New-York tribune., 1915-03-30
Neutrals and international Law.

If neutral nations have any title to con-
slider themselves innocent victims IN time
of war there is a dangerous double edge
to one of the arguments used by Mr..
Balfour in his defence of the avowedly
irregular blockade Of German ports Let
them" he saws, consider what would
happen if ordinary law were deprived OF
all its sanctions. if the state lost all power
10 enforce obligations to protect the IN
nocent or to punish the guilty. a COM
munity so situated might prosper so long
as there was a general agreement to obey
the laws and the agreement was main
tanned. But if the criminals broke 1t
whenever it suited them, ought the inno-
cent tamely to SUBMIT"
1t is a nice question to determine rela-
tive degrees Of innocence in the thick of
conflict. but as the Order in Council does
las Mr.. Balfour sets out by admitting)
"afFect both neutral interests and inter
national law" it is only natural that
neutral nations should be concerned to
have clear understanding of the modl-
tjcations introduced. 1t is manifest that
the original form of blockade is to-day
i1npracticable. It was commonly estab-
Gshed in the old days by an inshOre squad
ron Of frigates and other small craft keep
ing well without the range Of guns on the
land and i'm touch with a heavier fleet, the
main blockading fleet, in the ofiing. This
sort Of disposition is clearly out of date
today. There were no craft in the past
similar to submarines, and it would now
be sheer madness 20 attempt to uphold an
insbore SQUADRON as of old. In fact, there
is no obvious necessity for the blockading
feet TO he in sight in order TO establish
that manifest danger" upon which et-
fective blockade has hitherto been nomi-
nally dependent.
That much is clear enough, but when 1t
comes to disposing generally of past eX-
annie on the ground that current condi-
tions require methods undreamt Of before
neutral countries can hardly he expected
to stand by with absolute Indifference.
The difficulties that have arisen out Of
Germanv's so-called blockade Of the
British coasts and Of the retalatory
methods adopted by her foes were clearly
foreseen by Admiral Mahan, who, while
satisfied that "the yoke imposed by
England on neutrals will never again be
Nborne." was not free from apprehension
y regarding future possibilities, as appears
in this passage.
,- 2 41a { "a
war between maritime nations, an attempt
may be- made bv the one having a great sea
poTcr and wishing 20 break down its enemy s
commerce 10 interpret the phrase "ehectlNe
blockade I'm the manner that best SUITS ITS
interests az the time. 80. Inc ue'eIWlHa-
tion of sucn question viii depend not upon
the weaker belhgcrcnt, but upon neutral pow
ers: 10 Will raise the issue between belilger-
ents and neutral rights; and y the beHlEef-
ent have "a vastly OveTpOwerIng navy ne may
carry his point just as England, Wnen pos
sossing the mastery Of The seas, long refused
to admit the doctrine Of the neutral flag
covering the goods.
Nor was the part of neutrals over
looked in England Testifying before a
royal commission twelve years ago, the
late Professor Westlalle, then president of
the Institute of international Law, dwelt
strongly on their influence in all questions
of this kind Thus. with regard to block
aiding of the British Isles, which he fore
saw as a very possible endeavor on the part
of Britain's foes, the outcome would de-
pend largely on chow far they could actu-
auv carry it out and how far neutrals
would stand their not being able prop
erlv TO carry it out" In word, 1t has
long been evident to all the most acute
observers that tame submission on the
part of ucutrals was what could not rea-
sorably be expected.