The matter need hardly be mentioned at all were it not for the fact that the question was formerly discussed by publicists whether or not it involved a violation of neutrality on the part of a neutral State in case it fulfilled in time of war a treaty concluded in time of peace, by the terms of which it had to grant a coaling station, the passage of troops through its territory, and the like, to one of the belligerents. This question is identical with the question, to be treated below in § 305, whether a qualified neutrality, in contradistinction to a perfect neutrality, is admissible. Since the answer to this question is in the negative, such State as fulfils a treaty obligation of this kind in time of war may be considered by the other side an accessory belligerent party to the war, and all doubt in the matter ought now to be removed since article 2 of Convention V. of the Second Peace Conference[114] categorically enacts that "belligerents are forbidden to move across the territory of a neutral Power troops or convoys either of munitions of war or of supplies."
[Footnote 114: See also article 3 of Convention V.]
Vattel, III. §§ 223-231--Hall, §§ 177-179, 181--Lawrence, §§ 148-150--Westlake, II. pp. 60-63--Manning, pp. 206-210--Phillimore, III. § 94--Twiss, II. § 45--Halleck, I. pp. 555-562--Taylor, §§ 471-476--Moore, VII. § 1109--Wheaton, §§ 356-358--Bluntschli, §§ 569-572--Heffter, §§ 124-124A--Lueder in Holtzendorff, IV. pp. 371-385--Klüber, 267--G. F. Martens, II. § 271--Gareis, § 83--Ullmann, § 175--Liszt, § 40, II.--Bonfils, Nos. 1088-1098--Despagnet, Nos. 520-523--Pradier-Fodéré, VI. Nos. 2721-2732, and VIII. Nos. 3091-3102--Nys, III. pp. 155-202--Rivier, II. pp. 242-259--Calvo, IV. §§ 2044-2065--Fiore, III. Nos. 1303-1316, and Code, Nos. 1455-1475--Martens, II. § 112--Longuet, §§ 26-36--Pillet, pp. 35-59--_Kriegsbrauch_, pp. 4-8--Perels, § 34--Boeck, Nos. 209-213--Dupuis, Nos. 74-91--Lawrence, _War_, pp. 195-218--Zorn, pp. 36-73--Bordwell, pp. 228-236--_Land Warfare_, § 17-38--Meurer, II. §§ 11-20--Spaight, pp. 34-72--Ariga, pp. 74-91--Takahashi, pp. 89-93.
§ 78. The chief part of the armed forces of the belligerents are their regular armies and navies. What kinds of forces constitute a regular army and a regular navy is not for International Law to determine, but a matter of Municipal Law exclusively. Whether or not so-called Militia and Volunteer corps belong to armies rests entirely with the Municipal Law of the belligerents. There are several States whose armies consist of Militia and Volunteer Corps exclusively, no standing army being provided for. The Hague Regulations expressly stipulate in article 1 that in countries where Militia or Volunteer Corps constitute the army or form part of it they are included under the denomination "Army." It is likewise irrelevant to consider the composition of a regular army, whether it is based on conscription or not, whether natives only or foreigners also are enrolled, and the like.