsintheEnglishParliamentwhicharerecognizedas
authoritativeinallthemodernManuals。’Martiallaw，’hesaid，’isneither
morenorlessthanthewilloftheGeneralwhocommandsthearmy;infact，
martiallawmeansnolawatall。ThereforetheGeneralwhodeclaresmartial
lawandcommandsthatitshallbecarriedintoexecutionisboundtolay
downdistinctlytheregulationsandrulesaccordingtowhichhiswillis
tobecarriedout。Now，Ihaveinnocountrycarriedoutmartiallaw;that
istosay，Ihavenotgovernedalargeproportionofacountrybymyown
will。ButthenwhatdidIdo？Ideclaredthatthecountryshouldbegoverned
accordingtoitsownnationallaw，andIcarriedintoexecutionmysodeclared
will。’Comparingthisstateofthelawwiththatfromwhichwestarted，it
isevidentthattheancientpracticeandtheoryofoccupationhavemuchchanged。
TheyhavenotnowanyconnectionwithRomanLaw，norwouldanyonenowadays
thinkofborrowingtheRomanLawfortheirrules。Themodernpracticerests，
infact，uponmilitarynecessity，andiscircumscribedbythemilitarynecessity。
AninvadingGeneralcandocertainthingsbecause，bythehypothesis，there
isnooneelsetodothem。InEnglandthelegalruleisthesameinpeace
asinwar。Thesoldierycanalwaysbeemployedinourowncountrywhensufficient
necessitycanbeshownforusingthemthroughthetemporaryorlocalabeyanceofcivilauthority。Thisstateofthingscomestoanendwiththecessationofwar。Warsdo
notinourdaylingeron，asdidtheoldwarsofsuccessionandtheoldwars
ofreligion。Thereisalwayswithinsomemoderatetimeatreatyofpeace。
Indeed，themoderndifficultyinclosingawaris，sometimes，tofindan
authoritycapableofmakingpeace。ThisdifficultywasmuchfeltbytheGermans
aftertheyhadproceededagreatlengthintheirconquestofFranceinthe
lastwar。Theymadeuptheirmindsthattheonlyauthoritywhichcouldmake
atreatyonthepartofFrancewhichFrenchmenwouldrespectwasaNational
Assembly，andthereforebeforemakingpeacetheyinsistedthatsuchanAssemblyshouldbeelected。Ithinkitmaybeusefultosayafewwordsonthetreatiesofpeaceby
whichwarisnowadaysbroughttoanend。Inmoderntimesapeaceisalways
precededbyanarmistice，andanarmisticebyasuspensionofarms，which
isonlyashorterarmistice。Therulelaiddownbytheinternationallawyers
isthatastateofwarisbroughttoanendbyatreatyofpeaceorbya
generaltruce。Atreatyofpeaceputsanendtothewarandabsolutelyabolishes
thesubjectofit;ageneraltruceputsanendtothewar，butleavesundecided
thequestionwhichgaveoccasiontoit。Inmoderntimesthesegeneraltruces
havefallenoutofuse。TheywerecommonenoughintheMiddleAges，especially
betweentheTurksandtheirChristianenemies，becausethereligionofneither
partypermittedthecombatantstoconcludeadefinitetreatyofpeace。It
hasalwaysbeenlaiddownthattreatiesandgeneraltrucescanonlybeconcluded
bythesovereignpowerofastate，andnotthatofanyotherauthority。An
armisticeisdefinedasapartialtruce。Thepowertoconcludeanarmistice
isessentialtothefulfilmentbythecommandingofficerofhisofficial
duties，andthereforeheispresumedtohavesuchpowerdelegatedtohim
byhissovereignwithoutanyspecialcommand。Thispresumptionofauthority
isheldtobesostrongthatitcannotberebuttedbyanyactofthesovereign。
Ifanofficermakesanarmisticeindisobediencetoordersreceivedfrom
hissovereign，heispunishablebythatsovereign;butthesovereignisbound
bythearmistice，inasmuchastheenemycouldnotbesupposedtohaveknownofthelimitationofauthorityimposedontheofficer。Itissuggestedbyseveraloftheinternationalwriters，anditisprobable，
