In a second letter I endeavoured to distinguish between the mischief which would and that which would not be regarded as permissible in civilised warfare.

The correspondence which has subsequently appeared in your columns has made sufficiently clear the opposition between the view which seems to find favour just now in naval circles and the principles of international law, as I have attempted to define them.

The question between my critics and myself is, in effect, whether the mediaeval or the modern view as to the treatment of private property is to prevail.
According to the former, all such property is liable to be seized or destroyed, in default of a "Brandschatz," or ransom.

According to the latter, it is inviolable, subject only to certain well-defined exceptions, among which reasonable requisitions of supplies would be recognised, while demands of money contributions, as such, would not be recognised.
The evidence in favour of the modern view being what I have stated it to be is, indeed, overwhelming; but I should like to call special attention to the _Manuel de Droit International a l'Usage des Officiers de l'Armee de Terre_, issued by the French Government, as going even further than the Brussels Conference in the restrictions which it imposes upon the levying of requisitions and contributions.

The Duke of Wellington, who used to be thought an authority in these matters, wrote in 1844, with reference to a pamphlet in which the Prince de Joinville had advocated depredations on the English coasts:-- "What but the inordinate desire of popularity could have induced a man in his station to write and publish an invitation and provocation to war, to be carried on in a manner such as has been disclaimed by the civilised portions of mankind ?" The naval historian, Mr.Younge, in commenting on the burning of Paita, in Chili, as far back as 1871, for non-compliance with a demand for a money contribution (ultimately reduced to a requisition of provisions for the ships), speaks of it as "worthy only of the most lawless pirate or buccaneer, ...