The Washington herald., 1915-08-04

Paragraph three indicates that the
British government feels inclined to de-
pend, if necessary, upon German viola
tions of international law for partial
justification of its extension of the prac-
tsce of blockade. German atrocities,
according TO the view Of the British
foreign office have shown how indis-
pensahle il is that We should leave un-
used no Justifiable method of defending
ourselves
Earl Grey interprets the contention of
the United States government to be
that if a belligerent is so circumstanced
that his commerce can pass through
adjacent neutral ports as easily as
through ports in his own territory, hi.
opponent has no right to interfere anG
must restrict his measures of blockade
In such a manner as to leave such ave
nues of commerce still open to his ad-
versary'' This contention, the note de-
cIares his majesty's government is I'm
able to accept as being violation Of
amy fundamental principle of inter
national law"
Civil War Mentioned.
After quoting President Wilson's note
committing this government TO allow
ances for changes in the practice of
blockade necessitated by new instru-
ments of war, the note continues:
The only question then which can
arise in regard to the measures resorted
to for the purpose of carrying out a
blockade upon these extended lines is
whether to use your eXcelency's words.
they conform to the spirit and princi-
piles Of the essence of the rules of war .
and we shall be content to apply this
test 10 the action which We have taken
insofar as ii has necessitated interfer-
ence with neutral commerce"
The note then reviews the causes and
operations of the Southern States by
the Union government in the civil war,
when. TO quote the note, the old prln-
cipleS relating to contraband and block
sde were developed and the doctrine OF
continuous voyage was applied and en-
forced, under which goods destined for
the enemy territory were intercepted be-
fore they reached the neutral ports from
which they were to be re-exported.
The difficulties which imposed upon
the United States the necessity of re-
shaping some of the old rules are some
what akin to those with which the allies
are now faced in dealing with the trade
of their enemy.
Extension Called Defensible.
The British foreign office contends that
the right of a belligerent to intercept
the commerce of its enemy before it goes
into or after il comes out of a neutral
with which one belligerent may send his
commerce across a neutral country with
out compromising its neutrality
provided OF course, that he can estdb-
lish that the commerce with which he
interferes is the commerce of his enemy
and not commerce which is bona fde des-
tined for or proceeding from the neu-
trail state" On this hypothesis. the
note declares such an extension is de-
fcnsible and in accordance with principlse
which have met with general accept
ance.
The note calls attention to the fact
tnat in the SprinEbok case, growing out
O. the Iuion blockade of the Southern
S,ates during the Civil war. the doctrine
II d down Ivy thu United States Supreme
Court and upheld by tn" claims commits
:ion was vigorously attacked by promi-
n. 1t international lawyers of various ma
ii"lalltics not IN accordance with writ
g. Law.
But tho United States and the British
p,".arnneat took broader view
a.! the government OF this country,
v.lc-a nationals We're the sufferers by
- tension ard development of the
"'G metho!S Of blockade made hv the
Lifted States dWrlnG IN" Civil war. ah-
s'rnod from AL protest against tn" de
is on9 ny whi'h the ships and their
{, 4 ocE were condemned.
After declaring again that under this
irt rpr'iation Great Britain is int"rfer-
i0i with 70 commerce which she is not
.-.!t,,6 % interfere with. the not"
C,a,,,s that he has tempered the Sc
,r.t.,. Of her measuTts by not applying
III ,.ul. which wa: inVarith.e i'll the
q! foyyr az h"ckfde that ships and
C.06s Son theil NJ 70 and from tn" in
y dcd Yea are .!able to condemnation"
1--.. F,. Of hi
ernm"n' that interference with non-bel
lscrent commerce : confined to the
right Of capture and contamination for IN
service for the carriage of con-
II ,band and for breach of blockade. the
note points on; that no maritime ma
ton ever has hccn consistent in tlis re-
spect. and declares that:
The one principle which is funda-
mental and has obtained universal
recognition is that by means of block
ade a helIiGerent Is entitled to cut off
by effective means the sea-borne
commerce Of his enemy.
ut is Impossible in the view of His
Majesty's government in these cir
CumstanCes to maintain that the right
merce Of his enemy is limited in the
way suggested in Your ENcellenCy's s
communication
Goods Being Detained.
The note declares that while the al
lied governments announced last
March that they would hold them !
selves free TO detain and take into
port shirs carrying goods of presumed
enemy destination. ownership or orr |
gin in actual practice. how
e"er. We are not OBTAINING goods on
the sol" ground that they are the
property of an enemy. Where
proof OF enemy ownership would af !
ford no evidence of such origin or /
destination We are not in practice de-
tanning the goods"
While not offering figures on our
inarv or ad interim reply:
His MaJestys government has been
gratihed 10 observe that measures |
which they are enforcing have had no |
detrimental effect on the commerce OF
the United States" which has been
more than compensated for the loss |
of the German and Austrian markets"
The concluding sentence of the note /
of July % follows:
Your EXcellency that we shall con-
tinue to apply these measures with |
every desire TO occasion the least pos
siple amount of inconvenience TO per-
sons engaged in legitimate commerce
Under date of July 81, the British |