instead of declaring war against Spain, the United States should have established a pacific blockade of Cuba or Porto Rico. In the eyes of statesmen a "pacific blockade" needs no justification. It may avert war or stop war when begun. It avoids the responsibility of declaring war. It may be just the exact amount of pressure required to bring a small Power to reason. It

66

is described in a recent work of international law as a convenient and salutary method of coercing a weak but aggressive power, and preventing it from presuming on its weakness." The nations against which this measure has been employed have been Powers of a second order. This is in the nature of things; such coercion employed against an equal would mean war. Some of these recommendations of "pacific blockades" seem to me positive objections. They enable a strong nation to resort to war without bringing upon her all the consequences. All the precedents above cited indicate evolution, but it is to be feared in the wrong direction; the growth of a form of international law to be used by strong States in dealing with weak. We stand here at the top of an inclined plane down which public morality may slide to a level below that on which international law has hitherto built. The doctrine of the equality of States was never expressive of a literal fact; but it enshrined an ideal which has been, on the whole, to the advantage of the weak. We have heard much of late of the need of a revision of that doctrine; and in the Far East we have seen the revisers at work. The legalizing of "pacific blockades" may be one more blow struck at the theory of the equality of States.

Moreover" pacific blockades" seem, in a legal point of view, open to grave objections. Whether this form of blockade is recognized by International Law, is apt to turn into a question of words; the changes being rung on "uses" and "abuses." It is easy to draw up a list of jurists who have strongly condemned the practice in all forms. Some of the latest writers on the subject are emphatic in condemning this "monstrous doctrine" as based on no sound principle and as a

Still, no

deplorable retrogression.* doubt, another list of writers, no less eminent, who have approved it subject to restrictions could be compiled. The Institute of International Law has by a majority passed a resolution approving of pacific blockades, if qualified by certain conditions. It is no disrespect to say of a body which has done very much for International Law, what Lord Stowell said of the opinion of another body not less illustrious: "Great as the reverence due to such authorities may be, they cannot, I think, be admitted to have the force of overruling the established course of the general law of nations." If pacific blockades are legalized, what are the rules thereof? The law applicable to blockade was reduced to order about the beginning of this century, chiefly by the luminous genius of Lord Stowell. He found fragmentary rules, uncertain practices, and no clear principles. By a series of decisions, as much creative as the genius of the great men of letters who were his contemporaries, he perfected a coherent system. What part of it, if any, applies to a pacific blockade? Is a captured vessel to be sunk or otherwise dealt with as the admiral of the blockading squadron thinks fit? Are there to be no prize courts? When a blockade is notified, and war really though not nominally exists, are the governments of neutral States bound to refuse the use of their ports to either belligerent as a basis of operations? Will the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act apply? If a blockade may exist in a time of peace, what was the value of the contention of England, that Lincoln's proclamation of blockade necessarily implied a state of war?

Of the examples above given, France has been a party to the majority; France has insisted upon her right to exclude from the blockaded zone the vessels of all Powers; she has repeatedly exercised this claim, and in the last diplomatic correspondence on the subject she reiterated this contention. And we may expect that other countries will make claims similar to those

*Un véritable mouvement de recul." Fauchille, Du Blocus Maritime.

which France has often made. This indeed is a necessary contention if a pacific blockade is to be of much use. The organ of the shipping interest in this country puts this point distinctly: That it (such blockade) must be binding on all States, certainly appears to us to be equally clear. Its effect would be so weakened as to be useless otherwise. If the ships of any Power not actively taking part in the blockade were entitled to sail through the lines with provisions, arms and ammunitions, troops, general merchandise and so on, the whole object of the blockade would be neutralized, and the end would be that the blockaling power would be forced to declare war, the very result to avoid which the scheme of pacific blockade was instituted.*

