Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-08-16

OF the world Of the theory that neutral
powers ought TO prohibit the sale Of
arms and ammunition to belligererts
would compel every nation to have In
readiness at all time sufficient NUM-
tions OF war to meet any emergency
which might arise and to erect and
maintain establishments for the manu-
facturc OF arms and ammunition suf-
ftcient to supply the needs OF it's mill
tary and naval forces throughout the
progress OF war. Manifestly, the ap-
plication OF this theory would result
In every nation becoming an armed
camp. ready to resist aggression and
tempted to employ force in asserting
It's rights rather than appeal to rea son
and Justice for the settlement OF In.
ternntional disputes.
PerceivinR, as II does, that the adop-
ton OF the principle that 1t Is the
: duty of neutral to prohibit the sale
of arms and ammunition to beiliEer.
ent during the progress OF a war
would inevitably give the advantage
TO the belligerent which had encour-
/ aged the manufacture of munitions In
time OF peace. and which had laid In
vast stores of arms and ammunition
In anticipation OF war. the govern
ment OF the United States Is convinced
that the adoption of the theory would
force militarism on the world and work
against that universal peace which is
the desire and purpose OF all nations
which exalt Justice and righteousness
| in their relations with one another.
EXPRESSES NO JUDGMENT
AS TO PRESENT CONFLICT
The government Of the United states
in the foregoing discussion Of the prac-
teal reason why il has advocated and
practiced trade in munitions OF war,
wishes to be understood rs speaking
with no thought OF expressing or im-
plying any judgment with regard to
| the circumstances OF tho present war,
but ms merely putting very frankly tho
argument In this matter which has
been conclusive In determining the
! policy OF the United States.
While the practice of nations, so we'll
| Illustrated by the practice Of Austria
Hungary and Germany during the
South African war, and the manifest
evil which would result from change
of that practice. render compliance
with the suggestions Of tho imperial
and royal government out OF the ques-
| ton, certain assertions appearing In
the Austro Hungarian statements as
! grounds for Its contentious cannot be
! passed over without comment These
! assertions are substantially ~ follows:
| !. That the expectation of arms and
! ammunition from tho United States to
belligerents contravenes the preamble
| OF Tho Hague convention No. 10, Of
1907.
.. That 1t is inconsistent with tina
, refusal OF this government to allow
delivery OF supplies TO vessels OF war
(. on the high seas.
g. That, according to all authqFities
Of international law who concern them
selves more properly with the ques-
ton" expectation should he prevented
when this traffic assumes such form
or such dimensions that the neutrality
Of a nation becomes involved thereby"
| AS 10 the assertion that the exporta-
ton OF arms and ammunition contra
venes the preamble Of The Hague Con-
vent!on No. l3. of 1907, this govern
ment 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-
c!plc. he altered. in the course Of the
war. by a neutral power. except in a
ease where experience has shown the
necessity for such change for the pro-
lection OF the rights OF that power"
MADE DISCRETIONARY,
NOT MANDATORY
Manifcstly. the only ground to
change the rules laid down by the con-
veution, one OF which, II should he
noted. explicitly declares that n neutral
IS not bound 10 prohibit the exporta.
ton of contraband OF war, Is the neces.
sity of neutral power to do so In
order 10 protect its own rights. The
right and duty to determine whom this
necessity exists reats with the neu
trail. not with belligerent. 1t Is dis.
cretionary, not mandatory. II neu
trail power does not avail Itself OF the
right. a belligercnt is not privileged e
complain. for in doing so II would ht
in the position OF declaring to the neu
trail power what is necessary to pro
,eci that powers own Fights. The i'm
pcrial and royal government cannot
M
nature would invite just rcbuke.
With reference to the asserted in
consistency OF the course adopted b,
this government In relation to the ex
porta:ion of arms and ammunition ant
} That followed Is not allowing supple:
10 be taken from its ports TO ships OF
! war on tho nigh soas. II ia only neces
aary To point out that tho prohibition
o! supplies 10 ships OF war rests upor
Inc principle that a neutral power mus
not permit It's territory to become ,
naval base for either belligerent.
warship may, under certain restrictions
) obtain fuel and supplies In ncutra
port once In three month"; tn mar