The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-07-23
ATTITUDE.
A Prediction as TO . New Phase OF
the Propaganda.

To THE EDITOR OF THE SUN-Sr: Your
article tersely but fully answers the let
ter signed Lawyer" in THE Sun or
July 10. Germany's notes and the pro-
German press entirely ignore one as
poet which cannot be emphasized too
often for the benefit of sympathizers
with Germany who are at the same time
loyal to this country.
Germany's prior notes officially recog-
nized that. according to international
law, she has not the right to sink a
merchant vessel. whether enemy or neu-
trail. without visit. search and removal
of passengers and crew to safety. she
relies solely on the right to retaliate
against her enemy on account OF the
sta fvation" blockade effectively main
tained by the British.
The right to retaliate against an
enemy is recognized by international
law. The point that has not been
emphasized sufficiently is this: The
principle OF retaliation can be invoked
and extended only to affect an enemy,
and must be so applied as not to afect
neutral nations. The act of retaliation.
an act OF war. properly available
against an enemy, Is no less an act OF
war when its application affects the
citizens of a friendly nation, unless re-
sponsibility for the unfriendly act be
disaffirmed.
TO affirm. as Germany's last note
does, the right so to act is a casus
belli which no self%-respecting nation
should parley over. That Germany's
enemy Britain warned neutrals as TO
the use of mined areas in the North
Sea. referred to in the British order as
a zone" without attempting TO assert
the establishment of a war zone as
Germany's last note d~lsingenuously in
Inmates. does not alter the situation.
our Government no moro recognizes
Britain's right to. imperil the lives or
properties Of our citizens on the high
seas by the use of mines than 1T recos-
nizes Germany's right to do SO by the
Use of submarines. Fortunately. in the
former case, no life has been lost.
For the loss Of property Britain prom
ises compensation, / believe. But loss
of life is immeasurable, as u Presi-
dent has said In our last note to Ger
many, For that loss Germany makes
no offer or promise to compensate so
far as she could. What Is still worse
Germany's asserted right to misaprly
the principle of retaliation Is in abro-
cation OF her treaty relations with us.
The suspension of diplomatic relations
with Germany would be no mere than
a recognition OF an existing fact.
namely. that while plying us with sinil-
ing II cynical words Germany would
persist in acts of enmity.
The compiacency OF the public in the
crisis which has been reached is due
solely to the fact that Germany has not,
during the past two months, repeated
the Lusitania outrage. an act which
probably would have led Immediately
to a suspension of our relations with
her. as. no doubt, our President quietly
gave her to understand. Germany
falsely asserts a right of retaliation af-
fecting a friendly nation, though she
has not deemed Il wise to exercise
such asserted right for over two
months. The situation itself suggests
a course which might avoid a severance
Of relations, that is, a rejection OF her
preposterous proposal that our Gov
eminent a%brogate by a new treaty with
Germany. the only form of agreement
which would have the effect of law
, binding our citizens. the acknowledged
, rights OF our citizens on the high seas,
formal notice to Germany that any
, future violation OF such rights would
be regarded as an unfriendly act, and
a statement to her that our claims aris-
7, ing out OF the sinking of the Lusi,ania
will be held In allegiance until our Gov
7 eminent elects to renew them.
) The suggestion Of eN-Presldent Roose-
I welt that our Government suspend com
l mercial intercourse with Germany with
/, out s~uspending diplomatic relations
/. seems weird from a constitutional
standpoint. Commercial intercourse oi
, our citizens with all nations is a right
= OF which they cannot be deprived undeI
| the Federal Constitution, in the alb
sence of a state of war, which auto
$ matically suspends all intercourse anc
5 relations with the enemy and its c!t!'
zens. Even Congress lacks power e
$ enact a law forbidding our citizens
o from engaging IN with thu
citizen. OF Germany or Any other par
ticular country. The assertion that th'
, Precedent could make such an edct
: presumably prescribing penalties foi
; dlso'cdience. Is simply proposteruus.
The pro-German propaganda vii
l shortly reach the stage of claiuor 70
e a special session Of CONGRESS, havin,
= FOR its objective the suspension OF tn
n present commercial Intercourse by gu
citizens with Britain, France, Russ!
, and Italy, before any break with Ger
many takes place, though. no doubt
- your correspondent Lawyer would no
: be "A party to such a scheme.
J. ANOTHER LAWYER
e NEW York, July %,