I am, however, confident that the organisation is too intelligent not to see that it would lose nothing if the articles in which it is interested were made an integral part of a Convention constituting a League of Nations; the League being already solely charged with giving effect to the articles in question.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant, T.E.HOLLAND.
Oxford, December 20 (1919).
Sir,--Professor Alison Phillips is not quite accurate in attributing to me a belief that the task of amending the Treaty of Versailles is "not beyond the powers of competent diplomatists." No such belief is expressed in my letter of December 16, in which I was careful to admit that the question, "whether it is now too late to attempt" the reform which appears to me to be desirable is one "which can be answered only by the diplomatists." I am, Sir, your obedient servant, T.E.HOLLAND.
Oxford, January 5 (1920).
* * * * * SECTION 2 _Pacific Reprisals_ The four letters next following were suggested by the ambiguous character of the blockades instituted by France against Siam in 1893, by the Great Powers against Crete in 1897, and by Great Britain, Germany, and Italy, against Venezuela in 1902.

The object, in each case, was to explain the true nature of the species of reprisals known as "Pacific Blockade," and to point out the difference between the consequences of such a measure and those which result from a "Belligerent Blockade." A fifth letter, written with reference to the action of the Netherlands against Venezuela in 1908, emphasises the desirability of more clearly distinguishing between war and reprisals.

On the various applications of a blockade in time of peace, see the author's _Studies in International Law_, pp.

130-150.
THE BLOCKADE OF THE MENAM Sir,--Upon many questions of fact and of policy involved in the quarrel between France and Siam it may be premature as yet to expect explicit information from the French Government; but there should not be a moment's doubt as to the meaning of the blockade which has probably by this time been established.
Is France at war with Siam?
This may well be the case, according to modern practice, without any formal declaration of war; and it is, for international purposes, immaterial whether the French Cabinet, if it has commenced a war without the sanction of the Chambers, has or has not thereby violated the French Constitution.

If there is a war, and if the blockade, being effective, has been duly notified to the neutral Powers, the vessels of those Powers are, of course, liable to be visited, and, if found to be engaged in breach of the blockade, to be dealt with by the French Prize Courts.
Or is France still at peace with Siam, and merely putting upon her that form of pressure which is known as "pacific blockade"?
In this case, since there is no belligerency there is no neutrality, and the ships of States other than that to which the pressure is being applied are not liable to be interfered with.