Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1914-12-29

ShNNoI BE ESEkCIkED
MERELY ON SUSPICION
Taking up the subject of detentions
OF American ships at sea, the United
States government states that It can
aminins them or the conveying Of such
ships to British ports for detailed en-
animation. 1t argues that proof of
he in evidence at the time of search ut
sen. The bclligcrcnt right of search,
the note adds. Is fully recognized, but
diverttng American ships into British
The United States asserts, moreover
detention OF scores of American car
goes consigned from this country to
neutral ports, contending that it should
tect neutral commerce and prevent in
Hoeent merchants from suffering.
One 81 the m3st conspicuous COM
treatment by Great Britain OF American
cargoes Of copper II is charged that
sams trentmsnt to nSa sissordirg the
copper with the Scandinavian countries
as to commerce in this product between
same conditions Of shipment. Even
though the italian government has pro-
claimed an embargo on the expectation
countries similar to the embargo in
force In Norway. Denmark and sweden,
the consignments of copper to Italy
held up, while those TO the Scandi-
na Avian countries are not moiested.
records is further
shipped 10 order" or or no e speeie cons
signee. stating that this circumstance
alone Is not sufficient on which to hold
suspicious. This view has been eS.
pressed by the Supreme Court or the
nounced recently that cargoes shipped
ITO order" would be considered '!sus-
pect." To.day's note points out that TO
proof must be presented when the de-
tentton or seizure is made showing that
a hostile destination is intended, or else
be advanced to justify further exanina-
tion Of the cargo.
BURDEN of PROOF
ON THE BELLIGERENT
II is in this connection that the
United States remarks that commerce
between neutral nations constitutes
the normal relations OF peace, and
not, not war. and that the presumption of
Suiity cannot rest on neutral shippers
Dut the burden of proof must be i'm
posed on the belligerent who inter
Although the sending of the note was
NOT known to members of the diplo-
matte corps tonight, and it is unlikely
o IN a, TN, me Washington government will
eeption, of the British ambassador, un-
t fsS n Tefu nss,k nth officials
marked by the United States Would a be
followed by other neutral governments.
south American nations especially have
attitude of the United States on sub
lects Of neutrality. and in most cases
nave adhered to American position. AS
WIN European neutrnls, 1t is believed
that the diplomatic representatives here
81 f1n,t ths latter VIII see. to learn the
sion 10 their governments
The position Of the United States as
expressed In o-day''s note is con-
Britain, France and Germany on the
subject of contraband. Although the
DECLARATION of London. drafted in 1903.
II international law and new rules for
the conduct of maritime warfare. with
respect to neutral commerce. had not
broke out. 1t was thought for time all
countries would adhere to II. Great
Britain. by an order in Council on Au-
gust 20 last, declared the Declaration Of
London effective with certain modinca-
lions. Germany announced to all ncu-
WSoe hdr nEnens the 10 h etner 30 the
ligerents would.
The United States took the position
that 1t could not accept piecemeal
London with their own amendments.
and declared II would be guided by the
general pra etices of international law
irrespective Of the Declaration of Lon
don.
The German government in n formal
note to the United States and other
neutrnls then voiced it's objections to
the British notifications. which SINH
lnrly the United States opposed
To-day's note follows in many i'm
portant points the argument then ad-
vanced by Germany that British prac-
tice with respect to the neutral com
merce was distinct departure from
mary previously accepted principles of
international law.