thatarmisticesfirstarosefromthetruceortrucesofGodwhichwererepeatedly
proclaimedbytheChurch。Thesetrucestookmanyandverysingularforms。
ThusonefamoustruceofGodwastobegineveryWednesdayatsunset，and
lasttillthefollowingMondayatsunrise。ItwastocontinuefromAdvent
totheoctavesofEpiphany，andfromQuinquagesimaSundaytotheoctaves
ofEaster。Ifanypersonbrokethetruceandrefusedtogivesatisfaction
hewasexcommunicated，andafterthethirdadmonitionthebishopwhoexcommunicated
himwasnottoadmithimintocommunionunderthepenaltyofdeprivation。
Thetrucewasconfirmedatmanycouncils，andespeciallyattheLateranCouncil
of1179。SomeoftheregulationswereextendedintoEngland，andWednesday
andFridayweresetapartasdaysforkeepingpeace。Itisexceedinglylikely
thatthesetemporaryandlimitedtrucesaccustomedthewarlikecommunities
ofthosedaystotemporarysuspensionsofhostilities，andarmisticesmanifestly
grewintoconsiderablefavour。Buttheyalsogaverise，andindeedtheygive
risestill，toanumberofratherdifficultquestions。Wefindagreetnumber
ofruleslaiddownastowhatbelligerentpartiesmightdoormightnotdo
duringanarmistice。Theviewstakenofthesedutiesinmoderntimesare
decidedlycontradictory。Ontheonesideitisheldthatallequivocalacts
ofhostilityshouldbeabstainedfromduringanarmisticewhethertheycome，
ordonot，withinthedescriptionofactscapableofbeinginterruptedby
theenemy;whileontheotherhanditiscontendedthat，accordingtothe
practiceofmodernwarfare，belligerentshaveaperfectrighttoalterthe
dispositionoftheirtroops，constructentrenchments，repairbreaches，or
doanyactsbywhichtheymaythinkfittopreparethemselvesfortheresumption
ofhostilities。Theviolationofanarmisticebyeitherofthecontending
partiesgivestotheothertherighttoputanendtoit;butitsviolation
byprivateindividualsonlyconferstherighttodemandthepunishmentof
theguiltypersons。Thequestionisoneofgreatpracticaldifficulty，and
inalltheManualstheadviceisgiventhatthegreatestcautionshouldbe
observedinthecaseofanarmisticetospecifytheactswhichareorarenottobepermittedduringitscontinuance。Anotherquestionwhich，evidently，wasthoughttopresentgreatdifficulties，
wasthedateofthecommencementandthetimeoftheterminationofanarmistice。
Supposingittobemadeforacertainnumberofdays——thatis，fromthe
1stofMaytothe1stofAugust——questionshavebeenraisedwhetherthe
daysnamedarebothincludedorexcluded。Theusualmodeofreckoningin
Englandaslegaltimeistoincludethefirstdayandexcludethelast。（consequently，
intheabove—mentionedcase，accordingtoEnglishlaw，thetrucebeginsat
themomentonwhichthe30thofAprilendsandceasesatthemomentatwhich
the31stofJulyends。Toavoiddifficulties，itshouldbestatedfromthe
1stofMayinclusivetothe1stofAugustinclusive，ifitisintendedto
includethe1stofAugust;orbetterstilltobeginatacertainhouron
oneday，andtoendatacertainhouronanother。Inthecaseofashort
armisticethenumberofhoursshouldbestated;anditisadvisableinall
caseswhereanarmisticehasbeenarranged，toagreetoindicatebysome
signalforexample，thehoistingofaflagorthefiringofacannon——both
thecommencementandtheterminationofthearmistice。Anarmistice，itis
toberemembered，isonlyaqualifiedpeace，andthestateofwarcontinues，
thoughactivehostilitiesaresuspended。Thisanomalousstateofthingsleads，
intheabsenceofexpressstipulation，toconsiderabledifficultyinascertaining
whatisallowedtobedoneorcontinuedtobedone。Apartfromparticular
