INTEODUCTORY CHAPTER. 
from or acting under the control of enemies. A person 
knowingly dealing with the company in such a case is 
trading with the enemy.” This doctrine of control was 
adopted by the Prize Court,” and also that of the 
character of the shareholders. Control is not easy to 
prove in all cases, and the nationality of the shareholders 
may be difficult to ascertain. In the actual decisions of 
the Prize Court it would appear that justice was done, 
and that the Court did no more than remove the artificial 
covering which concealed the enemy ; but it is of interest 
to note that the Daimler Case has not been followed in 
all the decisions of the Mixed Arbitral Tribunals,® nor 
has it been adopted in the United States.® 
As regards trading with the enemy,’ Great Britain 
departed from the general principle of domicile as 
determining enemy character, and included the Con- 
tinental principle of nationality. Similarly, France added 
enemy domicile to her traditional test of nationality in 
her decrees on this subject. The ‘‘ Black Lists,”’ which 
contained the names of persons with whom trade was 
prohibited, were new; but the British measures were 
purely municipal in character, and as such were rightly 
defended by the Government. The United States, who 
had vigorously protested against British legislation on 
this subject, proceeded to enact legislation on similar 
lines, and the American ¢ Black Lists >’ of “ enemies 
and allies of enemies, and other persons, firms and 
corporations who there is reason to believe have acted 
directly or indirectly for, or on behalf of or for the 
benefit of, enemies and allies of enemies,’’ contained 
7 See p. 61. 
® B, Y. B. I. L., 1922-93, pp. 186-188. 
9 See p. 67. 
1 See post, Chap. VII.