The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-07-11
LITTLE CHANCE AT THE HAGUE
FOR FRANKLIN'S IDEA.
History of American Doctrine OF Immunity
for Private Property on the Seas.

To THE EDITOR or TME SUN->Siy: 90 far
the proceedings OF The Hague conferences
do not give much Encouragement % TO the
settlement Of the great International ques-
tions which II WAS expected would DO sub
mittsd TO that body.
As to the subjects OF arbitration and the
limitation OF armaments thsrs is little hope
that anything will be accomplished.
The first Hague conference agreed upon
the policy Of commanding voluntary arbitra-
ton. and provided for the organisation of a
permanent court of arbitration: and several
cases. including that Of the claims OF the
European Powers against Venezuela, were
submitted to and decided by that court. But
as to compulsory arbitration It soon became
apparent that It. had no friends in that oon-
ference. The American delegates In their
report upon this subject said:
A. 10 the question between compulsory and
voluntary arbitration. u Was clearly seen before we
had been long In seseion that general compulsory
arbitration of questions Teal,y likely 10 produce
war could not be obtained: In fact that no ooe Of
the nations represented In the conference was VIII
ing TO embark In II 80 far as the more serious CUES
lions were concerned. Even as 10 the questions
Of less moment IL was found TO be impossible to
secure agreement except upon q voluntary basis.
Much has been lone since the adjourn
ment Of that conference by the advocates OF
compulsory arbitration to advance the cause.
and conventions AVE been held in various
parts Of the world by enthusiastic philanthro-
pists In that behalf. but IL remains to be seen
whsther their benevolent zeal will make any
impression on the delegates to the present
conferences. The opening address of the
president. NJ. Nslidon. did not convey much
encouragement on this point. and Captain
MahAn's paper reveals q strong opposition
from an unsupported source.
As to the limitation Of srmamsnts there is
absolutely 10 prospect Of any action. The
Gear Of Russia In his invitation to the Powers
which resulted in the first Hague conference
declared that
The maintenance Of general peaoe and . possible
reduction OF the excessive which weigh
upon all nations present themselves In the present
situation of the world as the Ideal toward which
should tend the Efforts OF all Governments.
To put an end to these increasing ornaments. and
to md means for avoiding the calaHides which
mensoe the entire world. that Is the supreme duty
which to-day lies upon all nations.
So Russia spoke in 1899. but it seems that
the war with Japan and the internal troubles
which now threaten the stability Of bis en-
pire have worked a complete change In the
opinion OF the Gar. and IL In now reported
that Russia will refuse to discuss the sub
ject. and that in this refusal she will be Joined
by Germany. Austria and Italy. The matter
may therefore be considered as indefinitely
postponed.
The United States has had very little in
terest In the question Of limitation OF Euro
pean ornaments, and can get along very well
In the absence Of compulsory arbitration. but
there are other questions in which we have
a deep and abiding interest. The most i'm
portant Of these are the rights Of neutrals
and the immunity OF private property in time
OF war.
The exemption OF private property on land
from seizure and conflscation has long been
recognized by civilised nations, but the ex-
tension of this immunity to private property
on the high seas has up to this time been
refused. In principle OF course there is no
distinction, the equity In each case being the
same.
BENJAMIN Franklin was the first Of diplo-
mats to suggest the propriety Of extending
the exemption to property on the sea. He
made this proposition to the British agents
while negotiating the treaty which recog-
nized our independence in 1888. but IL was not
accepted.
The next year IL was embodied In a report 10
Congress from a committee Of which Thomas
Jefferson was chairman. and was adopted by
that body, and our Ministers were instructed.
In negotiating treaties. to propose q clause
providing that all merchants and traders
exchanging the products Of different places.
and thereby rendering the accessories. con-
veniencss and comforts OF human life more
easy to obtain and more general. shall be
allowed to pass free and unmolssted."
These instructions we're carried out In the
first treaty made by the United States after
the recognition OF Its Independence: namely,
that with Prussia in 1885.
The doctrine thus enuncisted has from its
origin taken the name OF The American
Doctrine" and has been advocated by our
Government from time TO time ever since
Its inception.
One Of the most jealous advocates of this
doctrine was John Quincy Adams. In 1898,
as Secretary Of State under Mr.. Monroe. he
submitted q proposition to the European
Powers for It's adoption and wrote to our
Minister to Russia, Mr.. Middleton:
The principle upon which the Government OF the
United States now offers this proposal to the civil
lied world Is that the same precepts of justice,
charity and OF peace under the influence OF which
Christian nations have by common consent ex
empted private property on shore from the de
struction or depreciation OF war. require the same
exemption In favor OF private property upon the
sea.
An entry In his diary in regard to II made
at the time shows how deeply he was inter-
ested in this matter:
When I think. II II possibly could succeed, what
a rosl and solid blessing II would be TO the human
race. ! can scarcely guard myself from a spirit Of
enthusiasm which It becomes me to distrust.
Mr.. Adams was doomed to disa appointment
the European Powers declining to accept his
proposition.
In 1886 these Powers adopted the Declare
tion of Paris. the irst article of which pro-
vided that "privateering Is and remains
abolished. = and invited all other nations to
become parties to this declaration. In reply
to this invitation Mr.. Marcy. Secretary OF
State under Mr.. Pierce. in a very able letter
to the French Minister. Count de Sartiges.
pointed out that while the Ian guase Of the
declaration prohibited privateering IL did
not prohibit the capture Of private property
by belligerent men-of-war and that it's effect
therefore would be to give free rein TO the
Powers who possessed large ma val forces,
while IL would strip those who were deficient
In naval vessels OF the power Of attacking
their enemies in the only way they could.
by privateers. For this reason he declared
the United States must decline to accede to
the declaration As worded. but expressed its
willin gness to become q party TO the instru-
ment provided a clause was inserted exempt
ing private property on the sea from bellia-
erent capture except In cases OF contraband
and blockade.
At that time our navy was comparatively
insignificant and utterly unable to cope with
th. ,oxrarf,I Aaafa If the 0raaf na,.I oz-..-