The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1890-05-26
a German Professor Oh Some American
Questions.

The name Of Prof +. H. GEFFCKEN has
been made familiar to Americans by his
arrest for alleged completely In the publica-
ton Of extracts from the diary Of the late
Emperor FREDERICK. His attachment to
that sovcreGn's widow, who is the eldest
daughter of Queen VICTORIA. is we'll known,
and it is. therefore, to be expected that in
discussing controversies between Great
Britain and the United States his sympa-
thies would be enlisted on the side Of the
former country. For this reason and be-
cause he is regarded in Germany as a
high authority on international law. u
good deal of weight attaches to his
admission that the fundamental argu-
ment of the United States in the fisheries
dispute is we'll founded. This admission is
made in an article contributed to the last
number of the F0rtnighiy RCrcr, in the
course Of which Prof. GEFFCKEN discusses.
besides the fisheries dispute. the controversy
touching the right to take seals in Bchring
Sea and the annexation OF Canada. With
the political aspects of the latter topic he is,
as We Shall see, less conversant than he is
with the principles and prccedcnts OF inter-
national jurisprudence.
II will be remembered that the expression
"thrcc miles from the coast, as used in the
treaty OF 1918. is interpreted by the United
States to mean three marine miles from the
coast, following ii in ali lis siWuostles"
The British Government, on the other hand
has maintained tAat the line should he meas
ured at three miles distance from headlaud
to headland all the waters inside OF this
line being claimed us under British jursdic-
ton. Prof GEFFCKES does not hesitate to
say that this claim IS untenablr, such pre-
tensions as are put forward by Great Britain
having never been sanctioned by intcrna-
tlonal law. The importance of the conccs-
sion is enhanced by the fact that he pro-
Ceeds to rcbuke us for rejecting the CHAM
BERLAIN treaty and for recurring to threats
of retaliation. But if the principle which
We lay down is sound, and England never
theless, declines to recognize it, why
are VIC not morally justified in en-
ploying the weapon of retaliation which
lies ready to our hand When Prof.
GEFFCKEN adds that the menace OF retaia-
ton is hollow" he must either mean by
the adjective that we are insincere in maxi
ing ii, on that we are poweress to iniure
Canada by retaliatory measures. The latter
hypothesis would implya strange Ignorance
VI Wv no WI llo IluIb Vi inc Professor,
while, whatever may be Thought of Mr..
tLEVELAND'S good faith in putting forth
his retaliation message, 1t is certain that
the people OF this country would ratfv
the adoption If II retaliatory policy in the
last resort.
iIol, GEFFCKEN turns with obvious salts.
faction to the Behring Sea dispute, because
here Americans occupy less solid ground
lie does not have much difficulty in proying
That the assertion of tho court at Sitko
mat Behring Sea Is land-locked sea under
American Jurisdiction Is unfounded Inas-
much however, as our Federal Government
Is understood TO have discaimed anv such
pFetenslons Prof. GEFFCKEN seems TO have
wasted powder in demolishing a man of
straw 1t should DO possible for us to save
me seal fisheries from extinction without
asserting ownership over tract OF ocean
'omplehcnding 100000 square miles How
ever preposlerous, moreover, such an
assertion may seem to an inter-
national iurist, England, which has
'I"lmed exclusive jurisdiction over the Bav
:" fuhdy could not with good grace object
i" H. seeing that the distance from Alton
we most westerly of the Aleutian Islands
" III" eastern mainland of Kamtchatka. is
unly about 500 miles. II the mouth of the
"'V Of Eundy, which is from Is 10 rs miles