Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1915-08-24
COTTON AS c~oNTRABAND
Weighing the Case According to tho
Evidence.

Evidence.
II you haven't read the article by
Hon. Hannis Taylor, published in the
Hearst sunday papers, on the vital
question Of British interference with
American commencement which deals
/ particularly with the proposal To
treat cotton as c~ontraband Of war
let us advise you to get a copy, at once,
and read it carefully and with an open
mind.
You know, of course, who the Hon.
| Hannis Taylor Of Mobile, Ala, is; a
former United States minister to Spain
| and one of the leading authorities in
this country on international law.
Then, let Mr.. Taylor tell you, quietly
| and dispassionately-as a lawyer who
knows his case and the law-some
things that you may not know; but
| which as an American citizen, you
ought to know.
MIR. Taylor bases the whole case on
the Declaration of London, which was
the last authoritative expression on
the rules and agreements regulating
maritime warfare. He points out, OF
course, thai the conference held in
1908, which promulgated this official
international declaration was called by
| Great Britain herself, that it met in
her capital, and that, after the experts
on international law and customs OF
all the nations participating had care
fully threshed out all the questions
at issue, the declaration was voted
unanimously by the delegates present.
These delegates represented the Unit
ed States, Great Britain, France,
| Russia, Germany, Austria, Italy, Spain,
| Holland and Japan.
The United States formally ratified
this declaration Of London in 1912,
| but other countries, including Great
| Brilain-because her constitution
does not provide for such action
neglected to formally ratify the agree
ment; though, as pointed out by eX-
minister Taylor, and also by Rear
| Admiral Stockton, who was the Unit
| ed States representative at the London
| conference. such formal ratification
was rendered unnecessary by the fact
that it had the authoritative weight
due to the unanimous vote or repre-
s~entatives Of all the powers" and be-
cause the British government solemn
" agreed with us that the declaration
was a full, ina and formal restate-
ment Of the rules Of maratime warfare
Note this: a "restatement' Of those
rules; not a laying down of new rules.
And this reinstatement" and final Of
fetal declaration Of how maritime war
fare should continue to be conducted
was made forty-three years after the
close of the civil war in the United
| States, about which Great Britain now
pirates so much.
Moreover it was made, as Mr.. Taylor
points out, latter the use of torpedoes,
submarines, submarine mines I'M 9TH
err means of submarine destruction
were perfectly understood and pro-
vided for" Therefore, Mr.. Taylor
concludes that it is IAN insult to our
intelligence" for Sir Edward Grey to
now contend that new conditions
have made this declaration Of London,
which Great Britain herself brought
about, "inapplicable." He insists that
the discussion Of all cases at issue be
limited to the declaration itself, from
which he quotes Article % in clear
and express terms, as follows:
1.-The following may not be declared
contraband Of war: (1) Raw cotton,
wool, silk, jute, hemp. and other raw
materials Of the textile industries, and
yarns of the same"
With this before us, ex-Minister
Taylor's conclusions are irresistible.
it seems to us-for all except those
who want to see Great Britain come
out victorious in this war, regardless
of their own, or any other, country's
interests-and we quote therefrom,
as follows:
And so the time has arrived at last
when the infatuated who have been
fawning at the feet Of Great Britain,
even to the point Of surrendering IL
right to control the Panama Canal,
can no longer deceive themselves. In
return we have received a blow in
the face from the mailed hand that
always lifts its despotic power to con-
troll the high seas above every other
earthly consideration. To ac-
complish that end she claims: Cd
the right to blockade neutral ports Of
Holland, Denmark, Norway and
Sweden; (2) to declare by her own
municipal ordinance articles contra
band which by the declaration Of Lon
don soiemnly prepared in her own
capital in 1909, were to be exempt
| from seizure as such.
"And yet in the teeth Of that positive
agreement that raw cotton shall
never be made contraband, Great
Britain hunts it down on the high seas
as If it were a wolf ready to devour
instead of clothe the poor and needy.
And so the settled international mari
time law of the world is trampled I'M
der foot by British orders in council,
| arbitrary edicts which issue by virtue
of a certain ancient and despotic
power vested in the privy council act
ing without the authority Of parliament
"Our Atlantic seaboard, which Is
reaping a great harvest, is more than
content to have things remain as they
are, no matter how much the west,
with its vast food products, and
the south with it's vast cotton pro-
ducts may suffer in the meantime.
1t is no use to disguise the issue be-
tween the forces now at work. If
congress could only meet; if the
American people could only enjoy the
benefits Of the power and leadership,
the mere threat of an embargo act
would rectify everything SO far as
Great Britain is concerned, without
the slightest danger of war.