Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1915-12-10
'DEN0UNCES BRITISH
SHIPPING EMBARGO
Senator Hoke Smith Demands
Interference With Neutral
Commerce Cease.
CALLS UPON CONGRESS
TO TAKE FIRM STAND
Asserts English Merchants Are Ex-
polting Same Glass of Goods
Seized From U. S. Vessels.

called upon Congress to insist
that Great Britain cease interter-
ence with neutral commerce. He
declared that protests by the
American State Department had
been met BY increased lawless-
ness and trampling upon neutral
rights. -.#
The United States. with other ma
tions, should demand from Great Brit
aim said the senator, that disregart
of their rights cease. 1t may be nee
essary for the United States and othel
neutrals to let Great Britain under
stand that no word or act Will o'
omitted to enforce their rights.
British merchants and shippers are
profiting greatly. he asserted. by eX'
porting the very character of good:
seized when shipped from the tnitet
States to neutral European ports.
Disregard of Rights.
The blockade of neutral ports is &
deliberate disregard of neutral right.
by Great Britain Senator Smith con
tinued. There can be no pretense thai
it is sustained by. the customs of ma
tions. Indeed. there is no such pre-
tense 1t is a bold. reckless disregard
of that freedom of the seas which Is
the right of neutrals by the customs
of nations and the rules of interna'
tional law.
Yet for eight months this disregard
of the sovereign rights of all neutral
countries has been permitted to con
tinue, to the serious injury of the com
merce of their citizens.
"On March l and March II the British
government issued orders for the seiZ-
ure upon the ocean of goods belonging
to citizens of neutral nations coming
from or seeking to enter the neutral
ports of northern Europe
suppressed All Shipments.
These orders were not confined te
shipments of contraband goods. They
completely suppressed shipments ane
blockaded neutral ports against neu-
trail trade.
The executive department of oul
government. through the Secretary OF
State has three times vigorously pro-
tested the legality of these orders The
responsibility now rests upon Congress
at least equally with the executive
department.
Are these orders illegal. and. If So
what shall be done about them.
THE sovereignty of nation extends
to it's citizens and their property upon
the ocean.
Nations at war have no natural right
TO interfere with citizens or the COM
merce of citizens of nations at peace.
The customs of nations have given to
belligerents certain well defined priv
ileges of Interference with the COM
uierce of neutrals. When interference
takes place not authorized by the well
defined customs of nations the act OF
the belligerent nation SO interfering
with the commerce of a citizen of a
neutral nation is lawleSs and violates
the sovereign rights of the neutral ma
tion.
Established Customs Abandoned.
More than twelve months ago the
British privy council began passing
orders to govern their naval and prize
courts providing for the seizure and
disposal of cargoes of merchandise be
longing to citizens of neutral coun-
tries They ceased to rely upon estab-
lshed customs permitting belligerents
to interfere with neutral commerce and
presumed to direct at pleasure the SelZ-
ure and disposition of goods belonging
to citizens of the United States and of
other neutral nations.
"Great Britain has sold in English
ports cargo after cargo of merchandise
belonging to citizens of the United
states when the merchandise was in nc
sense claimed to be contraband. and
settlements for the goods are still
being held up. citizens OF the United
States having been deprived of theil
trade privileges, of their goods and OF
the value of their goods
I'm aggravation it can be shown that
the same character of goods sailing
from ports of the United States. des-
tined to neutral ports OF northern
Europe, which were seized and carried
into British ports. were permitted to
be sent from British ports by British
owners to the same neutral ports of
northern Europe from which American
owners were excluded. The trade by
citizens of Great Britain was greatly
Increased to the ports from which neu-
trails were excluded.
No Civil War Parallel.
Senator Smith denied that Great Brit
ain could be excused on the ground
that the United States had acted illeg-
ally and improperly in similar way
in the civil war. He quoted from the
decision of the United States Supreme
Court in the Bermuda and Springbok
cases and said:
In these cases the right of seizure
was based not on the blockade of a
mort. but on the fact that ship
ners had arranged a continuous voyage
for the goods by sea into blockaded
port"
Remarking that the relations between
the United States and Great Britain
had been growing closer for hundred
years, the senator added: But we are
not a dependency of Great Britain
germany. too, he said. always had
been a friend of the United States and
MANY American citizens love that coun-
try only second to their own.
Must Maintain Neutrality.
"The United States. therefore, owes it
to her citizens and to her friends to MAIN
tain a real neutrality said Senator
smith "Neutrals must maintain their
neutral rights to maintain neutrality.
Great Britain may desire to crush an
enemy through the suppression of trade,
INIT she has not the right to do it at our
loss or to make us the instrument OF 1t.
$50 far the protests of the executive
against the lawless conduct of
Great Britain have been answered by in
creased lawlessness Step by step the
rights of the citizens of neutral nations
to buy and sell merchandise in foreign
markets have been suppressed.
1T is for Congress to determine what
value it will be to the integrity OF neu-
trail rights for the United States TO have
become unhesitatingly their champion.