Some Questions of International Law.

beef had been given to charity, granting that such had been the case, could have been but cold comfort to the butcher; and surely the arbitrary power of the Commissary was such as constantly to cause friction. Three years later, 1534, the Mayor and Council of Ox ford "boldly affirme that the sayd Chaun'r Schollers be not Clarks of the Markett, and that they have never used it peacably, but by wrong usurpation," and they also affirm that the University should not be allowed "to set the price of coneys, nor of other things wh they buy of ye freemen of the Towne."1 But again we see against what conditions the University was fighting in an item from "The Particulars of the University Petition to the King in 1661," which reads: "Euery browne baker to sell iij horse loves for a penny, and they to wey according to the Statute in that behalffe provided & the same ЧЬ.

659

loves to be made most of beanes and not all of branne, uppon payne of forfetinge of Xs so often as any of the sayd bakers do offend in any of the premises, besides further pun ishment as before."2 So the struggle continued, with complaints and petitions from both town and gown until 1771, when Parliament passed an act for "Removing, Holding and Regulating Mar kets within the City," and under this Act, as amended successively in 1781, 1812-, 1838 and 1888, the Market of Oxford is still ad ministered. Such is the history in brief of one main point of contention between town and gown, in itself perhaps hardly worthy of so long a digression, but important, because it shows the sources of constant strife and the neverending opportunities for quarrels and handto-hand battles. 2Ogle, p. 69.

SOME QUESTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ARISING FROM THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR. VI. Russian Seizures of Neutral Merchantmen—The Right of Visit and Search, of Capture, and the Alleged Right of Sinking Neutral Prizes. BY AMOS S. HERSHEY, Associate Professor of European History and Politics, Indiana University. Russian Mediterranean fleet in the Red Sea THE most important questions of Inter and of the detention of several British and national Law bearing upon the rights American ships at Port Arthur.1 The tem of neutrals which have thus far1 arisen from porary detention of the British and Ameri the Russo-Japanese war have grown out of can vessels at Port Arthur, whether due to the exercise of the right of visit and search and from the seizure of neutral vessels in the 'It was also reported by Admiral Alexieff that Red Sea by several crusiers of the Russian the German cruiser Hansa, engaged in transport ing German subjects from Port Arthur, was fired Volunteer Navy, as also the seizure and (in upon by Japanese warships; but the circum two cases) the sinking of neutral prizes in stances were not described, and, according to Ad miral Alexieff's own admission, the vessel ap the Pacific Ocean by the Vladivostok squad pears to have harbored Russians in the guise of ron during the month of July. Germans. The incident appears to have attracted but little attention. From the military corres Complaints were heard almost at the very pondent of the London Times. February 17, 1904. A British steamer (the Fu Pung) was also fired beginning of the war of the searching and upon by a Russian guardship as it was leaving detention of neutral merchantmen by the Port Arthur. This was said by Admiral Alexieff to have been due to a misunderstanding. 'August 25, 1904.