The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-04-11
LIMITATION OF NEUTRAL's RIGHTS.

congressman DOuSueFLy statements
about the British purchases of horses
and mules in his Missouri district. taken
in connection with the revelations of the
doings at the British stock camp at
Chalmette, near New Orleans, suggests
that our government might be justly
charged with some dereliction in the dis
charge Of its duties as neutral in con-
nection with the South African war. The
trade in horses and mules both in Mis-
souri, and Louisiana has diffused a vast
amount Of money among American raisers
of the live stock named and Doughertys
constituents are so we'll pleased with the
thrilling advantages of the situation that
they want the business continued in
definitely and they and Dougherty are in
clined to damn the neutrality laws.
While a majority of authorities On the
rights of neutrals under internation
law take the view that, after a declara
ton of war, the citizens Of neutral
state may continue to sell merchandise,
a belligerent commission, to belliger-
ent, it is manifest that if belligerent I'M
dertakes to establish camps or stations on
neutral territory in an official manner for
the purchase of millions of dollars worth
of supplies, and these supplies are loaded
upon belligerent's transports destined
for the seat of war, hostile intent is the
just and legitimate Inference, and it is the
clear duty of the neutral to prevent the
departure of the cargoes.
Justice Story Of our supreme court held
that there is nothing in the law Of ma
lions which forbids our citizens from
sending armed vessels as we'll as NUM-
tions Of war to foreign ports for sale,
on the ground that such action is a COM
mercial adventure which no nation is
extension Of the rights of neutrals was
repudiated by our government nearly
forty years ago, when we put in claim
against Great Britain for violating neu-
trality obligations, by permitting the con-
struction and equipment of confederate
cruisers in Its ports. By our own action
in mulcting Great Britain, through
court of arbitration, to the sum Of $15,-
OOO0 900 in this case, limitations were
placed on the rights of neutrals.
The obligation of the three rules en-
bodied in the treaty of Washington in
require a neutral to prevent the fitting
out, arming or equipping, within it's juris-
diction, of any vessel intended to carry on
war with a power with which it is at
peace and to use all diligence to prevent
the departure Of such vessel adapted to
warlike use; to prevent the use Of it's
ports or waters by either belligerent as
base of naval operations or as a base
for renewing and augmenting military
supplies or for the recruiting of men, and
to prevent the violation of these rules as
to all persons within its jurisdiction. AS
yet there has been no proof obtained that
the British government is enlistfng men
at the purchasing camps, but that gov
eminent is using the port of New Orleans
"for the purpose of the renewal and aug
mentation of military supplies" in viola
ton of the second of the three rules Of the
neutral citizens to engage in trade or
commercial ventures with belligerent
and quite another for belligerent to
enter neutral's territory and establish
camps on a large scale, under its mill
tary officers, and use neutrals port for
the loading and dispatch of its transports
with the purchases Of military supplies
to the seat Of war; Americans sold and
shipped many steamer loads Of military
supplies for the Boerssas long as Lorenzo
Marques was the open door for the intro
duction Of such supplies into the Trans
vaal, but the. Louisiana and Missouri
camps appear to ibe British stations
under British rule, where the British gov
eminent is permitted to augment and re-
new Its military supplies. That is more
than horse of another color. It is an
animal OF a different shape.