Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-08-12
HER Attitude.
Britain's Opinion Re-
garding Contraband.
Discussion Arises Over Seizure
of Knight Commander.
Premier BaIfour and Lord Lansdownc
State They Are Perfectly Confident
That No Neutral Ship Will Again Be
Seized by Russians.

London, Aug. lin the House Of
Commons, today, Premier Balfour.
speaking on the same lines as Lord
Lansdowne in the House of Lords, said
he was perfectly confident that no ncu-
trail ship would again be sunk by the
Russians.
He fully agreed in the statement that
such q sinking was an international
outrage and the government had eX-
pressed to Russia in the clearest way
possible that view with the above re-
suit.
1t seemed to be matter of such inn
portance that the British government
deemed its duty to call the attention Of
Russia to the gravity Of the question,
referring particularly to the inclusion
of provisions in which this country is
very largely interested among the ar
ticles regarded as Internationally
contraband of war"
The British government had pointed
out that this inclusion was serious
innovation and stated that it was
bound to assert it's rights by protesting
against the doctrine that it was optional
for a belligerent to decide on what ar
ticles should be dealt with as contra
band, regardless of well established
rights and usages.
The government had informed Russia
that it refused to consider itself bound
to regard as valid the decision of any
prize court violating these rights or
which failed to act in conformity with
recognized principles of international
law.
The effect of these severe rules had
been greatly intensified by the excep-
tional measures taken to enforce them,
as in the case of the knight Comman-
der. The government had been given
to understand that Russia cor idered
that il was within the rights of bel
lgerent to destroy a captured neutral
vessel, whether she carried contraband
or not.
This country had never accepted such
Il view and he Uord Lansdowne) be-
lieved it had been refused by other
powers. 1t certainly had not been ac-
cepted by the government of the Unit
ed States.
The British government, therefore,
was unable to admit that the sinking
of the Knight Commander was justi-
fable according to any of the principles
of international law by which this
country had considered itself bound.
If the st. Petersburg court reversed the
decision of the Vladivostok prize court
it would be a matter for congratula-
ton. But anyway the government had
refused to admit that the destruction
of the knight Commander was justi-
fled or that the proceedings of the
court were valid.
The cumulative result of the Russian
actions was extremely serious and was
having most injurious effect OH the
commerce of Great Britain. His i'm
preston was, however. that both gov
ernments would be glad to discover
reasonable means of settling their diff
ferenceS.
Lrod Lansdownc concluded with re-
marking that he was glad to be able to
add that the replies of the Russian
government to the British representa-
tons justified the hope that these acts
of destruction of neutral prizes were
not likely to be repeated.
The British government deeply real
lied the gravity of the question and
would deem it to be its duty to insist
strongly on its rights. This country
| possessed rights which, owing to her
predominant interest in the commerce
of the Far East, she more than any
| power was called upon to vindicate.