Historical practice. of Cuban ports preceded the declaration of war between Spain and the United States in 1898.1 Similarly, hostilities were begun before the declaration of war between China and Japan in 1894,2 and between Russia and Japan in 1904. Indeed, few of the wars of the last two centuries have been declared before the outbreak of hostilities, and many have not been declared formally at all. In the case of the war in South Africa, early in October, 1899, the government of the Transvaal requested the government of Great Britain to give "an immediate and affirmative answer" not later than 5 P.M. on October 11th to certain questions in the accompanying ultimatum as to settling differences by arbitration, the withdrawal of British troops, etc., stating that if the answer was not satisfactory, it would be regarded as "a formal declaration of war." The government of Great Britain replied that the conditions demanded were such that the government deemed it impossible to discuss them. Hostilities immediately followed. (b) The present rules in regard to the commencement of war as agreed upon at The Hague in 1907 provide that hostilities between the contracting parties "must not commence without previous and explicit warning, in the form either of a reasoned declaration of war or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war." Rules of the (c) Civil war naturally is not preceded by a declaration, but exists from the time of the recognition of the belligerency by an outside state, or from the date when the parent state engages in some act of war against the insurgent party.3 In the case of the Civil War in the United States, the proclamation of blockade of the Southern Civil war. 130 U. S. Sts. at Large, 1769, 1776. 'Prize Cases, 2 Black, U. S. 635; Scott, 475. ports by President Lincoln was held to be sufficient acknowledgment of a state of war.1 Historical practice. 98. Declaration and Notification of War (a) In ancient times wars between states were entered upon with great formality. A herald whose person was inviolate brought the challenge, or formal declaration, which received reply with due formality. At the beginning of the eighteenth century this practice had become unusual, and in the days of Vattel (17141767) the theory of the necessity of a formal declaration was set aside. It was, however, maintained that a proclamation or manifesto should be issued for the information of the subjects of the states parties to the war, and for the information of neutrals. The practice became general, and was regarded as obligatory.2 Provisions of the Hague Conference. (b) In 1907 the Hague Convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities provided as to (1) declaration or ultimatum, and as to (2) notification: "ARTICLE I. The contracting powers recognize that hostilities between themselves must not commence without previous and explicit warning, in the form either of a reasoned declaration of war or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war." “ART. II. The existence of a state of war must be notified to the neutral powers without delay, and shall not take effect in regard to them until after the receipt of a notification, which may, however, be given by telegraph. Neutral powers, nevertheless, cannot rely on the absence of notification if it is clearly established that they were in fact aware of the existence of a state of war." 3 'Takahashi, Chino-Japanese, 38 et seq; 2 ' Calvo, § 1910. Such requirements are reasonable in view of the changes which a state of war brings about in the relations of the parties concerned, and of neutrals. The declarations usually specify the date from which the war begins, and hence have weight in determining the nature of acts prior to the declaration, as the legal effects of war depend on the declaration. The constitution of a state, written or unwritten, determines in what hands the right to declare war shall rest, e.g. in the United States in Congress. By act of the United States Congress of April 25, 1898,1 it was declared:— 'First, That war be, and the same is hereby, declared to exist, and that war has existed since the twenty-first day of April, Anno Domini eighteen hundred and ninety eight, including said day, between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Spain. "Second, That the President of the United States be, and he hereby is, directed and empowered to use the entire land and naval forces of the United States, and to call into the actual service of the United States the militia of the several States, to such extent as may be necessary to carry this Act into effect." 2 From the of view. 99. Object of War (a) The object of war may be considered from two points of view, the political and the military. International law cannot determine the limits of just objects for political point which a state may engage in war. Politically the objects have covered a wide range, though there is a growing tendency to limit the number of objects for which a state may go to war. It is generally held that self-preservation is a proper object, but as each state must decide for itself what threatens its existence and well-being, 130 U. S. Sts. at Large, 364. The French declaration of war against Prussia in 1870 is given in 2 Lorrimer, 443. even this object may be very broadly interpreted. History shows that it has not been difficult from the political point of view to find an object of war when the inclination was present in the state. The nominal are often not the real objects, and the changing conditions during the progress of the war may make the final objects quite different from the initial objects. The simple cost of carrying' on hostilities sometimes changes the conditions upon which peace can be made. The classification of causes and objects formerly made has little weight in determining whether a state will enter upon war. The questions of policy and conformity to current standards are the main ones at the present time. From the of view. (b) The object of war in the military sense "is a renewed state of peace,' or as stated in the English manual, "to procure the complete submission of the enemy military point at the earliest possible period with the least possible expenditure of men and money.' The "Institute of International Law," Oxford session of 1880, gave as a general principle that the only legitimate end that a state may have in war is to weaken the military strength of the enemy. In general the ultimate object of war is to establish a permanent peace. The means naturally accord with that end and must under present regulations be humane. (c) The Hague Conference of 1907 endeavored to remove one of the frequent objects of war by limiting by convention the employment of force for the recovery of contract debts as follows: Limitation by the Hague Conference. "ARTICLE I. The Contracting Powers agree not to have recourse to armed force for the recovery of contract debts claimed from the Government of one country by the Government of another country as being due to its nationals. "This undertaking is, however, not applicable when the 1 Inst. U. S. Armies, § 29; Appendix, p. 355. debtor State refuses or neglects to reply to an offer of arbitration, or, after accepting the offer, prevents any 'Compromis' from being agreed on, or, after the arbitration, fails to submit to the award." 1 100. General Effects of War (a) The general and immediate effects of war are:(1) To suspend all non-hostile intercourse between the states parties to the war. The general and immediate (2) To suspend the ordinary non-hostile intercourse between the citizens of the states effects. parties to the war. (3) To introduce new principles in the intercourse of the states parties to the war with third states. These impose new duties upon neutrals and allies. (4) To abrogate or suspend certain treaties: (a) To abrogate those treaties which can have force only in time of peace, e.g. of amity, commerce, navigation, etc. (b) To suspend those treaties which are permanent and naturally revive at the end of the war, e.g. of boundaries, public debts, etc. (c) To bring into operation treaties concerning the conduct of hostilities. Convention on (b) The Convention with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed at The Hague on October 18, 1907, in a measure supplants all other codifications and rules upon this subject. In cases for which the Convention provides, the Laws and Customs of War. the signatory powers are thereby bound; "in cases not included in the Regulations adopted by them the inhabitants and the belligerents remain under the protec 1 Scott, "Conferences," p. 194. This Convention introduces a modified form of the "Drago Doctrine." For statement of which, see U. S. For. Rel. 1903, p. 1. |