stipulation，thegeneralruleseemstobethatabelligerentcannottake
advantageofanarmisticetodoanyaggressiveactwhichbutforthearmistice
hecouldnothavedonewithoutdangertohimself。Forexample，inthecase
ofanarmisticebetweenabesiegingarmyandabesiegedtown，thebesiegers
mustnotcontinuetheirworksagainstthetown，andthebesiegedareforbidden
torepairtheirwalls，raisefreshfortifications，orintroducesuccours
orreinforcementsintothetown。ThelastdangerousquestionwhicharoseinEurope，aroseononeoftheclassoftermswhichIhavebeenexamining。Beforeclosingthislectureitwinbeusefultonotethesubstanceof
thestatementsmadeinthemodernManualsinrespecttoanumberofterms
whichareinmuchuseinthispartofmilitaryoperations，butwhichare
verylooselyemployedbyciviliansandevenbyhistoricalwriters。First
astowhatiscalledaCapitulation。Acapitulationisanagreementforthe
deliveryofabesiegedplaceorforcesdividedinthefieldintothehands
oftheenemy。Thecommandersoneithersideareinvestedwithpopoverto
agreetothetermsofacapitulation，inasmuchasthepossessionofsuch
powersisnecessarytotheproperexerciseoftheirfunctions。Ontheother
hand，theextentoftheirpowersislimitedbythenecessityfortheirexercise。
Inthesurrenderofaplacethequestionsatissuearetheimmediatepossession
oftheplaceitself，andthefateofthegarrison。Acapitulation，therefore，
mustbelimitedtothesequestions。Itmaydeclarethatthegarrisonisto
surrenderunconditionallyasprisonersofwar，ortobeentitledtomarch
outwithallthehonoursofwar。Itmayalsoprovidethatthesoldierscomprising
thegarrisonarenottoserveagainduringthewar。Furtherconditionsfor
theprotectionoftheinhabitantsandoftheirprivileges，andfortheir
immunityfrompillageorcontribution，mayfairlybeputintoacapitulation。
Astipulationinacapitulationtotheeffectthatthegarrisonshouldnever
againbeararmsagainsttheforcesoftheconqueringstate，orthatthesovereignty
ofthetownshouldchangehands，wouldbeinvalid，inasmuchaspowersfor
suchextensivepurposesbelongonlytothesovereignpoweroftheState，andcannoteverbepresumedtobedelegatedtoinferiorofficers。AfewwordswillnotbethrownawayonFlagsofTruce。Suchaflagcan
onlybeusedlegitimatelyforthepurposeofenteringintosomearrangement
withtheenemy。Ifadoptedwithaviewsurreptitiouslytoobtaininformation
astotheenemy’sforces，itlosesitscharacterofaflagoftruceandexposes
itsbearertothepunishmentofaspy。Greatcaution，however，andthemost
conclusiveevidenceareheldtobenecessarybeforethebearerofsucha
flagcanbeconvictedasaspy。Thebearerofaflagoftruce，atthesame
time，shouldnotbeallowedwithoutpermissiontoapproachsufficientlynear
tosecureanyusefulinformation。Whenanarmyisinposition，thebearer
ofaflagoftruceshouldnot，withoutleave，bepermittedtopasstheouterlineofsignals，oreventoapproachwithintherangeoftheirguns。Whenaflagoftruceissentfromadetachmentduringanengagement，the
troopfromwhichitissentshouldhaltandceasefiring。Thetrooptowhich
itissentshould，ifthecommanderiswillingtoreceiveit，signaltothat
effectandalsoceasefiring;butitmustbeunderstoodthatfiringduring
anengagementdoesnotnecessarilyceaseontheappearanceofaflagoftruce，
andthatthepartiescommunicatingwithsuchflagscannotcomplainifthose
whosentthemshouldcarryonthefiring。Whenitisintendedtorefuseadmission
toaflagoftruce，thebearershould，assoonaspossible，besignalledtoretire;andifhedonotobeythesignal，hemaybefiredupon。Afewwordsmaybeusefullyaddedonothertermsoftheartofwarwhich
