Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1915-08-25
is COTTON LEGALLY
WAR CONTRABAND?
A Civil War Precedent and the Pres
ent Case - Can Pocketbook
Logic Override the Logic
of the Law?
Bv EDWIN MAXEY


TURING our Civil War the United States
~ declared cotton contraband The South
was at that time extremely pro-Engllsh in
its views In fact It was then as
much Anglophile as Il is now Anglo
phobe. And the Federal Government
which is now protesting the policy of the
British Government in treating cotton
contraband was at that time using the
guns of its navy to emphasze its insist
ence that cotton contraband. AS the
| British did not resort to the same form
Of emphasis in their insistence that cotton
was not contraband. the view of the Fed
eral Government prevailed. Now the Brit
ish Government is insisting that cotton is
contraband and enforcing their view by a
resort to the same form of emphasis which
carried conviction during the Civil War.
It would appear that our Federal Govern
ment was wrong then or now, and whether
they were wrong then or now is a ques-
ton of law.
With respect to their character contra
! band, Grotus divides goods into three
classes: Goods used mainly in war; p
| Goods used only in peace; 3-Goods Of use
in peace and in war. The latter he terms
ancipits usus, or of a double headed use
The goods of the first class are absolute
! contraband. Those of the second class never
! contraband; and those of the third class are
! conditional contraband, t. e., are contraband
| If destined for the use of the enemys army
or navy. This classification has not been
improved upon and cited with approval
by the Supreme Court of the United States
in the of the Peterhoff. Wallace, 2S
OF these classes little difficulty is found
with regard to the first or second. Articles
manufactured for and used primarily in war,
such artillery, universally conceded
to belong in the list of absolute contraband.
Articles Of the second class such as works
of art, are never considered contraband.
But articles used in peace as well as in
war, and become contraband only according
to circumstances, as foodstuffs, occasion no
end of difficulty. 1t is by the addition of
such articles to the list of contraband that
friction frequently arises between the bel
ligerent and neutral. The interests of
belligerent and neutral are on this point,
antagonistic, the expansion of the list is
manifestly advantage to the belligerent,
and, as it interferes with his trade, it is a
corresponding disadvantage to the neutral.
out of this antagonism of interests more
than out of the inherent difficulty from a
legal standpoint, has come the inconsistency
and confusion in regard to the subject of
contraband.
military Necessities" Then and Now
Since cotton has come to be so largely used
in the manufacture of high explosives it
would seem clearly enough TO belong in the
class of absolute contraband. The Importance
of cotton as a factor in military operations
! will be better appreciated after reference to
the July number of the Scientific American in
which it is estimated that 100000 bales of
cotton year is necessary for the manufacture
of the explosives used by the German artillery
alone. This is about half of the normal inn
portation of cotton into Germany annually.
| When remember that the above estimate
does not take into account the amount nee
essary in the manufacture of explosives for
| small arms, the navy and clothing for the
| soldiers, the military Importance to the Allies
of cutting off the importations of cotton into
Germany grows upon AS Germany does
not produce cotton she is dependent upon
| importations direct through neutral terri
tory.
When wood charcoal the carbonizer
in gunpowder it was generally conceded to
belong in the list of absolute contraband.
Now that cotton takes the place Of it and
sulphur in the great bulk of explosives
used in war; there is no convincing reason
why it should not be placed In the list of
absolute contraband, since 1t is its possibili-
ties for direct military use which deter
mine in which of the above classes an
article shall be put. The fact that in it's
raw state It is not used mainly In war
does not exempt it from the list of abso-
lutte contraband If by a process of combi-
nation it becomes an explosive of decided
use in military operations. Saltpetre char
coal and sulphur, not in combination, are
| harmless and used in
of peace, but this does not prevent a recog-
milton of the fact that in the hands of an
enemy they have great possibilities Of
HARM and there is no breath of protest
even by the South. against placing them in
the list of absolute contraband Yet it
might readily be different, II their produc-
ton and expectation. like cotton, were the
great industry of the South. The logic of
the pocketbook is frequently more power
ful than the logic of the law
The reasons for placing cotton in the list
Of absolute contraband now are certainly
more convincing than those given during the
Civil War. The contention OF the Federal
Government at that time rested solely upon
the grounds Of military necessity. The con-
tention Of the British Government at the pres
ent time rests upon the same general princi-
pie which applies TO all other commodities in
determining in what list they shall be put
It will, however be difficult for the present
Democratic Administration 10 insist upon ad-
herenee to legal principles as against a COM
bination Of political and economic exlgeneies
Doctrine of Continuous Voyage"
If, legally, the British Government is war.
ranted In placing cotton In the list of abso-
lutte contraband. and 1t seems abundantly