character of foodstuffs, chiefly flour, canned meats, and other food materials.  Lumber, hardware and various miscellaneous articles generally considered innocent in character were also included.  There was a consignment of lubricating oil to the Netherlands South African Railway, the latter company held to be the property of the Transvaal Government, and a like consignment to the Lorenzo Marques Railway, a Portuguese concern.  At first the seizures which occurred at points between Cape Colony and Delagoa Bay were supposed to have been made on account of contraband.  Later Great Britain declared that the ships had been seized because of the violation of a municipal ordinance forbidding British subjects to trade with the enemy.  The Mashona, Beatrice and Sabine were British ships sailing under the English flag.  The Maria was a Dutch vessel sailing under the flag of Holland, but was supposed by the English authorities to have been under charter to an English firm.  In the latter case the ship would have been liable to the English law, but for the mistake the owners of the ship as well as the owners of the cargo were indemnified by the English Government.  The seizure of the cargoes of the British ships was declared to have been merely an unavoidable incident of the seizure of the alleged guilty ships.  Compensation was made to American shippers by the purchase of the goods.  The consignment of oil to the Netherlands South African Railway was confiscated as enemy’s property.

The views of Great Britain and the United States were divergent with reference to the principle of treating foodstuffs as contraband.  Rather as an obiter dictum the former declared:  “Foodstuffs 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."[60]

[Footnote 60:  For.  Rel., 1900, p. 555.]

The United States declared that the validity of the right to seize goods on the ground of contraband could not be recognized “under any belligerent right of capture of provisions and other goods shipped by American citizens in the ordinary course of trade to a neutral port."[61]

[Footnote 61:  For.  Rel., 1900, p. 540.]

England declared:  “Her Majesty’s Government have not admitted liability in respect of any claims for loss or damage sustained ... in consequence of the delay in the delivery of the ... goods.  But they have offered to purchase the flour on board by United States citizens.  Claims for redress for the non-delivery of the cargo appear to be a matter for settlement between such claimants and the ship which undertook to deliver.  British subjects who owned goods on board, having no right to trade with the enemy, are not in the same position as foreign owners.  The latter are not guilty of any offense in trading with the enemy from a neutral country unless the goods are contraband and are found on board a British ship in British territorial waters or on the high seas, and are destined for the enemy’s countries."[62]