arealliedtothosewhichIhavebeendefining。ACartelisanengagement
fortheexchangeofprisonersofwar。Acartelshipisashipcommissioned
fortheexchangeofprisoners。Sheisconsideredaneutralship，andmust
notengageinanyhostilitiesorcarryimplementsofwarexceptasignal
gun。ASafe—conductorPassportisadocumentgivenbythecommanderofa
belligerentforceenablingcertainpersonstopass，eitheraloneorwith
servantsandeffects，withinthelimitsoccupiedbytheforceofsuchcommanding
officer。Intheso—calledSchnabelecasewhicharoseonthefrontierofFrance
andGermany，youmayremember，itwasdecidedtheremightbeanimpliedsafe—conduct。
Theexpression’passport’isusuallyappliedtopersons，and’safe—conduct’
bothtopersonsandthings。Asafe—conductforapersonisnottransferable，
andcomestoanendatthedatestated，unlessthebearerisdetainedby
sicknessorotherunavoidablecause，inwhichcaseitterminatesonthecessation
ofthecause。Asafe—conductmayberevokedifitisinjurioustotheState;
thatis，anofficerpreparingforagreatexpeditionmayrevokethesafe—conduct
ofapersonwhowouldbymeansofsuchsafe—conductbeabletocarryinformation
totheenemy。Insuchcase，however，hemustgivetimeandopportunityto
thebearertowithdrawinsafety。Asafe—conduct，however，forgoodsadmits
oftheirbeingremovedbysomepersonotherthantheowner，unlessthere
issomespecificobjectionagainstthepersonemployed。ASafe—guardisa
guardpostedbyacommandingofficerforthepurposeofprotectingproperty
orpersonsagainsttheoperationsofhisowntroops。Toforcesuchaguard
isbyEnglishlawamilitaryoffenseofthegravestcharacter，andourArmyActmakesitpunishablebydeath。Youmayrememberthatnotmanymonthsagoseriousuneasinesswasfelt
throughoutEuropeonaccountofanincidentonthenewFrenchandGerman
frontier。AFrenchofficial，belongingbybirthtotheformerGermanpopulation
ofprovincesnowFrench，wasfoundonterritorynowGerman，undercircumstances
whichmadehimliabletoarrestunderaGermanlaw。Hisdefencewas，that
onthatandseveralpastoccasionshehadbeeninvitedbytheGermanfrontier
officialstohelpinsettlingborderquestions。TheGermanofficialsasserted
that，howeverthatmightbe，hewasonthepresentoccasionengagedinacts
ofhostilitytoGermany。Aftersomediplomaticcorrespondence，theGerman
Governmentlaiddownthat，ifGermanofficialsinvitedaFrenchfunctionary
tocrossthefrontierintoGermanterritoryforanyreason，heenjoyedan
impliedsafe—conducttohishomeinFrance，andthereforeM。Schnabelewas
released。Thecontroversy，therefore，endedintheestablishmentofthepoint
thatasafe—conductmaybenotonlyexpressbutimplied。
LECTUREXI。
RIGHTSOFCAPTUREBYLAND。BeforeIleavethegroupofsubjectsdiscussedinthemorerecentlectures，
itmaybewelltosaysomethingonabranchofthelawofwarbylandwhich
triestoregulateincidentsofbelligerencythatcausesometimesasmuch
sufferingandveryconstantlymoreirritationthanactualhostilities。This
isthelawofthecaptureofpropertyinlandwar。Isaidinaformerlecture
thatawarbylandresemblesamaritimewarintheprincipleswhichareapplied
tothecaptureofproperty;butthereisagreatpracticaldifferencebetween
thetwo，ifneutralsdonothappentobeinterestedinthesamewayinwars
bylandinwhichtheyhaveinterestasinwarsbysea，sincethereareno
prizecourtstoinsistonregularityandmoderation。Theprincipleofcapture
isthatmovableproperty，capturedeitheronlandoratsea，isacquired
byreductionintofirmpossession。Leaving，however，movablepropertyfor
themoment，andpassingtoimmovable，Ibeginbystatingthatthereisa
