New-York tribune., 1911-02-13
THE new NAVAL CODE
Partisan Attacks on It-R,.
tionaI Peace.
London. Januarv a

1
OF permanent prize court Of appea, ;.
| The Hague. and each was conrnl,,.s,
its delegates at the last peace co,..
ence TO the policy Of providing the ~.
maritime tribunal with code Of ir,.,
national law At the London conf.r....
two years ago ten maritime pov...
through their representatives s,icessA.,
in formulating a code for this p,,,.
court. With the single exception ~ a..
conversion Of merchant ships into r.. .
vessels. every important controysry.,
point proposed by the Foreign Office r,,
settled by conciliatory diplomacy ana
series Of compromises
The law of blockade. the princip,. -
/ continuous voyage, the lists Of free .,I
contraband goods. the transfer OF a,,,
and many other matters. concern,,,
which every nation had been law mn.
itself, were regulated with fair dts,~
Of precision. This concentration o. .,
pert opinion upon "A common law a,
naval warfare and neutral trade wa.
manifest gain for civilization. The D...
laration OF London was recognized A.
the time as an enlightened neasur. ~
rational peace. II is now fercely dS.
nounced by partsans as a surrender a,
sea power and foreign plot against m.
British Empire,
The panicmongers having failed N
overthrow the Liberal government Nv
accusing it Of impairing British supr.m.
acy on the high seas and Of dsregardlnz
| the rapid progress Of German naval
ornaments, are now bent upon dscred.
itng II for allowing the Declaration ~
London TO be formulated. sir Edward
Grey could not be properly censured 70,
! issuing invitations 10 the naval confer.
ence after the last Peace Congress AZ
| The Hague. and ne could not have been
expected 70 control the deliberations q,
body representing ten maritime "a.
tions. Instead OF proclaiming prens.
turely the ratification OF the declaration
by the Crown. ministers have pledged
themselves TO abide by the decision q
Parliament when the naval prize bill b
| introduced. Apparently the new code q
to be debated I'm detail. the bill IL
not TO be presented as a party measure
and the Declaration is not 10 be ratified
until the imperial conference. as well %
| Parliament has had ample facilities for
discussing it. The conduct OF the gov.
ernment has been exemplary from be-
| ginning 10 end. and yet ministers are
subjected TO systematic defamation ana
abusive TRADES from partisans for hav.
ing anything whatever 10 do with the
negotiation of the anti British" Dech.
ration This is sorry exhibition Of
frenzled partisanship.
At the international law conferences
| last summer finical objections were
raised TO the new code by dsputatious
lawyers. Carping criticism was easy
when the experts of ten nations tad
agreed upon a compromise and every
power represented had been forced 10
abandon traditions and to sacrifice prin-
ciples. Chambers of commerce, shipping
associations and marine insurance cor
porations rec, ,rded their protests against
the Declaration on various grounds This
was not difficult, as the conference had
deliberately attempted TO balance the
claims Of extreme advocates Of belligef-
ent rights and the privileges Of neutral
| traders. Englands own interests are
divided between the aggressive power
OF the strongest navy and the security
of the largest merchant marine and for
eign commerce. Her own experts could
not have provided code for neutral
trade and naval warfare which would
have satisfied extremists at home. ana
naturally an international council has
been unsuccessful in pleasing everyoody'
Mr.. Bowles became an outspoken oppc'
nent OF the declaration; the Australian
Parliament adopted hostile resolutions
and now there is a Conservative hue and
cry against It. headed by The Daly
Mail" for the purpose OF hsrassing tns
government.
So complex a subject ought TO be az
preached without the partisan exaggera'
ton involved in THE Standards asser'
ton that the Liberal government MAJ
given away TO other countries ever!
essential maritime right won by cen
turies of warfare. and that the Declara'
tion of London sanctions by implication
the revival OF privateering. In reality
England made fewer concessions OF prin'
ciple and tradition than America and TN
Continental nations, and while the con-
ference was unable to agree upon an ar
ticle prohibiting the transformation q
merchantmen into warships. this failure
did not involve the revocation of I'M
Treaty Of Paris, with it's edict against
priyateering. The flag still covers the
cargo except contraband of war. ano
privateering remains abolished beyond
risk of revival. The fact that England
lad at once the strongest navy and tne
largest commerce influenced GERMANY
Austria Hungary and Russia in their ad'
herence to the right OF arming merchah''
men and converting them into commerce
destroyers. That omission was serious
misfortune. II would not, however
justify condemnation Of the revised cooe'
with it's free list and definite provisions
in place of the vague and Irregular
usages now prevailing.
Stress is laid by partisan objectors on
the fact that the foreign food supplies OF
Germany are protected in war time. wnh'
those of England are imperilled. Ger.
many has neutral bases in Holland anu
Belgium. Foodstuffs in neutral bottoms
not directly consigned 10 the enen!
military or naval forces are not liaole "