New Britain herald., 1915-08-16

!
states in the foregoing discussion OF
the practical reason why it has ad-
Vocated and practised trade in NUM-
lions of war wishes to be understood
as speaking with no thought OF eX-
pressing or implying any Judgment
, with regard to the circumstances or
the present war but as merely put
, ting frankly the argument in this
matter which has been conclusive in
| determining the policy of the United
| States.
While the practice of nations, so
well illustrated by the practice Of
Austria-Hungar and Germany dur
ing the South African war, and the
manifest evil which would result from
a change Of that practice render COM
! pliance with the suggestions Of the
Imperial and Royal Government out
| of the question, certain assertions ap-
! pearing in the Austro- HUNGARIAN
statement as grounds for it's conten-
tons cannot be passed over without
comment. These assertions are sub
| stantially as follows:
CD That the expectation Of arms
| and ammunition from the United
States to belligerents contravenes the
preamble of the Hague convention
( number 10 of 1907;
w 11dI IL Is inconsistent with the
refusal of this government to allow
delivery of supplies to vessels of war
! on the high seas;
90 That according to all authori-
ties on international law who concern
themselves more properly with tho
question, expectation should be pre-
vented when this traffic assumes
such form or such dimensions that
the neutrality of nation becomes in
Volvel thereby
Hague Convention Quoted.
AS to the assertion that the expor-
tatlon of arms and ammunition con-
traVenes the preamble of the Hague
convention number 13 of 1907, this
government presumes that reference
is made to the last paragraph of the
preamble, which is as follows:
Seeing that, in this category Of
Ideas, these rules should not in prin-
ciple be altered, in the course of the
war by a neutral Powers except in a
case where experience has shown the
necessity for such change for the pro-
lection Of the rights of that Power"
Manifestly the only ground to
change the rules laid down by the
convention, one which, it should be
d
| trail is not bound to prohibit the
expectation of contraband of war, is
| the necessity of a neutral Power to
| DO so in order to protect it's own
| rights. The right and duty to de-
! termine when this necessity exists
rests with the neutral, not with a
| beillgerent. Tt is discretionary not
n Predatory. If a neutral Power does
not avail itself Of the right, belli-
gerent is not privileged to complain,
for in doing so it would be in the
position of declaring to the neutral
Power What is necessary to protect
that Powers own rights. The Imperial
and Royal Government cannot but
| perceive that II complaint of this ma
| ture would invite just rebuke.
With references to the asserted in
| consistency Of the course adopted by
! this Government in relation to the ex-
| portation of arms and ammunition
| and that followed in not allowing
! supplies to be taken from it's ports to
| ships OF war on the high seas it is
| only necessary to point out that the
prohibition Of supplies to ships of war
| rests upon the principal that a neutral
| power must not permit its territory
| to become a naval base for either bel
| ligerent. A warship may, under GER
| tain restrictions, obtain fuel and sup
plies in neutral port once in three
months. To permit merchant vessels
| acting as tenders to carry supplies
| more often than three months and in
| unlimited amount would defeat the
! purpose Of the rule and might consti-
| tute the neutral territory a naval base.
Furthermore, this Government is I'M
aware that any rian
ship Of war has sought to obtain sup
! plies from a port in the United States,
| either directly or Indirectly This sub
! ject has, however, already been dis
! cussed with the Imperial German gov
ernm emf. to which the position of this
government was fully set forth De-
cenber "a, 1914. o..
Autrian Claim Erroneous.
| In view Of the positive assertion in
! the statement Of the Imperial and
Royal government as to the unanim-
| ity Of the text writer's as to the ex-
| portation of contra band being unneu-
trial. this government has caused a
| careful examination of the principal
authorities on international law to be
made. AS a result of this examina-
ton it has come to the conclusion
that the Imperial and Royal govern
ment has been misled and has mad
vertently made an erroneous asser-
ton. Less than one-fifth of the au-
thorities consulted advocate unre-
servedly the prohibition Of the export
Of contraband. Several Of those who
constitute this minority admit that the
| practice of nations has been other
wise.
1t may not be opportune to di-
rect particular attention to the decla-
! ration Of the German authority, Paul
1einicke, who states that at the be-
ginning of a war beliligrents have