Mr. Choate to Mr. Hay.
[Mr. Choate gives text of a paper in writing handed to him on January 10 by Lord Salisbury, as follows:
Our view is that food stuffs with a hostile destination can be considered contraband of war only if they are supplies for the enemy’s forces. It is not sufficient that they are capable of “being so used. It must be shown that this was in fact their destination at the time of the seizure.
Lord Salisbury verbally added that the British Government do not claim that any of the American goods on the Mashona and on the Maria are contraband. Lord Salisbury also handed to Mr. Choate an answer to his note of January 4, which, after saying that the Mashona is a British vessel and is understood to have been seized and taken in for adjudication by the prize court on a charge of trading with the enemy, and claiming that the offense is cognizable by the prize court only and that the action taken is correct, proceeds as follows:
If the owners of cargo, being neutrals, claim that they are innocent, the cargoes should not be condemned with the ship, but should be delivered over to them. The ordinary course is that they should claim the cargo in the prize court, where the case will no doubt be considered and properly dealt with on its merits. The practice is well stated in Story’s Manual of Prize Law, pages 46 to 71, edition 1854, and in the portions of the work relating to claims made by innocent or interested parties.
Mr. Choate, at this point, asked Lord Salisbury what he understood this to require the owners of the cargoes to prove. Lord Salisbury replied: Only that they were the owners; that the prize court must have bills of lading and invoices and could not, of course, deliver to first comer. The note proceeds:
The case of the Netherlands ship Maria is of a different character. Her Majesty’s Government understand that the flour on Maria is not detained in any way and that it is perfectly open to the owners to make whatever arrangements they please for its immediate removal. If they consider themselves to be in any way aggrieved, owing to the action of the authorities in causing the flour to be landed, it is, of course, open to them to take such proceedings as they may be advised are appropriate against the persons concerned.
Mr. Choate here stated that the United States Government would probably send the bill to the British Government. Lord Salisbury replied, “Very likely.”
Mr. Choate informed Lord Salisbury that one owner had authorized the United States Government to offer his goods at the value of the flour at the port of destination at the time the vessel would have arrived there if she had not been interrupted. Lord Salisbury replied that his commissariat would consider such an offer. Mr. Choate’s impression is that the British Government would take all of the Maria’s and Mashona’s cargoes on these terms, and he suggests that it would be [Page 550] advisable for all those whose cargoes had been landed to offer to sell, if terms can be arranged to include all. Mr. Choate states that he will not present the case of the Pennsylvania Milling Company’s flour in the form directed by the Secretary of State unless again instructed, thinking it better to rest the case on the regular shipping papers.]