Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1915-01-29
BR|TA|N'S REPLY
PROTEST OF
Sir Edward Grey Comedies
Principles Valid, but Defends
Seizure Policy Offers
to End Delay.

NOLLOWING is the preliminary
" reply Of the British government
q to the American shipping pro
test:
The British Secretary OF State For
Foreign Affairs to the American Am
baSsadOr
Foreign Office. Jan. Z. 1915.
Your Excellency-l have the honor
to acknowledge receipt OF your note OF
the 2Sth of December. 1t is being
carefully examined. and the points
raised in 1t are receiving consideration.
rs the result Of which reply shall be
addressed to your excellency. dealing
in detail with the issues raised and the
points to which the United States gov
eminent has drawn attention. This
consideration and the preparation OF
the reply will necessarily require some
time. and therefore desire to send
without further delay some prelim
mary observations which will. | trust
help to clear the ground and remove
some misconceptions that seem to ex
iSt
Let me say ut once that we entirely
recognize the most friendly spirit re-
ferred to by your excellency and that
we desire to reply in the same spirit
and In the belief that, as your excel
lency states. frankness will best serve
the continuance Of cordial relations be
tween the two countries,
His majesty's government cordially
concurs in the principle enunciated by
the government of the United States
that a belligerent in dealing with trade
between neutrals should not interfere
unless such Interference is necessary tn
protect the belligerent's national safe
ty and then only to the extent to which
this Is necessary We shall endeavor
to keep our action within the limits
Of this principle ON the understanding
that it admits our right to interfere
when such interference Is not with
bona fde'' trade between the United
States and another neutral country.
but with trade in cOntraband destined
for the enemy's country. and we are
ready. whenever our action may unin-
tentiOnally exceed this principle, to
make redress
Cites Increase In Exports.
We think that much misconception
exists as to the extent to which we
have In practice interfered with trade,
Your eXcellency's note seems to hot!
his majesty's government responsible
for the present condition Of trade with
neutral countries. and it is stated that
through the action of his majesty &
government the products of the grea,
industries of the United States have
been denied long established markets
In European countries which. though
neutral, are contiguous to the seat OF
war, Such result Is far from being
the intention of his majesty's govern.
ment. and they would exceedingly re.
greet that 1t should be due to their
action.
I have been unable to obtain COM
plete or conclusive figures showing
what the state of trade with these
neutral countries has been recently.
and can therefore only ask that some
further consideration should be given
to the question whether United States
trade with these neutral countries has
been so seriously affected The only
figures as to the total volume Of trade
that I have seen are those for the ex
ports from New York for the month OF
November. 1914. and they are as fol
lows compared with the month Of No
vember. 1918:
Exports from New York for Novem-
Der. 1918. and November. 1914. re-
specdvely: Denmark, $55S.O00. $7.101.-
900: Sweden. $377 900. $2.S5S!OOO; Nor.
way. $477.OOO. $2.3ls.OO0; Italy. 81.
071.OOO. $4.7s1 600: Holland. $4.3S9.-
600. $3.96O.OOO.
1t is true that there may have been
falling OF in cotton exports. as to
which New York figures would be no
guide. but his majesty's government
has been most careful not to inter.
IeTe Will COILOus duu ltS place. Ou Iuc
free list has been scrupulously main
tanned.
We do not wish to lay too much
stress upon incomplete statistics. The
figures above are not put forward as
conclusive. and we are prepared to ex-
anime any further evidence with re
gard to the state Of trade with these
neutral countries which may point to
a different conclusion or show that It
Is the action Of his majesty's govern
ment in particular and not the exist
ence of state Of war. and consequent
diminution Of purchasing power and
shrinkage Of trade. which Is RESPONSE
BILE for adverse effects upon trade with
the neutral countries
That the existence Of state Of war
on such scale has had a very ad.
verse effect upon certain great indus
tries. such as cotton. In obvious. but 1t
Is submitted that this IL due to the