greatdealonthissubjectintheolderlawbooks。’Acompletetitletothe
landofacountry，’saystheleadingrule，’isusuallyacquiredbytreaty
orbytheentiresubmissionordestructionofthestatetowhichitbelongs。’
Herewhatismeantisthesovereigntyorsupremerightoverpropertysometimes
calleddominiumeminens，therightinthesovereign，whethercorporateor
single，toaffectpropertybylegislation。Insomerarecasestheproprietary
right，generallyinprivatehands，cannotbeseparatedfromtheeminentdomain。
ThisoccursinIndia，andmoreorless，probably，allovertheEast。The
sovereignistheuniversalproprietor;butinourdaythequasi—proprietary
rightswhichaconqueredsovereignhascreatedorrespected，wouldinpractice
bemaintainedbyasuccessfulinvader。Such，infact，wasthecaseinthe
recentBritishconquestofBurmahproper。ButintheolderInternational
Lawbooksanotherkindofacquisitionbycaptureofprivatepropertyinland
seemstobechieflycontemplated。Thewritersappeartobethinkingofthe
seizureoflandwhichisprivatepropertybythesoldiersoftheconquering
andinvadingarmy，muchinthesamewayinwhichtheprovincesoftheRoman
EmpirearesupposedtohavebeentakenpossessionofbytheTeutonicbarbarians。
Nowadaysthatisacasewhichneverpracticallyoccurs;butifithappened，
theoccupantofthelandwouldholditsubjecttotheRomanprincipleof
post—liminy。Iftheformerownerreturnedhewouldretverttohisoldrights，
andthenewownerwouldbeousted。Amoreconceivablecaseisoneinwhich
anoccupyingcivilianshouldsellforvalueaportionofthelandofwhich
hehastakenpossession。Here，too，intheorytheprincipleofpost—liminy
wouldintervene，buttheresultwouldbethateverysaleofcapturedprivate
propertywouldproduceatitletoitsobadthatonecanhardlyconceive
itsbeingeffected。Themodernusageisthattheuseofpubliclandandpublic
buildings，andtherentsandotherprofitsaccruingfromsuchlandsandbuildings，
formpartofthespoilsofwar。Asregardsprivatepropertyinland，belligerents
inmoderntimesusuallyabstain，sofarasisconsistentwiththeexigencies
ofoperationsofwar，fromexercisingtheextremerightconferredbywar
ofseizingorinjuringprivatepropertyorland。Thiscustomobtainsonly
solongasnotonlytheowners，butalsothecommunitytowhichtheybelong，
abstainfromallactsofhostility，asitisnotunusualforaninvaderto
takeordestroythepropertyofindividualsbywayofpunishmentforany
injuryindictedbythemorbythecommunityofwhichtheyarememberson
thepropertywhichheowns。Insuchcasestheinnocentmustnecessarilysuffer
fortheguilty，butahumaneGeneralwillnot，exceptinaveryextremecase，
destroyavillageforanoutragecommittedbyaninhabitantofthatvillage，
orravageadistricttopunishanattackmadewithinitslimitsbyabody
ofmarauders。Fromthepowerswhichasuccessfulenemyenjoystoappropriate
landandbuildings，itistobeobservedthatthemodernusagesofwarexcept
museums，churches，andothermonumentsofart;andbysomeitiscontendedthatnopublicbuildingcanbedestroyedunlessusedforbelligerentpurposes。Ifwenowturnbacktomovableproperty，itisheldthatthearms，implements
ofwar，andeverydescriptionofmovablepropertybelongingtotileState
maybetakenpossessionofbyaninvader。Anexceptiontotherightofseizure
ofmovablesoftheenemyismade，indeed，inthecaseofarchives，historical
documents，andjudicialandlegalrecords。Aninvadercanholdthemsolong
asheremainsinthecountryandrequirestheiruse;buttotakethemaway
withhimisanactofbarbarismprohibitedbythecustomsofwar，forthe
