addressed to the commander of armed forces of the grantor, in which the former is charged with the protection of the respective individual or property, and by which both become inviolable. The other kind of safeguard is given by detailing one or more soldiers to accompany enemy subjects or to guard the spot where certain enemy property is, for the purpose of protection. Soldiers on this duty are inviolable on the part of the other belligerent; they must neither be attacked nor made prisoners, and they must, on falling into the hands of the enemy, be fed, well kept, and eventually safely sent back to their corps. Just like concerning passports and safe-conduct, it must be specially observed that safeguards are only then a matter of International Law when their granting has been arranged by the belligerents, and not otherwise.

Meaning

of Flags

Hall,

III

FLAGS OF TRUCE

190-Lawrence, § 232-Phillimore, III. § 115-Halleck, II. pp. 333, 334-Taylor, § 510-Bluntschli, §§ 681-684-Heffter, § 126 -Lueder in Holtzendorff, IV. pp. 421-423—Ullmann, § 152—Bonfils, Nos. 1239-1245-Despagnet, No. 556-Pradier-Fodéré, VII. Nos. 2927-2931-Rivier, II. pp. 279-280-Calvo, IV. §§ 2430-2432-Fiore, III. No. 1378-Martens, II. § 127-Longuet, §§ 136-138--Mérignhac, pp. 220-225--Pillet, pp. 356-358--Kriegsgebrauch, pp. 26-29-Holland, War, Nos. 82-85.

§220. Although the outbreak of war brings all of Truce. negotiations between belligerents to an end, and although no negotiations are regularly conducted during war, certain circumstances and conditions make it necessary or convenient for the armed forces of belligerents to enter into negotiations with each

other for some purpose or another. Since time immemorial a white flag has been used as a symbol by an armed force who wish to negotiate with the enemy, and always and everywhere it has been considered a duty of the enemy to respect this symbol. In land warfare the flag of truce is made use of in this way,1 that an individual, charged by his force with the task of negotiating with the enemy, approaches the latter either carrying the flag himself or accompanied by a flag-bearer, and often also accompanied by a drummer or a bugler, or a trumpeter, and an interpreter. In sea warfare the individual charged with the task of negotiating approaches the enemy in a boat flying the white flag. The Hague Regulations have now by their articles 32 to 34 enacted most of the customary rules of International Law regarding flags of truce without adding any new rule. These rules are the same for land warfare as for naval warfare, although their validity for land warfare is now grounded on the Hague Regulations, whereas their validity for naval warfare is still based on custom only.

ment of

bearers.

§ 221. As a commander of an armed force is, accord- Treating to article 33 of the Hague Regulations, not obliged Unadmitto receive a bearer of a flag of truce, a flag-bearer ted Flagwho makes his appearance may at once be signalled to withdraw. Yet he is inviolable even then from the time he displays the flag to the end of the time necessary for withdrawal. He may during this time neither be intentionally attacked nor made prisoner. However, an armed force in battle is not obliged to stop its military operations on account of the approach of an enemy flag-bearer who has been signalled to withdraw. Although the latter may not 'See Hague Regulations, article 32.

Treat

ment of Admitted Flagbearers.

intentionally be fired upon, he may during the battle accidentally be killed or wounded without responsibility or moral blame to the belligerent concerned. And it must be specially mentioned that the commander of an armed force may inform the enemy that he will under no circumstances and conditions receive a flag-bearer either within a certain or an indefinite period. Should, in spite of such notice, a flag-bearer approach, he does not enjoy any privilege, and may be attacked and made prisoner like any other member of the enemy forces.

§ 222. Bearers of flags of truce and their party, when admitted by the other side, must be granted the privilege of inviolability. They may neither be attacked nor taken prisoners, and they must be allowed to return in due time and safely within their lines. On the other hand, the forces admitting enemy flagbearers need not allow them to acquire information about the receiving forces and to carry it back to their own corps. Flag-bearers and their parties may, therefore, be blindfolded by the receiving forces, or be conducted by roundabout ways, or be prevented from entering into communication with other individuals than those who confer officially with them, and they may even temporarily be prevented from returning till a certain military operation is carried out, of which they have obtained information. Article 33 of the Hague Regulations enacts specifically that a commander to whom a flag of truce is sent "can take all steps necessary to prevent the envoy taking advantage of his mission to obtain information." Bearers of flags of truce are, however, not prevented from reporting to their corps any information they have gained by observation in passing the enemy lines and in communicating with enemy individuals. But they

are not allowed to sketch maps of defences and positions, to gather information secretly and surreptitiously, to provoke or to commit treacherous acts, and the like. If they nevertheless do this, they may be court-martialled. Articles 33 and 34 of the Hague Regulations enact specifically that a flag-bearer may temporarily be detained in case he abuses his mission for the purpose of obtaining information, and that he loses all privileges of inviolability "if it is proved beyond doubt that he has taken advantage of his privileged position to provoke or commit an act of treachery." Bearers of white flags and their party, who approach the enemy and are received, must carry some authorisation with them, which shows that they are charged with the task of entering into negotiations (article 32), otherwise they can be retained as prisoners, since it is his mission and not the white flag itself which protects the flag-bearer. This mission protects everyone who is charged with it, notwithstanding his position in his corps and his status as a civilian or a soldier, but it does not protect a deserter. The latter may be retained, courtmartialled, and punished, notice being given to his principal of the reason of punishment.2

1

Flag of

223. The abuse of his mission by an authorised Abuse of flag-bearer must be distinguished from an abuse of Truce. the flag of truce itself. Such abuse is possible in two different forms :

(1) The force which sends an authorised flagbearer to the enemy has to take up a corresponding attitude; the ranks which the flag-bearer leaves being obliged to halt and to cease fire. Now it conthe belligerents to enter into communication with the other. 2 See Hall, § 190.

1 Article 32 of the Hague Regulations confirms this customary rule by speaking of an individual who is "authorised" by one of

stitutes an abuse of the flag of truce if such attitude corresponding with the sending of a flag of truce is intentionally not taken up by the sending force. The case is even worse when a flag-bearer is intentionally sent with a feigned mission for the purpose of carrying out military operations on the part of the sender under the protection due on the part of the enemy to the flag-bearer and his party.

(2) The second form of a possible abuse appears in the case in which a white flag is made use of for the purpose of making the enemy believe that a flag of truce is about to be sent, although it is not sent, and of carrying out operations under the protection granted by the enemy to this pretended flag of truce.

It need hardly be specially mentioned that both forms of abuse are gross perfidy and may be met with reprisals, or with punishment of the offenders in case they fall into the hands of the enemy. The following case of abuse is related by Sir Sherston Baker in Halleck (II. p. 315):—“On July 12, 1882, while the British fleet was lying off Alexandria, in support of the authority of the Khedive of Egypt, and the rebels under Arabi Pasha were being driven to great straits, a rebel boat, carrying a white flag of truce, was observed approaching H.M.S. 'Invincible' from the harbour, whereupon H.M. ships Temeraire' and Inflexible,' which had just commenced firing, were ordered to suspend fire. So soon as the firing ceased, the boat, instead of going to the 'Invincible,' returned to the harbour. A flag of truce was simultaneously hoisted by the rebels on the Rasel-Tin fort. These deceits gave the rebels time to leave the works and to retire through the town, abandoning the forts, and withdrawing the whole of their garrison under the flag of truce."