more desirable to-day than in the days of the Declaration of Paris, that the use of these improved instruments of destruction should be confined to vessels officered and manned by regular officers and men trained in the observance of the complicated code which ought to regulate naval warfare.

So far no action by armed merchantmen (other than regularly commissioned auxiliary cruisers), whether for purposes of defence or offence, has been reported in the present war. It is, however, interesting to consider some of the legal questions that may arise out of their existence before this war is ended, and in Armed Merchant Ships, Dr. Pearce Higgins has very clearly dealt with the position in International law of armed merchant ships, their crews and cargo. These vessels must of course be distinguished from the auxiliary cruisers which both Germany and ourselves have converted into men of war and regularly commissioned. They may be described as defensively armed and uncommissioned merchant ships."

The right of merchant ships to arm for self defence has, as Dr. Higgins points out, been recently denied by German jurists.

At the meeting of the Institute of International Law at Oxford last year the following rule (Article 12 of the Manuel des lois de la Guerre Maritime) was adopted after discussion.

166

"La course est interdite. . . . les navires publics et "les navires privés, ainsi que leur personnel ne peuvent pas se livrer à des actes d'hostilité contre l'ennemi. "Il est toutefois permis aux uns et aux autres d'employer la force pour se défendre contre l'attaque d'un "navire ennemi.”

Professor Triebel of Berlin opposed the latter clause. on the ground that an enemy merchant ship had no right to resist capture, and since then Dr. George. Schramm, legal adviser to the German Admiralty, in

Das Prisenrecht in seiner neustengestalt has maintained that there is no legal foundation for the rule allowing a merchant ship to defend itself, and that the crew of such a vessel unless duly enrolled in the enemy forces, would be subject to the criminal law!

The usual view is that they would become prisoners of war, and this view is expressed in the United States Naval Code, and the United States has, it is believed, expressly recognised the status of our armed merchant vessels in the last few weeks.

By the defensive arming of their ship, the crew are deprived of their right under the Eleventh Hague Convention of 1907 to be released, if captured, on a written undertaking not to engage while hostilities last, in any service connected with the operations of war.

In Dr. Higgins' view, the defensively armed merchant ship may, if attacked, lawfully capture its assailant. He does not deal with the question of whether such a vessel may lawfully assist a sister ship which is the subject of attack. Probably not, but the situation might well strain the conscience of an English merchant captain.

The position of neutral goods on board a defensively armed merchant ship, may create some difficult questions for our Prize Courts. Neutrals will obviously incur some additional risk in shipping goods by these vessels. For the law as to their position is far from clear. In almost contemporaneous decisions in 1814-1815, Lord Stowell in The Fanny (I Dods. 448), and the United States Supreme Court in The Nereide (9 Cranch 441), expressed opposite views. Lord Stowell, dealing it is true with a case of a vessel armed with 16 guns and carrying letters of marque, held that prize salvage was payable by the owners of neutral goods on board. The United States Supreme Court held that neutral goods on an enemy armed merchantman, were not liable to confiscation under American Prize Law.

Dr. Higgins expresses the view that neutral cargoes placed on merchant ships which may be converted into warships under the terms of the Hague Convention 1907, would be liable to be condemned, while those placed on armed but uncommissioned merchant ships should, under the Declaration of Paris, be released. It is not, however, clear that the Declaration of Paris governs the matter, still less what view a German Prize Court might take of the case. The hitherto recognised laws of naval warfare may possibly suffer some unexpected usage before the present war is brought to a conclusion.

C. A. McCURDY.

V.-REPORT OF THE

PRISONS AND THE

COMMISSIONERS

OF

DIRECTORS OF CON

VICT PRISONS FOR THE YEAR 1913-14.1

THE

HE present Report shows several satisfactory features. The first is that there continues to be a decrease in the number of prisoners received under sentence. The total number of prisoners received under sentence was 151,603; and as in the previous year, 1912-13, the number was 166,023 there is a substantial decrease amounting to 14,420. Another way of looking at this question is to compare the daily average prison population of the two years. This shows that in 1912-13 the average population in local prisons was 15,534, and in convict prisons 2,876; whereas in 1913-14 the average was 14,352 and 2,704 respectively. This shows a decrease of 1,182 in local prisons and 172 in convict prisons.

The Commissioners give a table showing the number convicted on indictment and summarily from 1899-1900,

1 Parts I & II. London: Wyman & Sons. 1914.

to 1913-14. From this statement it appears that in 1899 -1900, of the persons convicted on indictment, 753 were sentenced to penal servitude and 6,441 to imprisonment, etc., making a total of 7,194 against 7,738 convicted in 1913-14, made up of 797 sentenced to penal servitude. and 6,941 to imprisonment. This does not at first look like an improvement, but it must be remembered that the population of England and Wales had increased by something like 5,000,000 and the proportion of convictions per 100,000 of population, according to another table, is 24 sentenced to penal servitude, and 2013 to imprisonment in 1899-1900, against 2'2 and 18.8 in 1913-14. The number convicted summarily in the former year was 146,266; this went on increasing, till in 1904-5 it reached 189,180. Since then it has almost invariably decreased, till the figure for 1913 is 128,686, by far the lowest on record. The proportion per 100,000 of the population of the country, taking the total receptions on conviction, is 369'5. The proportion in 1904-5 is 586*2. The present figures are a substantial decrease on the preceding year, which marked the lowest point within statistical record.

An interesting attempt has been made to ascertain the number of individual prisoners incurring the 136,424 convictions, and it was found that 19,666 males and 10,176 females were committed more than once during the year, which showed that the total convictions were increased by not more than 83,344 males and 22,699 females, or a proportion of 287 per 100,000 of population. We should think that, considering how often some offenders receive a number of short sentences, the proportion might have been estimated as even lower. The much larger proportion of women convicted more than once is easily explained by the nature of their offences.

1904-5 are in the number

The principal decreases since of persons convicted summarily. In fact, out of a total

decrease of 61,517, the decrease in these convictions amounts to no less than 60,494. The Commissioners sum up in paragraph 9: "We referred last year to the need of caution in drawing deductions from statistics of imprisonment, but the remarkable decrease in the number of prisoners received after conviction for indictable offences (chiefly under larceny), during the last ten years, being no less than 7,209, is a most favourable symptom, for it is crimes of this character, i. e., larcenies and the various acts of dishonesty, which make up about fifteen-sixteenths of the total number of indictable offences, and it may be generally regarded as an index to the law-abiding instincts of the community."

The Commissioners give credit for "the gradual diminution of anti-social acts bringing the offender to prison, to a variety of causes-the efforts of those working at the prisons themselves," the work of Borstal Committees, "the notable revival of zeal and efficiency in the work of Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies, the work of Lady Visitors, Chaplains, etc." They give a long quotation from the Report of the Chaplain of Knutsford Prison, from which we may give a few passages. It begins, "Officers of long service affirm that prisoners are quieter and more amenable than in days gone by. This is due no doubt to education, and the higher level of conduct prevailing in the general community to-day; but it is also due to the humanity of the modern prison system." "The greatly improved conditions of prison life and labour impress upon offenders the fact that their welfare is desired and their reformation hoped for by the community." "Men are surprised to find, as their sentences proceed, that they are healthier, more vigorous, and in every way in improved condition. They begin to set a higher value on the quieter joys of life, such as reading, and to appreciate as never before the meaning and value of religion."