The Watertown weekly leader. [volume] (Watertown, Jefferson County, Wis.) 1912-1917, 1915-06-29
GREAT BR|TA|N'S
NOTE To AMERICA
DEFENDS SEIZURE
Blockade to Be Tightened-No
Relief Is Seen.
NO ANSWER TO CHIEF ISSUES
England Explains Action, But Does
Not Answer United States Pro-
test on Holding American
Vessels.


memorandum to Ambassador Page,
dealing with the complaint of deten-
ton of American cargoes bound for
neutral ports, was made public by the
state department.
State department officials would not
opinion of experts on international
law who have followed the controversy
between the two governments, the
memorandum is not of character to
afford much satisfaction. 1t holds out
little expectation of material relief to
American commerce from the hard
ships inflicted upon it by British regu-
lations and violation of the principles
of international law as pointed out by
the United States in it's note of
March 80. Consequently it's effect,
it is believed, will be rather to sharpen
the edge Of the issue between the two
governments.
Note Merely Explains.
In his note of transmittal, Ambas-
sador Page says that the memoran-
dunn is not intended as an answer to
the principles set forth in the note
of March 80, but merely an "explana-
ton Of concrete cases and the regula-
tons under which they are dealt with. -
The inference would be that a note
from the British foreign office deal
ing with the principles discussed by
the United States in the note of March
80 might be expected later
But Lord Crewe does not say that
it may be. Moreover, as it is con-
strued here by authorities on interna-
tional law, the British memorandum
made public this evening contains dis
tinct denial of certain rights for which
the United States in the note of March
80 contends. So to an extent at least
it must be taken as an answer to that
note.
In the note of March 80 the United
States asserted that a nations SOW
ereignty over it's ships at sea suffered
no diminution In times of war Eek.
cept in so far as the practice and con
sent of civilized nations has limited 1t
w taO ACSO5ulLAOA VI CSl td1nly ClCdI
ly defined rights which it is conceded
may be exercised by nations which
are at war" These admitted rights
of the belligerents are visit and
search, capture and condemnation II
visit and search reveals contraband
and finally the right of blockade OF
enemy ports.
Says Law is Violated.
The complaint of the United States
was that the interference of Great
Britain was not confined within these
rights, but went far beyond them
The principal complaint Of the United
States has been that Great Britain
not content with the right of visit
and search, has held up American
cargoes of noncontraband bound for
neutral ports and taken them into
British ports, where they have been
detained to the great detriment OF
American trade with neutral coun.
tries.
The British offer to pay has not
been accepted by the United States as
full recompense and it certainly has
not been regarded as justifying such
high-handed action. Payment for a
specific cargo does not compensate for
| a continuous trade lost to the United
States by the taking over by Great
Britain Of cargoes and the detention
of ships for protracted periods, there
by causing the loss Of a voyage OF
voyages.
Therefore, the United States said
tc Great Britain in the note of March
80 that such liabilities placed upon q
ship of neutral power were "a dis
tinct invasion of the sovereign rights
of the nations whose ships, trade or
| commerce is interfered with" And
such invasion of the rights of the
United States was vigorously pro.
tested
Ignores Law Question.
Lord CreWe in his memorandum
| makes no reference to the principles
of international law which the United
States demanded that Great Britain
respect and in the view taken here
seeks to override the American pro-
test. He details the concessions
which he says Great Britain has made
to American commerce, such for In.
stance as the payment of 8450,OOO to
various American shippers of cotton.
The rejoinder made by the Washing
ton authorities to this contention OF
Lord Crewe is that the British conces
sions fall short of American rights.
Two paragraphs of Lord Crewe's
| memorandum were considered of spe
cial Importance as indicating that
Great Britain intends to tighten
| rather than loosen, her blockade
| These were:
| His majesty's government will
| be prepared hereafter to give special
| consideration to cases presented tc
| them and involving particular hard
ships if the goods concerned are re
CURED for neutral governments or mu
.f -