The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-05-12
OUR PART AT THE PEACE CON-
FERENCE.

From present indications it looks as if the
soon to meet at The Hague. would give it
the only practical aspect 1t is likely to have.
As far as the Cars suggestion for uni
versal disarmament or even material re-
duction of military establishments is con-
cerned the conference is not likely to have
any results whatever. Modern civilization
has made wars more dreaded and less fire.
quent thar formerly, but the time has not
yet come when the world can be expected
to beat its swords into plowshares. How
ever much nations may deprecate and dread
war they must still be prepared for it, and
Russia is not likely to be the first to adopt
a different policy. AS far as the United
States is concerned its standing army is so
small that it could hardly be expected to
figure in a programme of universal disarma-
ment. But in other respects the United
States may have controlling influence in the
conference. Assuming that the inspiring
motive of the conference is to prevent wars,
or. If that is not possible, to minimize their
injury to the United States may
do more towards shaping its action benefi-
cially than any other power that will be
represented there. 1t is in a position to
do so because its traditional policy is one
our delegates to the conference are in
structed TO advance three leading principles
the settlement Of international disputes
by arbitration, the extension of the declara-
ton Of Paris of 1856 to the nonconfscation
of all cargoes not contraband Of war. and
the extension of the Geneva agreement. or
Red Cross rules. TO war by sea as well as
by land. To secure the adoption Of either
of these points By the conference would be
a victory for the United States. and to Sc
cure the adoption of all of them would be
a magnificent achievement. The principle
OF international arbitration and its iniiu-
ence In preventing war are too well under
stood to require explanation. The United
States and Great Britain are the only two
nations that are committed to the principle,
and 1t is probable they will unite in urging
1t at the conference.
The declaration of Paris of 1856. to which
all the nations of Europe except Spain are
committed. abolished privateering. The
United States was not a party to the decla-
ration, but at the beginning of the war with
| Spain this government voluntarily and pub
licly renowned the right Of privateering,
thereby practically compelling Spain TO do
the same. But this still leaves ships of
war free to capture private ships and car
goes. The United States now proposes to
extend the declaration Of Paris so that even
ships Of war may not capture cargoes not
contraband OF war. In other words. 1t will
urge the conference to adopt the principle
long commended for by the United States.
that free goods make free ships" and
| that neutral goods not contraband OF war.
| found on board neutral vessels. shall not be
| subject TO seizure. In other words, the
| American contention has been that a neu-
trail flag should protect everything, even
the enemy's goods. except contraband OF
war, and neutral goods should be respected
even IL found under the enemy's flag. This
would min naval warfare 10 war ships
ard lighting machines. and would do away
with the prize-money system which new
rewards naval officers for capturing car
goes which are the private property Of non-
combatantsL All goods c~ontraband OF war
J would. Of course. stu - subject to capture