New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-08-09
OUR RIGHTS AT SEA
international Law Not To Be Con.
founded with What Ought To Be-

To the Editor Of The Tribune
Sir: The letter of Frank Sinclair in your
issue this morning is admirable as an Amer
lean utterance of what ought to be- I'm
fortunately, we have to deal with things as
they are.
A vessel has always been considered the
territory of the country whose flag she flies.
This rule has been accepted so universally
and completely that children born upon a
ship at sea have been held to be citizens by
birth Of the country under whose registry the
vessel belonged
One cannot accept the advantages of a
condition without mourning also its response
blities and obligations.
There may be room for discussion as to the
degree of difference in the treatment by
beligerent warships of neutral passengers
on vessel of nation which is at war
and the treatment of neutral passengers upon
neutral vessel, but there can be no ques-
ton upon the proposition that they are in a
different class and that the principles OF
international law that apply to passengers
on neutral vessel cannot be the same as
those which apply to passengers upon the
vessel of beligerent.
Since the beginning of this controversy my
contention has been that, much as we may
desire to impress the beligerents with our
nsstence upon humane and reasonable
methods of warfare, their refusal to comply
with our demands Gin so far as those demand
operate to interfere with the methods of war
fare, one against the other, of the nations at
war; cannot possibly form a basis for such q
disagreement as to warrant the breaking off
IF diplomatic relations or a declaration of
war, but in so far as our protests have to do
with the interference of any of the belliger-
ents with neutral vessels or neutral com
merce, whether merchandise or passengers
the failure to heed our protests forms per-
feet basis for declaration from Washington
that such acts are unfriendly.
This is all tina. is meant by "the freedom
of the seas"
The seas are just as free for two nations
to go to war upon and kill each others citi
zens and destroy each others property "a
for neutral traffic to pursue its peaceful way
even in times of war.
There is no rule that neutral passengers
are immune upon the ship of a nation at
war II is perfectly right and proper for
Washington to contend for such a rule, but
in doing so they are contending for what
ought to be, and this is right, and the ad-
ministration should have the support of every
American citizen in this contention. The evil
lies in the fact that great many newspapers
are instlling into the minds of the people
the false impression that we can demand as
a matter of right that our citizens can be
protected by our government il they voun-
tarily enter the territory of nations at war.
international law and practice sustain
fully the above contention, and while | sin
cerely hope that the future may bring forth
a rule such as contended for by Washington
in the present controversy until such rule
has been accepted and approved generally by
the nations refusal TO accept it cannot
form basis for the breaking off of dplo-
matte relations or a declaration of war.
Since the Lusitania disaster have trav-
elled considerably in the State of New York
and while so engaged have talked with a
great many people of all classes, and | find
that public opinion as expressed in CONVEX
sation does not at all coincide with edi-
toral newspaper expression generally upon
this subject.
The great majority of those who nave
talked to me have expressed the view that
Americans who boarded the Lustania, know
ing that Great Britain and Germany were
at war, did so at their own risk. Those who
appeared to be at all agitated over the Lusi-
tania affair were less than one in ten. Much
deeper interest was shown in the Gulf. 1T
and William p. Frye cases than in the Lusi-
tania case, in spite of the fact that there
was no loss of life in either of the former
cases. The general sentiment Seemed TO be
that If We insisted upon non-nterference
with our commerce and our citizens en-
barked in neutral vessels we were within
our rights, and if We broadened our demands