A TREATISE ON THE LAW OF PRIZE. 
nations and not by the particular municipal law of 
any country.® 
Law . 5. The law administered by the English 
administered . . , ; 
hy the Pri.= Courts is thus professedly international law. 
peglish | Lor. Stowell repeatedly reaflirmed this rule. 
In The Elsebe, he held that a Prize Court was 
a Court of Justice which sat principally to enforce 
the rights arising from the law of nations,® and 
in The Recovery, that his Court belonged to other 
States as well as to Great Britain, and what 
foreigners had a right to demand from it was the 
administration of the law of nations simply, and 
exclusively of the introduction of principles 
borrowed from English municipal jurisprudence? 
The same view was taken by the Courts during 
the Great War. In one of the first cases to come 
before him, Sir Samuel Evans said that two things 
should be remembered :—first, that the English 
Prize Court was a Court of law, and secondly, that 
the law to be administered was the law of nations, 
that is the law which wag generally understood and 
acknowledged to be the existing law applicable 
between nations by the general body of enlightened 
international legal opinion. 
This principle was reasserted by the Privy 
Council in The Zamora® Lord Parker, in deliver- 
ing their Lordships’ Judgment, stated that the law 
8 (1781), 2 Dougl, 594, 610. 
© (1804), 5 C. Rob. 174, 180. 
* (1897), 6 ibid., 341, 348. And The Maria (1799), 1 ibid. 340, 
350; The Walsingham Packet (1799), 2 ibid., 77, 82. 
2 The Odessa, [1915] P. 52, el. Cf. The Marie Glaeser, [1914] 
P. 218; The Hakan, [1916] P. 266. 
? f19161 2 A. C. 77, 91. Cf. The Consul Corfitzon, [1917] A. C. 
550; The Sidmark, [1917 A. C. 620. 
B