in conformity with the legislation of certain other powers, and, therefore, would meet with opposition in the Parliaments which would have to give their approval in this matter.

Under the circumstances, and also by reason of the desirability that there should be a uniformity established in the respective obligations resulting from this convention for the contracting powers, a uniformity which would be endangered by the reservations made by four of them, the Government of Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands deems there should be a means of excluding the ratification of the said article 10, which of itself otherwise is only of secondary interest.

It is to be hoped that if this proposition is accepted - and I am happy to be able to inform you that the Imperial Russian Government entirely agrees with us in our views on this, the subject of the exclusion of the above-mentioned article the ratification would not meet with any other difficulty of internal form in the different countries, and it could be effected with little delay, which would be highly desirable.

As the result of an exchange of views, the minister of the Netherlands, at Washington, informed the Department of State on April 30, 1900, that:

The former proposition of the Government of the Queen, which formed the subject of Mr. de Beaufort's communication No. 1109, of January 29 last, addressed to Mr. Stanford Newel, suggesting the exclusion of the ratification of article 10 of the convention for the adaptation to maritime warfare of the principles of the Geneva Convention, has received the consent of all the States which up to the present have made known their views.

These powers being in the majority, and the adoption of the proposition by the other interested States being probable, it is important that, with a view of expediting the filing of these acts of ratification, a uniform method for emphasizing this exclusion should be established now.

The Cabinet of St. Petersburg has suggested, for this purpose, a combination which consists in inserting in the act of ratification a copy of the convention in which the text of article 10 would be replaced by the word "exclu" (excluded) while still preserving the proper numbering of the articles.

Copies prepared in conformity with the method above indicated will be placed at the disposal of those Governments who wish them.

In thus proposing an alternative method for the decision of prize cases submitted to the International Prize Court and urging the creation of a Court of Arbitral Justice by an apt clause in the instrument of ratification of the Convention for the Establishment of the International Prize Court, the United States is influenced by the sincere desire not merely to render its coöperation in the matter of the Prize Court possible and to secure the constitution of the Court of Arbitral Justice, but is en

deavoring in a thoroughly disinterested manner to advance the cause of international justice and peace.

As the Department of State desires to submit the Prize Court Convention as thus understood and explained, and the Draft Convention for the Creation of the Court of Arbitral Justice to the approaching session of the Senate for approval and ratification, an early reply to this circular note is earnestly requested.

P. C. KNOX,

Secretary of State.

OCTOBER 18, 1909.

OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS

ANNEXES TO THE PROCES-VERBAL OF THE TENTH PLENARY SESSION OF THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MARITIME LAW.

ANNEX I.

OUTLINE OF A PROPOSED CONVENTION, REGARDING THE LIMITATION OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SHIP OWNERS, AS SUBMITTED TO THE EXAMINATION OF THE GOVERNMENTS CONCERNED.

(October 6-7, 1909.)

ARTICLE 1.

The stipulations of this convention shall be applicable in each contracting nation when one of the interested parties is a citizen or subject of another contracting nation, as well as in other cases provided for in the national laws.

However, the principle laid down in the foregoing paragraph shall not affect the rights of the contracting nations not to apply the stipulations of this convention in favor of the citizens or subjects of a non-contracting

nation.

ARTICLE 2.

To the extent only of the (value of) a vessel and of the (amount of) freight (received therefor) (for a given voyage), as well as of any perquisites received in connection with the vessel and with the freight and arising from the voyage (in question), the owner of the vessel shall be liable —

1. For any injury caused to the property and rights of any nature belonging to third parties, on land or water, by the acts and omissions of the master, the crew, the pilot, or any other person in the service of the vessel.

2. For any injury caused to the cargo transported or to any other property or articles on board the vessel, as well as for any other injury caused by a fault of navigation even in the execution of a contract.

3. For compensation allowed for assistance, and for salvage.

4. For any obligations resulting from contracts concluded by the master in accordance with his legal powers, in case of necessity, outside

of the port of registry of the vessel, for the sake of preserving the vessel or continuing the voyage, if the need has been occasioned by accident. When the owner of the vessel is at the same time the master, the same limitation applies, but solely with respect to faults of navigation.

ARTICLE 3.

The freight referred to in Article 2 is the rent or the freight without deduction, whether it be a question of freight or rent paid in advance, or freight or rent still due, or of freight or rent acquired at all hazards. Passages and demurrage are classed with freight within the meaning of this convention.

The perquisites mentioned in Article 2 are:

1. Any compensation paid to or due the owner of the vessel for gross average, as far as the latter constitutes a material injury sustained by the vessel and not repaired, or losses of freight.

2. Compensation paid or due in reparation of damages, whether it be a question of damages sustained by the vessel and not repaired, or losses of freight.

3. Amounts paid or due to the owner of the vessel for assistance or salvage, after deducting the sums allowed to the master and to the crew. Indemnities due or paid under insurance contracts, and premiums, subsidies, or other national pecuniary assistance, are not considered as perquisites of the vessel.

ARTICLE 4.

If there is a first lien on the vessel or on the freight in favor of creditors toward whom it is not permissible to limit the responsibility, the owner of the vessel shall be personally obliged to make up in cash the sum constituting the limit of his responsibility, including the amounts deducted by his creditors.

ARTICLE 5.

The owner may substitute in lieu of the vessel the value thereof at the end of the voyage.

ARTICLE 6.

The owner shall have the privilege of exempting the vessel, the freight, and the perquisites mentioned in Article 2 by paying a sum corresponding per voyage to eight pounds sterling per ton of the gross burden of

his vessel.

This provision does not apply either to the compensation for assistance or to salvage or to the case contemplated under number 4 of Article 2.

ARTICLE 7.

The voyage is considered to be terminated, as far as the vessel is concerned, at the first port of call (d'cacle ou de relache) which it reaches after the event justifying an action for damages (donnant lieu au recours) or at the port in which it is situated when such event occurs.

If the place where the event has occurred is not determined, the voyage is considered terminated at the point where the performance of the obligation (the non-fulfillment of) which gives rise to remedial action. was to terminate.

ARTICLE 8.

As regards the freight, various formulas have been suggested:

1. The freight and perquisites mentioned in Article 3 are the freight and the perquisites acquired from the beginning of the voyage to the port determined in Article 7.

2. To substitute a stipulated amount (forfeit), calculated per ton, in place of the freight, the passage, the demurrage, and the perquisites mentioned in Article 3, taking into account the distance already traveled and the nature of the vessel.

ARTICLE 9.

The owner may, in the interest of whom it may concern, take any useful measure with respect to the vessel, without forfeiting the right to exercise the options provided in the foregoing clauses.

He shall be responsible for any deterioration or any injury which may be sustained by the vessel, in consequence of a new voyage, to the detriment of the creditors toward whom a limitation of responsibility is permissible.

ARTICLE 10.

The foregoing provisions shall not affect the right of the creditors to seize the vessel.

ARTICLE 11.

The foregoing provisions do not apply to obligations arising from the personal faults of the owner, from contracts concluded by him, or from such as he has authorized or ratified.

They apply to the obligation to remove the hulk of a sunken vessel, and to the responsibilities connected therewith, whether or not the master be at fault.