FACTS FROM THE PRIZE COURT.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 15499, 28 January 1916, Page 7

FACTS FROM THE PRIZE COURT.

(t'OM.irUXICATED.) A legal correspondent sends us the j following: — That the prevention of imports into Germany, especially of food stuffs and war material, is of_ the greatest importance to the Allies, is well known to us all. So also is the fact that the Allied Navies practically prevent all direct importation into enemy ports. But it is doubtful whether wc in New Zealand clearly rccogniso the efforts which the. enemy have mado to import indirectly through neutral countries the goods which they arc unable to import directly. The extent of these efforts is strikingly illustrated in the judgment of Sir Samuel Evans, president of the Probate and Admiralty Division of the English High Court of Justice, in the case of "The Kim" and three other vessels, reported in the December num. ber of the English Law Reports (19.15, P.D. 215). N The case deals with the liability to confiscation of parts of four cargoes of jard, fat backs and foodstuffs carried in four c'Vmerican-owned vessels from New York and consigned to Copenhagen. Dealing with the lard only, the Presidout says: "The average annual quantity of lard imported into Denmark during the three years 1911-1 Ol.'J from all sources was 1,409,0001b. Tho quantity of lard consigned to Copenhagen on these four ships alono was 19.252.0001b. Comparing these quantities, the result is that these vessels were carrying toward Copenhagen within less than a month more than thirteen times the quantity of lard which had been imported annually to Denmark for each of the three years before the war. "To illustrate further the change effected by the war. it was given m cvidenco tliat the imports of lard from the United States of America to Scandinavia (or more accurately to parts of Europe other than the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Italy) during the months of October arid November, 1911, amounted to 50.647,8491b as compared with 854,8561b for the same months in 1913 —showing an increase for the two months of 49,792,9931b: or, in other words, the imports during those two months in 1914 were nearly sixty times those for the corresponding months of 1913. •'One more illustration may be given from statistics which were given in evidence for one of the claimants ; (Hammond and Co. and Swift and Co.) . in the five months August-December, 1913 the exports of lard from the United States of America to Germany were 68,664,9751b. During the same five months in 1914 they had fallen to a mere nominal quantity, 23,8001b. On the other hand, during those periods similar exports from the United States of America to Scandinavian countries (including Malta and Gibraltar, which would not materially affect the comparison) rose from 2.120.5791b to 59,694,4471b. These

facts give practical certainty to tho inference that an overwhelming proportion (so overwhelming as to amonno to almost the whole) of the consignments of lard in the J'otir vessels we are dealing with was intended for or would find its way into Germany." This statement of facts is not the statement of the man in the street, nor is it the mere statement of experts. It is the deliberate statement of a Judge of the High Court of Justice, mado after the taking of evidence and after hearing soiuc of the most eminent counsel of tho British Ha.- as representing the claimants of the cargo. It is not surprising therefore to, find that the matter of indirect importation into enemy countries is made tho subject of remarks in Parliament, oj- that tho Imperial Government has been urged to take and has taken further steps to stop such importation. That in so doing it wil! meet with objections from the exporters from the neutral countries is very likely, but Ave can hardly suppose that the Americans in general, in the face of such evidence as this, will not recognise tho right- and duty of the Imperial Government to take all steps in its power to prevent tho importation into neutral countries of any great excess over normal quantities of goods and probably destined to the enemy." FOREIGN OFFICE CRITICISED. '"•THWARTING TIIK NAVY'S EFFORTS." (Received January '27th, S.IIO p.m.) LONDON, January 26. Dr. J. Dillon, in an article in the "Fortnightly Review," protests against ilie thwarting of the magnificent efforts of tho Navy. Ho says: "The Foreign Office is going out of its way to make tho blockade a farce. Only British sea power rests between us and defeat. If our success depends upon the exerciso of intelligence superior to that of the enemy we may regard the war as already lost, beyond recovery. •'The chief reasons for our present desperate plight are tho absenco of genuine leaders of strong wITI. high mirpo.se, and true insight, and also the lack of any efficient internal organisation. The failure which has paralysed the heroism of our Army has been applied with considerably more subtlety to the thwarting of the magnificent efforts of the Narv. If tho Foreign Office had not hampered the Navy, Germany would have been forced to sup for i>eaeo before the end of 1910. "We are slowly organising for defence. We have yet to organise for "victory. Wo may to-morrow have to organise for a bare existence. The public believe that things aro now going better. I know enough to bo unable to share that consoling faith." EVADING THE BLOCKADE. GERMAN TRICKS. (Received January 27tli, 10.30 p.m.) LONDON, January A Foreign Office report on tho results of searches of neutral steamers discloses that Germans are endeavouring to evade the blockade restrictions by sending through the post as jewel- [ lory, rubber, in packages marked '•samples, no value," and also propagandist literature.