The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1914-12-31
CONF
SUR RS
British Learn Of the.
American Note.
PUBLIC REMAINS CALM.
Press Says Protest Should Be.
Met in Friendly Spirit.

London, Dec. 30.-The American
note, protesting against the British
treatment of American commerce and
insisting upon an early improvement,
came as complete surprise to the
British public, as there had been vir.
tually no intimation that any friction
had arisen between the two govern
ments ~
The placards posted by the papers
were given over exclusively to the
American note and the papers gave
it the largest headlines they have CIV
en- any news during the past month
Consequently the British people re-
gard this as one of the most important
occurrences of the whole war ~
The first impression of the public is
that the note may create friction and
perhaps some unfriendly feeling, al.
though the newspapers point out that
it specifically states that the repre-
sensations were made in friendly
spirit. The situation is comparable to
that which arose at the time Of the
South African war when neutral ship
pers began to- send cargoes inteNded
for the Transvaal republic to the neu-
trail port of Delagoa bay.
q The Washington note has not
reached the foreign office, but it could
not have been dealt with had it ar
rived, as Sir Edward Grey, secretary
of foir &c %l,o
Christmas holidays.
Papers Realize Importance.
Even the war news was allotted a
secondary place to the note in the
news columns of the papers, although
that coming from the Russian front
was highly gratifying to the allies. =
All the morning newspapers COM
ment at length on the American gov
ernment's note and agree that the
American protest should be met by
the British government in the same
spirit of friendly good will as is shown
by the note. Generally, however, the
newspapers are inclined to await the
actual text of the note before indulg.
ing in detailed criticism of it,
In the meantim ethey point out how
inevitably serious difficulties arise
whenever e;:estions of neutrality are
involved. Moreover, they are inclined
to dispute the theory that Great Brit
ain alone is responsible for the dislo-
cation of the worlds trade, arguing
that even had she remained neutral
the fact that number of other ma
tons were involved in the hostilities
must have had a detrimental effect on
the worlds commerce.
In any case, they say, Great Britain
was not responsible for the war.
The Times in an editorial says:
Time Comments Friendly.
"The note is dated Dec "a and, al
though the idea may seem fanciful,
we cannot help imagining that it was
by no accident that the eve of the
great festival of peace and good will
was chosen for the dispatch of this
friendly communication from one OF
the great branches of the English
speaking communities to the other.
I'VE do not suppose this is a dis
pute Of our right as belligerents to
practice such interference with COM
merce between neutrals as is mani
testify necessary for the protection OF
our national safety What they do
question, as we gather it, is whether
the action Of our ships does not in
some cases exceed that manifest ne
cessity.
THE note deals throughout with un-
shaken faith in our sense of justice
That trust. we shall assuredly do our
best to preserve. 1t is quite incon-
ceivable that two sensible peoples on
The friendliest terms with each other
should not succeed in devising a
modus vivendi in accordance with the
general principles of international
law which will at the same time meet
the peculiar facts and circumstances