Suppose that an English vessel had been stopped in forcing the blockade of Crete; suppose that, refusing to be overhauled, she had been fired upon, and that a shot had injured her hull or killed one of the crew. If civil proceedings were taken against the officer who ordered the guns to be fired, it is not easy to see the answer to an action for damages by the owners. The orders of the Government or their ratification of the officer's conduct might not avail him, if the act were unlawful. Buron v. Denman shows such an action would not lie at the suit of a foreigner; it decides nothing more. The decision leaves the right of action as between subject and subject wholly untouched." If one of the crew of the English ship had been killed by a shot from a cruiser, and the officer in command on his return to England had been indicted for murder, it is also a little difficult to understand the answer to the charge. The royal prerogative, it has been said, is wide enough to cover such a case; the officer's conduct would be an

66 act of

State." Undoubtedly judicial phrases sanctioning it may be found; but whatever color may be given by dicta uttered in other times than ours to the opinion that there is an unexhausted and inexhaustible residuum of prerogative, legalizing every act deemed necessary for State ends, it would be hard to point to a clear judicial ruling since the Revolution to the same effect. For

at least two centuries the current of decisions has run strongly against the idea of prerogative being able to modify or annul private rights. The emergencies of actual war the Courts know; the authority of the Crown to do all that military necessities demand is recognized. The right of one subject to destroy the property or take away the life of another subject in time of peace in pursuance of State policy is dubious. The very writers who defend "pacific blockades" admit that they raise all sorts of questions, criminal and civil, private and international, to which no clear answer can be given; a proof that they are out of harmony with existing jurisprudence. With or without their abuses, they are a legal anomaly, what the Roman lawyers termed an inelegantia juris.

V. THE OUTLOOK.

Whether this war will impair or improve international morality, one cannot foresee. But there are hopeful signs.

The assurance by the United States Government that they will adhere to the four articles of the Declaration of Paris marks an enormous advance in international law. In the last few days it has become plain that the breaking strain of peace is greater than it was; that the burden of war falls heavier on neutrals, the assertion of strict belligerent rights becomes more intolerable. We are perhaps in sight of a time when war at sea will spare non-combatants as much as does war on land. The fragmentary phrases of international law are being slowly formed into a coherent system. Some old rules, barbarous and useless for the

paramount ends of war, are obviously falling into discredit and disuse. all events the whole subject of maritime belligerent rights needs reconsideration in the light of the new conditions of commerce. At the close of war there could be no worthier subject of inquiry for a Royal Commissionappointed not to collect platitudes or register the foreknown opinions of its members-than the rights and duties of belligerents and neutrals. - Nineteenth Century.

THE Government's promise to deal, in the coming Session, with that pressing but much delayed subject, Secondary Education, is welcome news, though expected. The point of speculation lies in the kind of Bill which we are to have. Secondary education is a term of somewhat vague import. The poorest provincial Grammar School but one remove from the Board School -claims to provide Secondary Education. The present-day descendant of Mr. Squeers's home of learning would place itself upon the list of providers. Secondary Education may take a number of varied forms, and each of them be useful; and it is quite possible to have something that can be called Secondary Education which is also absolutely futile.

Secondary Education divides itself roughly into three branches: Technical Education, Commercial Education and extended Literary Education. It is to the second of these branches that I propose to call attention here. The need for Technical Education is great -perhaps greater than that of either of the others. But among commercial people Commercial Education must also take its place. We are keepers of shops as well as makers of tools and fabrics; the manufacturer is often humbly dependent upon the merchant for the success of his business; and it behoves England to see that those of her sons who are to engage in commerce are thoroughly well equipped for the business. That is just what she fails to do; and it is just what her rivals are most particularly careful to do, thereby explaining not a little of the intensity of foreign competition. Go into the first stately block of offices you come to in the City, and question the scores of clerks scattered up and down the various rooms concerning their mental equipment for the work of conducting a world-wide commerce; and how many of them will you find capable of corresponding in two other languages save their own, or possessed of a sound knowledge of commercial history and

geography and political economy, or adept in practical mathematics? You will be lucky if you find one out of a hundred so equipped. If you do find one he will probably be a Belgian or a German.

For they do these things better across the water. I will take France by way of example, because Mr. James Graham, who is working hard on behalf of commercial education in Yorkshire, has written a report of commercial education in Paris, lately put into circulation by the Bradford Chamber of Commerce. which is well worthy of notice. From France, by the way, came the taunt against England that she was a nation of shopkeepers. Let us see, then, how France treats the question of preparing her own children for the counter or the counting-house.

