New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-07-27
PRESIDENT ON SEIZURES.
His Proclamation Of February II
Defines Government Position.


washington. July 26.-In the absence of &C
ton by the Department of State IN the case OF
any OF the Russian seizures and sinkinss of neu-
trail vessels it appears that the last official word
on the subject indicating the position of the gov
eminent is that contained in the proclamation
of President Roosevelt OF February IL OF this
year, just after the outbreak Of the war. This
was little different from the ordinary neutral
ity proclamation. and in addition TO enJolnlns
citizens of the United states to refrain from
organizing military expeditions in aid OF the
belligerents. contained this clear statement for
! the benefit OF the many inqutring ship owners
and exporting mercantile houses:
And that while all persons may lawfully and
without restriction, by reason of the aforesaid
state OF war. manufacture and sell within the
United States arms and munitions of and
other articles ordinarily known as ''contraband
of war yet they cannot carry such articles
upon the high seas for the use or service or
either belligerent, nor can they transport SOL
diers and officers OF either or attempt to break
any blockade which may be lawfully established
and maintained during the war without incur
ring the risk of hostile capture and the penal
ties denounced by the law OF nations in that be-
half. And 1 do hereby give notice that all citi-
zens OF the United States and others who may
claim the protection OF this government, who
may misconduct themselves in the premises will
do at their peril, and that they can in no wise
obtain any protection from the government of
the United States against the consequences Of
their misconduct.
This makes clear to mercantile and shipping
interests the Presidents view that contraband
must only be shipped at the owners risk and is
subject TO seizure.
RUSSIANS DID NOT TRY TO SAVE CREWS.
While there is no authority for saying posi-
lively in advance of an actual test case the
policy of the State Department respecting the
recent seizures and sinking of vessels with
American cargoes. attention may be drawn to
the fact that In the latest edition of Halls In
ternational Law" British work held in the
highest esteem here as an authority the doc
trine is laid down without qualification that
neutral ship must not be sunk by a belligerent:
that II the detained vessel cannot be sent to port
she must he released, and must not be sunk.
This doctrine bears precisely upon the case of
the knight Commander so far as the facts are
known.
The japanese Legation to-day received n able
gram from the Foreign Office Toxic giving
the story Of the captain of the British steamer
Isinan regarding the sinking of the knight
Commander by the Vladivostok squadron After
speaking of the knight Commander wit
Messing the sinking OF two Japanese sailing YES
sells by the Russian men-of-war, as already an
nounced the dispatch says: I'm these cases the
Russians made no signals 10 the Japanese YES
sells and did not search them. but simply sank
them. AS no attempt was made on the part of
the Russians 10 rescue the crew OF these vessels
all OF them must have been drowned" The other
details given in the dispatch have been already
published.
SHIPPING CIRCLES EXCITED.
The excited feeling in shipping circles how
ever, is indicated by the applica tons received
at the State Department from representatives
of various mercantile interests.
The attorneys for the American Trading Com
pany, which is concerned IN the destruction of
the cargo OF the knight Commander have nor
yet submitted the State Department any
formal demand for indemnity. 1t is their in
tention TO do so soon. and they will proba bly,
base their claim upon the contention that there
is no warrant in the international law OF naval
practice for the destruction OF a ship and cargo
of the character of the knight Commander and
Its load. They make the point that throughout
the Civil War the Union cruisers while fire.
quently making prizes Of neutral merchant
ships, never sank any but Confederate Iner-
chantInen. They argue that neutral nations
have a right to demand that any OF their shtps
and goods seized by a belligerent shall be
brought before prize court and that il shall
not be left to a naval commander, whose
ship perhaps is seeking 10 pursue enemy, TO
pass judgment hastily on the miscellaneous
cargo OF a modern merchants steamer under
a neutral flag. These views will be impressed
on the State Department as part Of tho brief 10
be presented.
The uniform rule of the State Department.
however Is TO refrain from making theoretical
decisions and 1t happens that up to this
moment no protests have been formally lodged
that will suffice 10 set in motion the ma
chinery OF the department. The judicial off,
GERS have informally discussed the seizures with
some OF the attorneys and parties in interest.
but there has been no formal declaration Of pur-
far