The record-union., 1898-02-23
NATIONAL CONTRIBUTORY NEG
LIGENCE

1INIEN1E.
Some very interesting questions have
been raised by distinguished interna-
| tional law authority in connection with
the Maine disaster, which seem to us
entirely appropriate for consideration
at this time, regardless of the outcome
of the pending investigation at Havana.
We are told by this authority that no
nation can be held responsible, or to
answer in indemnity for the nnisdeeds
the crime or great the injury inflicted,
since to hold to the contrary would in
volve nations in constant contention,
arbitration or war.
Abstractly this is true; but we sub
nit that if the nation is guilty of con-
tributory negligence in the matter; if
it has not exercised due caution and
vigilance in restraining the criminal, it
is in a measure to be held to RESPONSE
bility. Again we are told that it is
settled law that nation at war has
the clear right to fortify its ports, plant
mines and sow its harbors with tor
pedoes, and all the world must take
notice of this right and that the ship
of a friendly power entering such har
bors is bound to take notice of the risks
| snyolved. Hence, in case of damage,
no indemnity can be asked or rightfuliy
enforced.
But suppose the nation is not at war
with any foreign power, that it denies
that a state Of war exists on it's soil,
and contends that a riot only is III
progress, or at best an insurrection
scribed territory. Has it then the right
to plant its harbors with mines and tor
pedoes without noticeSto the nations
with which it is maintaining uninter-
rupted commerce?t
Again, suppose that such nation as
we have described, having sown its har,
bors with explosives, and having given
no notice of the danger, invites and
permits free entry of ships of trade,
passenger steamers and sailing craft
carrying passengers to enter and anchor
/ over these hidden mines and sunken
| torpedoes in ignorance of their locality,
| does not such a nation contribute IN
negligence, if some crank or criminally
! disposed person gains access to the ma
chinery of such death-dealing agencies.
and fires one of them?
| Is not the nation so planting its har-
Dor with deadly missiles bound to ex-
traordinary caution to prevent accident,
or tampering by maiciously disposed
| people? We think that the world of
1 international law commentators will
hold in the affirmative.
A nation as well as a person may be
guilty of contributory negligence, and
| the fact that one injured was bound
| to take notice of the danger incurred,
serves to protect the nation only to the
extent that it took due care and exer-
cised extraordinary precautions to pre-
vent injury by misuse of its planted
mines.
! The international lawyer whose opir-
| ion has been published on the subject
i
declares that a nation at war is not
bound to give notice of its secret de-
fences. But We think that revision OF
that opinion will give us instead, the
expression that while it is not bound to
give notice if engaged in a war, it is
| bound to give notice If it invites 10
| passage over secret defenses the ships
| Of trade and the ordinary passenger
| carriers If it is not bound to close
such ports, it certainly has not the
right to say to the world, Come and
| trade with us, sail into our ports, bring
in your wares and take out our prod
ucts," without warning the invited of
unusual danger in accepting the offer.
This we take it is precisely the situa-
ton Spain will find herself in. If it
turns out that the Maine was destroy
ed by a planted mine, or a set torpedo
| belonging to the Spanish Government,
though not discharged by its order or
with its knowledge.