The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-12-08
Mr.. James NJ. Beck on Belgium

We have read with admiration not
unmiNcd with surprise Mr.. JAMES VI.
BEcK's ARA ignment. in the New York
Times. of Germany for it's invasion AMI
destruction Of the little neutral State
Of Belgium. Mr.. BrCK eloIuently eS-
presses the general conviction of i'm
partial minds when he exhibits this
proceeding as one OF the greatest crimes
in history. His analysis OF the excuses
offered by the aggressor's apologlsts.
his dcnunciation OF the act on grounds
" moral principle and the obligations
OF national honor. leave little to be de.
sired in the way either Of effective ren.
Soning or Of impressive rhetoric.
This makes IL all the more surprisin.
10 us that Mr.. BECK should attempt
TO piece out his case with the subjoinei
| half-truth:
Germany. express obligation. however.
does not rest solely upon the treaty OF
1899
The second International Peace Con-
ference was held at The Hague in 1907.
There were present the representatives of
torty-tour nations, thus making as near
an approach to the poets dream Of the
federation OF the world and the 'parlia-
ment OF man as has yet been possible in
the slow progress OF mankind.
That convention agreed upon a GER
tain declaration OF principles and among
the signatures appended to the document
was the representative OF his Majesty the
German Emperor.
The pertinent parts OF this great COM
pact, with reference to the sanct!ty OF
neutral territory, are as follows;
ARTICLE /
The territory OF neutral Powers Is
| inviolsble.
PARTICLE II.
Belligerents are forbidden to move
troops or conveys OF either munitions u
war or supplies across the territory OF
neutral Power.
ARTICLE
The fact OF a neutral Power resisting
even by force. attempts TO violate It's neu-
tranty cannot be regarded as hostile act"
Mr.. BECK calls attention to the fact
that among the signatures appended to
this great compact with reference to
the sanctity of neutral territory" WAS
that Of the representative If his Maj.
esty the German Emperor. So good
a lawyer must be perfectly aware thal
| ii Is not the signature of Il treaty which
makes 1t binding legally or even NOR.
| ally. Ever since formal diplomacy WIS
invented treaties have been NEGOTIATED
and signed, quickly to become void Of
significance or interest through the fail.
IRE of one or tn" other party 10 rdtify
| tn" proposed contract. If the mere
signature Of n treaty IMPOSED any re
SponSbillty, legal or moral, upon tn"
Government whose accredited represent
alive signed II aS n preliminary to
ratification, we should now be- lahorlns
under certain Unfortunate striCtionS
rs to our control uf our own canal n
Panama. owing TO the fact that the
frs, IIay-Pauucefore treaty was signed
although never ratified,
Now 1t is true that Germany not only
signed but also subsequently ratified the
provisions quoted by Mr.. BECK in the
passage above. These provisions ave
from the fifth Of the series of ronrru-
lions framed by the courcrccS repre-.
~rnting fortyfour Powers ut The Hague
| IN 1900. Germanys ratification of the
, foregoing articles was denoslr"d ut Thc
! Hague on November -, 1909; and she
therefore became responsible for the
fnliilm"nt of her Contlnct 0OiigalionS
9 lln