Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1915-08-04

a group OF prominent international law
yers of all nations condemned the doc
trine which had been laid down by the
Supreme Court of the United states In
the case of the Springbok. a doctrine
upheld by the Claims Commission at
WSashington in 1873 But the United mi &c
took broader view and looked below
the surface at the underlying prlnci-
Piles. and the government OF this coun-
try. whose nationals were the sufferers
by the extension and development of
the old method OF blockade made by
the United States during the Civil War.
abstained from all protest against de-
cisions by which the ships and their
cargoes were condemned
Eleventh. What is really important
in the general interest is that adapta-
tions of the old rules should not be
made unless they are consistent with
the general principles upon which an an
is also essential that all unnecessary in
jury to neutrals should be avaided. with
these conditions 1t may be safely AFFIRM
ed that the steps we are taking to in
tercept commodities on their way to
and from Germany fully comply.
Neutral Ports In Name Only
Twelfth The communication made
by the United States Embassy on the
I'd April describes as novel and quite
unprecedented feature of the blockade
that 1t embraces many neutral ports
and coasts and has the effect of barrins
access to them. II does not appear that
our measures can be properly so de-
scribed II we are successful in the
efforts we are making to distinsuish =
between the commerce of neutral ana
enemy countries there will be no sub
stantial interference with the trade OF
neutral ports except in so far as they
constitute ports of access to and exit
from the enemy territory.
Thirteenth. Your EXCellencys memo
randum was to the effect that the SOW
ereignty of neutral nations in time of
war suffers no diruinution, except in so
far as the practice and consent OF civil
lied nations has limited 1t 'hy the
recognition of certain now clearly de-
termined rights" which II is considered
may be exercised by nations at war;
and these It defines as the right OF cap
vice. for the carriage of contraband and
for breach of blockade. may, how
ever, be permitted to point out that the
practice of nations on each of the three
subjects mentioned has not at any time
been uniform or clearly determined nor
has the practice of any maritime ma
tion always been consistent.
ticulars in which the exact method OF
carrying a blockade into effect has from
time to time varied. The need of pub.
of effectiveness, the locality OF the
blockading squadrons, the right of the
individual ship 10 a preliminary warn :
ing that the blockade is in force and
the penalty to be inflicted on a captur-
ed blockade runner are all subjects on
which different views have prevailed in
utHerent countries ana III NHlCu NlAt
practice of particular countries has
been altered from time to time.
Limitation Not Conceded
Fifteenth. 1t is the same with contra, ,
band. The underlying principle is well
established. but as TO the details there
for unneutral service-the very term
is of such recent introduction that many
writers of repute on international law
do not even mention It,. 1t is impos-
sible in the view of his Majesty's Gov
ernment in these circumstances TO
maintain that the right of a belligerent
is limited in the way suggested in
your Excellency's communication.
Sixteenth. There are certain substdi-
ary matters dealt with in your Excel
iency's communication to which think
ii well to refer Among these may be
mentioned your citation of the Decla-
ration Of Paris, due no doubt to the
sent by me to your EXcellency on the
1st March. wherein II was stated that
the allied Governments would hold
themselves free to detain and take into
port ships carrying goods OF presumed
enemy destination, ownership or origin,
and to our announcement that vessels
might. be required to discharge goods
of enemy ownership as well as those OF
enemy origin or destination.
Seventeenth. It is not necessary "a
discuss the extent to which the secono
rule of the Declaration of Paris Is af-
fected by these measures or whether II
could be held to apply at all as between
Great Britain and the United states. IN
actual practice, however, we are not
OBTAINING goods on the sole ground THAI
they are the property of an enemy. The
purpose of the measures we are taking
Is to intercept commerce on its way
from and TO the enemy country. There
are many cases in which proof that the
goods were enemy property would al
enemy origin or enemy destination, and
it is only in such case that we are de-
tanning them
Eighteenth His Majesty's Govern
ment have been gratifed to observe that
the measures which they are enforclne
have had no detrimental erect on the
commerce of the United States. Figures
of recent months show that the In
creased opportunities afforded by the
war for American commerce have more
than compensated for the loss OF the
German and Austrian markets.
Nineteenth. ! trust that in the light
of the above explanations IL Will be
realized that the measures to which
we have resorted have not only beer
justified BY the eXigencies of the case
but can be defended as in accordance
commended themselves to the. Govern,
ments of both peoples. I have been able
to assure your EXcellency that we shai
continue to apply these measures witt
every desire to occasion the least pos
sible amount of inconvenience to per-
sons engaged in legitimate commerce.
l have, etc, e. GREY.
The Secretary of State to Ambassador
W. H. Page.
Department of state. Washington, Jul!
IA, 1915.
In view of differences which are un
derstood to exist between the two Gov
ernments as to the principles of Law
applicable in prize court proceedings II
/ cases involving American interests. an
! in order to avoid any misunderstandini
/ as to the attitude OF the United State
| instructed to inform the British Gov
| ernment that in so far as the interest
/ of American citizens are concerned tn
/ Government of the United States viii
/ insist upon their rights under the prin
ciples and rules of international law a
/ hitherto established, governing neutra
/ trade in time of war. without Limitation
| or impairment by orders Council o
other municipal legislation by the Brit
/ ish Government, and will not recogniz
I the validity of prize court proceeding
/ taken under restraint imposed by Brit
! ish law in derogation of the rights o
American citizens under internationa
| law.
Ambassador W. H. Page to the secre
American Embassy. London. July 81
1915.
/ have to-day received the followin
note from Sir Edward Grey:
/ Foreign Office, July 81. 1915.
J Your Excellenc-;
First. I have the honor to acknowl
I edge the receipt of the note dated, tn
! 18th inst, in which you were goo
/ information of his Majesty's Govern
/ ment the opinion held by the Govern