The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-07-06
At Which the Freedom from Seizure
Of War VIII BE Discussed.
ANDREW D. WHITES SPEECH
SHOWING FUTILITY OF PRESENT
REGULATIONS ON THE SUBJECT.
How Privnteering Affected Our Ship
Secretary Hay Gratifed.

THE HAGUE, July 5.-The American
delegates scored great success to-day in
obtaining from the peace conference
unanimous vote in favor of having the
question of private property at sea in time
of war dealt with at a special conference
to be summoned hereafter. Much diplo-
matte management was necessary, and
many obstacles had to be surmounted be-
fore this result was reached.
The second committee met this morning
and Andrew D. White. head Of the Amer
lean delegation, preached the subject. The
question of its admissibility under the con-
ference mandate was discussed. No vote
was taken. but an agreement was arrived
at to allow the Americans to present their
case this afternoon Had vote been taken
Immediately the Americans would doubtless
have carried their point by majority OF
one or two, and to avoid this resolution
was prepared setting forth the Importance
OF the question and recommending the sum-
moning of a special conference.
At the afternoon sitting of the committee,
the successive clauses Of the laws of war
having been adopted, NJ. De Mertens, of
the Russian delegation, moved resolution
to that effect. Mr.. White seconded. In the
Of the American case he said the United
States government had accepted the invita-
ton to participate in the conference with
alacrity because of the opportunity it was
expected the conference would afford for
preaching the truth with regard to the i'm
munity from capture Of private property at
sea. He admitted, however, that the United
States government recognized 1t would be
hopeless to expect any decisive result from
this conference, owing to three causes
first, absence Of instructions from powerful
governments; second, doubts as to the COM
petence Of the conference, and third, the
length of time necessary for discussion
Of all the bearings Of the case.
RESULT OF PRIVATEERING.
Mr.. White frankly admitted the difficulties
| involved In deciding what constituted con-
| traband of war, but insisted these supplied
| one of the best arguments for - full and
prompt discussion. The suffering and losses
which seizures entailed were immense, while
| the effect upon the ultimate result Of war
| was almost nothing. Referring to the ex-
| perience Of the United States in the war
| Of rebellion he said only three Confederate
cruisers did anything Of Importance, but
| they captured 165 vessels, quadrupled the
| rate of insurance between America and
|
half million tons of American shipping to
British bottoms. The final result was the
whole American marine was virtually swept
| out Of existence.
| eff that resulted In the operations of
three poorly equipped little steamers" he
said. what would happen with the means
at the disposal of the greater nations to-
day? Yet everyone knows this privateering
| had not the slightest effect in ending or
| evening shortening the war, nor would 1t
| have had any even If the losses had been
| ten times greater. The only real effect is
| gained by warships in maintaining block
| ade. Nowadays the transfer of goods by
| land is so general that interruption by sea
| as rule does nothing to promote the ending
! of war, but that interruption may destroy
accommodations of human wealth and skill
| requiring generation to make good, while
| the losses cannot be confined to belliger-
ents alone, but must affect more or less
directly the whole world"
| Mr.. White warmly repudiated the SUPPOSE
| ton that the Americans were animated by
selfish considerations. They were eminently
| practical, he said, but not less pre-eminently
| devoted to great ideals. This he illustrated
by referring to the enormous sacrifice made
during the civil war and the devotion Of
Americans to arbitration. But the question
he was urging on the delegates, he asserted.
was one of right, justice and progress for
| the whole world and this all Americans
felt deeply. Nor could the acceptance Of
the American idea injure any nation. On
| the contrary, IL would strengthen all.
The head Of the American delegation con-
cuded with an eloquent appeal to the jur-
| ists diplomatists and statesmen of all
| ma tions assembled I'm the conference IN take
the subject under careful consideration, de-
claring, in the words of Count Nesselrode.
| that The addition of this principle to in
ternational law would be a crown Of glory
| to the worlds diplomacy"
NJ. Rahusen, of the Dutch delegation. sup
ported Mr.. White and suggested that the
| governments favoring the idea should con-
| clude treaties among themselves.
| Sir Julian Pauncefote. head Of the British
| delegation. said British opinion was divided
on the subject and that he had no instruc-
| tons regarding IL. In his personal opinion
| the question was outside the scope OF the
| conference.
| M. Bourgeois head of the French deIesa-
| ton, and Captain Scheme. Of the Russian
| delegation, announced that In the absence
| OF instructions they could not vote.
The resolution was then put and carried
| without opposition. but with reservations on
the part Of Great Britain. France and
| Russia
The committee also adopted a resolution
that the question of the determination of
| the rights and duties OF natural states
should be placed upon the programme of the
future conference
| The plenary conference assembled suisse
0uentIy and accepted ell the recommendar