QuoteBavaria recognizes the state of war and stands ready to honor Article IV of the Treaty of Leipzig (1)

The Esc fully concur with the Bavarian point off view,and has furthermore given the Kingdom off the United Netherlands,the option to use elements off the Esc Gujarat squadron   

Quote from: Korpen on June 11, 2009, 06:59:00 AM
To the international community:

All Siamese Ports are under blockade, neutral or other shipping will be turned way unless carrying contraband, in which case the cargo will be sized and the ship taken to a Dutch port for unloading.  Neutral shipping attempting to leave Siamese ports will be have their cargoes sized and taken to Dutch port for unloading. Owners of neutral ships re-routed to Dutch port will be compensated for the costs of the travel such as wages and fuel and average charter fee.

Question: How come noone seems to have bothred reading this?

Quote from: Korpen on July 03, 2009, 11:05:23 AM
Question: How come noone seems to have bothred reading this?

People have but are viewing the Dutch moves as illegal all the same.  Capturing a neutral ship on the high seas is a VERY questionable move.

I did read it, and reacted already on that.
The French shipowners are burrying the French government under complaints.

The fact Paris officialy isn't doing anything sits in the shipowners craw sideways.

In effect, the Dutch declaration gives following options to the Ships in the Siam ports.
Rot in port, or run the gauntlet.
With as possible outcome:
A full cargo loss.
Due or mines, or subs, or capture and impoundment. With as added spice, the lost cargo/profits.

Quote from: miketr on July 03, 2009, 11:09:58 AM

Quote from: Korpen on July 03, 2009, 11:05:23 AM
Question: How come noone seems to have bothred reading this?

People have but are viewing the Dutch moves as illegal all the same.  Capturing a neutral ship on the high seas is a VERY questionable move.

Heche my point about not reading it; as no ships have been taken, just countraband cargo!

What contraband can leave Siam?  Weapons?

On the 7 seas there is no contraband, just for starters. 
The cargo becomes contraband if the cargo consist of stuff that isn't allowed in the country owning the littorial waters a ship sails in. And even then, if the cargo isn't bound for that country, it's debatable.

Quote from: Korpen on July 03, 2009, 11:14:12 AM

Quote from: miketr on July 03, 2009, 11:09:58 AM

Quote from: Korpen on July 03, 2009, 11:05:23 AM
Question: How come noone seems to have bothred reading this?

People have but are viewing the Dutch moves as illegal all the same.  Capturing a neutral ship on the high seas is a VERY questionable move.

Heche my point about not reading it; as no ships have been taken, just countraband cargo!

A distinction without difference if one views the blockade as illegal.

Quote from: maddox on July 03, 2009, 11:13:42 AM
I did read it, and reacted already on that.
The French shipowners are burrying the French government under complaints.

The fact Paris officialy isn't doing anything sits in the shipowners craw sideways.

In effect, the Dutch declaration gives following options to the Ships in the Siam ports.
Rot in port, or run the gauntlet.
With as possible outcome:
A full cargo loss.
Due or mines, or subs, or capture and impoundment. With as added spice, the lost cargo/profits.

You forgot two options
Leave Siam with empty hold.
or
Have the shipping agent contact Dutch represntatives (indirect lines is still open after all), and arrange a deal for departure; most likley in combination with above.

QuoteNeutral shipping attempting to leave Siamese ports will be have their cargoes sized and taken to Dutch port for unloading. Owners of neutral ships re-routed to Dutch port will be compensated for the costs of the travel such as wages and fuel and average charter fee.

How will you seize the cargo and have it unloaded in a Dutch port if you do not take the ship first?

[quotemKorpen]You forgot two options
Leave Siam with empty hold.
or
Have the shipping agent contact Dutch represntatives (indirect lines is still open after all), and arrange a deal for departure; most likley in combination with above.[/quote]

Quote from: KorpenOwners of neutral ships re-routed to Dutch port will be compensated for the costs of the travel such as wages and fuel and average charter fee.

Great options. Now it becomes a protection racket.

So, A ship sails from a Siam port, and if it isn't sunk by mines, torpedo's, gunfire or scuttle charges, the Dutch confiscate the cargo, unload it, pay a pittance to the ship owner/crew, and then?  That cargo has value, more than the shipping fee.

Money in the pocket, I hear the Dutch think.

Quote from: maddox on July 03, 2009, 11:23:03 AM
Great options. Now it becomes a protection racket.

Only like any other insurence company.

QuoteSo, A ship sails from a Siam port, and if it isn't sunk by mines, torpedo's, gunfire or scuttle charges,

Good heavens, i did not know that the Siamese did that! But then, they have not acted sane when they created this mess.

Quotethe Dutch confiscate the cargo, unload it, pay a pittance to the ship owner/crew, and then?  That cargo has value, more than the shipping fee.

The carge does to a prize court. If the owners of the cargo feel it is unjust they should do what every civilized being does, take it up in court.

QuoteMoney in the pocket, I hear the Dutch think.

Far more generous that the normal (French) way, whey the ship carrying the cargo have to pay for the pleasure of having its cargo sized.

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on July 03, 2009, 11:21:43 AM

QuoteNeutral shipping attempting to leave Siamese ports will be have their cargoes sized and taken to Dutch port for unloading. Owners of neutral ships re-routed to Dutch port will be compensated for the costs of the travel such as wages and fuel and average charter fee.

How will you seize the cargo and have it unloaded in a Dutch port if you do not take the ship first?

Two ways: do it at sea (dumping) or pay the ship to take it to a port.

I read it, but I'm also going off of:
A: the war news says "INTERNED"
B: it's 1916, news doesn't travel terribly fast and has a habit of being beaten to it's destination by rumors.
C: AFAIK the ship never made Hai Phong. That says sunk or captured. Both are unacceptable.

Quote from: Korpen on July 03, 2009, 11:33:14 AM

Quotethe Dutch confiscate the cargo, unload it, pay a pittance to the ship owner/crew, and then?  That cargo has value, more than the shipping fee.

The carge does to a prize court. If the owners of the cargo feel it is unjust they should do what every civilized being does, take it up in court.

If you view the Dutch actions as illegal would you place any hopes in a legal action in a court in the nation in question?  Also if the cargo is perishable and the Dutch courts just take their sweat time about things or wait till the cargo has rotted and then go; "Sorry you can go now."  What does the shipper / cargo owner do in response?  The UK did this and much more in WW1.  It was only because of German stupidity and Wilson being such a anglophile that the US didn't come to heads with the British in WW1.

Michael

Quote from: miketr on July 03, 2009, 11:44:52 AM
If you view the Dutch actions as illegal would you place any hopes in a legal action in a court in the nation in question?  

If you view any form of naval blockade as ipso facto illegal then that really is a separate matter entirely. 
And the effect of considering the blockade here illegal is really of considering the entire concept of naval blockades illegal in every form. I would require that countries which national law forbid them from imposing any form of blockades to state that now.

QuoteAlso if the cargo is perishable and the Dutch courts just take their sweat time about things or wait till the cargo has rotted and then go; "Sorry you can go now."  What does the shipper / cargo owner do in response?

If they got any sense and hire a competent advocate they would raise the perishable cargo as a separate matter which would make is a matter of recompense rather then the cargo itself.
BUt as this is a matter of national laws I would request and require that all countries declare in detail exactly what their national laws are concerning blockades, I take that any country that do not to be in practical terms identical to the ones I have laid out.

I would expect the RRC's definition of a blockade to be quite similar to Korpen's. ;)