retentionofsuchdocumentscanbynomeanstendtoputanendtoawar，
whileitindictsagreatanduselessinjuryonthecountrytowhichthey
belong，andspeciallytothosecountries，nownumerous，which，unlikeEngland，
havecompleteregistrationoftitlestoland。Theseizureofscientificobjects，
ofpictures，sculptures，andotherworksofartandsciencebelongingto
thepublic，hasderivedsomesanctionfromtherepeatedpracticeofcivilised
nations，butwouldseemincompatiblewiththeadmittedrestrictionsofthe
rightsofwar，whichdepriveanenemyofsuchthingsonlyasenablehimto
makeresistance，andthereforecanonlybejustifiedasameasureofretaliation。
Seventyyearsagothequestionoftherightofasuccessfulenemytocarry
awaywithhimworksofartwasamatterofviolentcontroversyinthiscountry
andinthewholeofEurope，andthesubjectwasseveraltimesdebatedin
theBritishParliament。Itisafactverygenerallyknownthatafterthe
earlyandastonishingsuccessesofNapoleonBonapartein1796，andafterwards
in1797，therewasonlyoneofthesmallItalianStateswhichwasnotcompelled
togiveuptotheconqueringFrenchGovernmenttheworksofartthatwere
thegloryofitschiefcities。TheApolloBelvedere，theDyingGladiator，
theMediceanVenus，theLaocoon，theBronzeHorses，wereconveyedtoParis
anddepositedintheLouvre，inwhichtheyremaineduntiltheoverthrowof
thefirstFrenchEmpire。OntheoverthrowofthatEmpire，whentheallies，
enteringParisforthesecondtime，gainedpossessionofthewholecity，
theyrestoredmostofthesefamousmasterpiecestotheiroriginalowners。
TheFrenchexpressed，andnodoubtgenuinelyfelt，thegreatestindignation，
whichwas，however，manifestlytreatedwithmuchscornbytheEnglishwriters
ofthatday，whoseemedtolookupontheangeroftheFrenchorParisian
populationasamountingtoanabsurdrefusaltohavearuleappliedtothemselves
whichtheyhadfreelyappliedtoothers;butifwearetosupposethatstrict
lawappliedtothecasetherewassomethingtosayagainsttheinternational
validityoftherestorationsinthewayinwhichtheywereactuallyaccomplished。
Arguments，foundedonthis，weresubmittedtotheBritishHouseofCommons，
especiallybythegreatlawyerRomilly。Itwasafactthatsomeofthese
worksofarthadformedpartofforcedmilitarycontributions，whichaconqueror
mayalwayslevy，andsomeweregivenupunderexpressconventionstowhich
thesurrenderingstatehadnopowerofresistance。Insomeothercasesthe
statetowhichthereturnwasmadehadbeenabsorbedinanotherstateduring
thelongwarwithFrance。Forexample，Venice，whichhadsurrenderedsome
ofthemostbeautifulworksofartintheLouvre，hadnowbecomeabsorbed
intheAustrianEmpire。Itwasfurtherarguedthatitwasfortheadvantage
ofcivilizationthattheseworksofartshouldnotbedispersedoveranumber
ofsmallcitiesinItalywhichwerenotthen，allofthem，easilyaccessible，
butthattheyshouldremaininaplacewhichonthewholewassoeasilyreached
asParis。Thefactseemstobethatthecarryingoffoftheseworksofart
fromtheiroldItalianhomeshadbeenanewruleofwar。Forexample，Frederick
theGreat，whomorethanonceoccupiedDresden，alwayssparedthefamous
galleryanditscontents。ThenewrulewasintroducedbyNapoleonBonaparte
asconquerorofItaly，andwhatthealliesinoccupationofParisapplied
seemstohavebeentheruleofreprisal。Therewas，nodoubt，ifwethrow
thetechnicalruleaside，agreatdealtobeurgedonbehalfofgivingback
thesesculpturesandpaintingstotheItaliancities。Theywerevaluedby
themmorethananymereproperty。Someofthesecitiesbeforethewarwere
hardlyevervisitedexceptbypersonsdesirousofseeingsomefamouswork。