A most cursory examination of Mr. Graham's report suffices to show that, though France may taunt, she regards the shop-keeping faculty and its tangible results as so very well worth the having that she has put forth systematic and determined efforts to equip her own children with practical and theoretical learning of a kind which must go far to make of them ideal merchants and merchants' assistants. The French Government supervises and aids nine High Schools of Commerce, the management being in the hands of the local Chambers of Commerce. These schools are situated at Paris, Bordeaux, Marseilles, Lyons, Rouen, Havre and Lille. They do not exhaust the list of French commercial schools; there are many others, both public and private. It is, however, in the State-patronized High Schools that the French system of commercial education attains its crowning distinction. (State patronage, it may be parenthetically remarked, does not mean State support in the ordinary pecuniary sense; for these schools are more than self-supporting-in 1895 the Paris schools had a balance of £2000 remaining after all expenses were paid.) The aim of these schools is to give the students the special training which will

qualify them most efficiently and rapidly for the direction of commercial, industrial and banking houses, and to prepare for the work of teaching those who intend themselves becoming professors of commercial subjects. The schools also aim at training students for the Consular Service-a point which should appeal with special force to all classes of mercantile Englishmen who do business abroad, and who complain -often, it is to be feared, justly-that the last thing a British Consul is selected for is his capacity to further British trade in his district.

State patronage is in evidence in the diplomas which are granted to students who pass their examinations successfully the diploma gives the holder the privilege of serving one year, instead of three years, in the army; and in competitions for certain Government posts a candidate, if he holds one of these diplomas, is given a number of marks on that account.

And what is the special character of the teaching at these schools? Foremost is the study of languages. Two foreign tongues are obligatory, the choice ranging between English, German, Spanish, and Italian; and that the teaching is thorough, and not the paltry smattering so common in English schools, may be gathered from the fact that weekly conferences are held, when the students are only allowed to speak in the foreign language. The subjects claiming second place in the curriculum are arithmetic, algebra, book-keeping and accountancy. Next in importance come object lessons on merchandise, which are supplemented by practical work in testing and analyzing all sorts of articles of food, etc., in the laboratory, and by the handling and observing of products under the microscope. Economical geography and commercial shipping and industrial law also occupy conspicuous places. The other subjects are the history of commerce, the elements of public and civil law; foreign commercial legislation; political economy; customs and budget legislation; handwriting; mechanical apparatus in commercial use; transport and factory legislation. The course extends over two years. In the case of the Paris School (the others

have similar arrangements)-the State, the Municipality, and the Department of the Seine grant Exhibitions valued at £40 each; and there are a number of foreign travelling Exhibitions tenable for two years and open for competition by students who have obtained diplomas. Their value ranges from £100 to £160 for the first year, and from £80 to £120 during the second year. An interesting feature of the schools is the museum, which contains among other exhibits specimens of the products of French Colonies, of textile fabrics, metals and similar commercial articles presented by merchants and manufacturers. The Paris school receives boarders at £112 per annum, day boarders at £52, and boys who do not dine, at £40 per annum. The other schools are considerably cheaper. Attached to the School is an Old Boys' Association, which finds employment for ex-students, and, it is said, finds it with little difficulty.

The other commercial schools mentioned above are also worthy of note. Mr. Graham describes one which he says is a type. It is a private school, and pays particular attention to the practical side of commercial education. For that purpose it is made into an exact reproduction of a merchant's office, with desks, copying presses, telephones and all the other paraphernalia of the counting house, and has besides a model bank, post-office, railway parcel office, etc.

The teaching is considered so valuable that the Municipal Council of Paris grants the school a subsidy of about £100 a year, and the Minister of Commerce pays for the education of twelve pupils. The fees range from £2 to £6 per quarter. Merchants set so high a value upon the education thus afforded that (so Mr. Graham avers) there are ten applications for the services of every pupil. Another most interesting feature of these schools is the Ladies' Section attached to them: departments organized on similar lines, and conducted by lady teachers.

There is nothing of this sort in England, though a few far-seeing and patriotic enthusiasts are striving hard to promote such education. The work of the Institute of Bankers, for example, is an admirable attempt. The Insti