The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1915-11-08
ENGLAND'S BLOCKADE
ILLEGAL, SAYS u. S.
CONTINUED FROM PAGE OEE.

grounds OF complaint Is summarized II
the note as follows:
Il believe IL has been Conclusivel!
shown that the methods sought to b,
| employed by Great Britain TO obtain anC
use evidence OF enemy destination o
cargoes bound for neutral ports and q
impose a contraband character upon sucl
cargoes are without Justification: that thu
blockade. upon which such methods ar,
partly founded. is ineffective. illegal anc
indefenkible: that the judicial proceduI,
offered as a means of reparation for ar
international injury is Uncertainty defec'
tive for the purpose and that in many
cases Jurisdiction is asserted in violation
OF the law OF nations.
The United States. therefore. cannot
submit" so the note adds. ito the curtail.
ment OF its neutral rights by these meas.
ures which are admittedly retallatory and
therefore illegal in conception and In ma.
ture. and intended to punish the enemies
OF Great Britain for alleged illeEalities OF
their part. The United States might not
be in a position to object to them il its
interest and the interest OF all -neutrals
were unaffected by them. but. being AT.
fected, It connot with complacence suffer
further subordination of its rights and
interests to the plea that the exceptional
Great Britain require or Justify oppres-
slve and illegal practices
British Tribunals Unauthorized.
The newest matter in the note is thar
relating to the British prize courts. The
United States declares that Great Britain
can not reasonably expect this govern
ment Ito advise its citizens to seek re-
dress before tribunal which are, in its
opinion. unauthorized by the unrestrict-
ed application of international law TO
grant reparation. nor to refrain from
presenting their claims directly to the
British government through diplomatic
channels
The note contends that the British
prize courts acquire Jurisdiction over
neutral vessels by unlawful means.
British authorities. acting under British
orders-in-coundl, many OF which this
government regards are in contraventIon
Of international law, seize neutral ves-
sells on the high seas on mere suspicion
and take them into British ports where
they are within the territorial jurisdic-
ton of British domestic law. The British
have no right, II Is alleged, to extend
domestic law. such as the orders-in-
council, to cover seizures on the high
seas.
The prize courts. It is further alleged.
are bound by these same orders-ln-
council which are held to be in violation
of international law. IF courts are
bound" the note asserts, by the laws
and regulations under which seizures
and dententions are made and which
claimants allege in contravention of the
law of nations, those courts are power
less to pass on the real ground of COM
plant or to give redress for wrongs Of
this nature"
With reference to the British claim that
the United States took a similar position
In the civil war. and referred foreign
claimants to prize court< for redress. the
United States note declares that Great
Britain is mistaken. American cruisers,
it is stated, never brought into port
vessels except on evidence found in
search at sea, and the United States
government never sought to limit the