The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1915-03-24
UNITED STATES NOT SATISFIED.
FRENCH AND ENGLISH EMBARGO
ON COTTON NOT EXPLAIN
ED.
May File Protest Against blockade as
Commerce Between Ncutrals is I'm
mune Prom Interference at Hands
OF Beiiigerents-Thc law rs Laid
Down I'm SOS.


and France, In the British order In
councN and accompanying notes. have
not answered questions propounded
TO them as to what warrant there Is
under international law for the es-
tabiishment OF an embargo on all
commercial intercourse indirectly and
Indirectly between Germany and neu-
trail countries.
IL was stated officially ut the state
department today that this govern
ment still does not know whether the
action OF the allies is intended % a
legal blockade or whether ordinary
rules OF contraband and non-contra-
hand are TO be their legal basis for
future detentions. On n determina-
ton OF this question probably will de-
pend not only the nature OF any steps
TO be taken by the United States now
but also the basis for damage claims
arising out OF interruptions to Ameri-
can commerce.
f'NfoA'hb 'lo plottst tO Dt sent
90 Great Britain and France. the DO
sition OF the United States substan-
tally is as follows:
4. IL the action OF the allies is q
blockade, all commerce directly with
Germany can be halted by making
the blockade effective, certain
radius OF activity" being allowed for
the blockade warships of the Ger
man coast because OF the newly de-
vsioped activities OF submarines. But
there can be no legal blockade of
the coast OF neutral countries of Eu-
rope contiguous to those at war un-
der any circumstances and commerce
between the United States and neu-
trails. especially in non-contraband.
should be free from interruption. ir-
respective OF ultimate destination.
4. III the action Is not a blockade
then there exists no legal right to de-
tain cotton or other non -contraband
cargoes even when consigned directly
OF conditional contraband be Justly
interrupted unless proved, though
consigned TO Germany. TO be destined
for the use OF it's belligerent forces
and not It's civilian population. I'm
der the same circumstances. too. there
Is no legal basis for OBTAINING cargoes
consigned from the United States to
neutral countries of Europe II con-
tanning cotton or non-contraband
goods. irrespective OF ultimate desti-
nation. Similarly the allies can not
under the previously accepted prin-
ciples OF international law interrupt
shipment OF foodstuffs and other con-
ditonal contraband en- route between
the United States and neutral coun-
tries unless clearly proved TO be GO
Ing over land to the belligerent forces
OF Germany and not its civilian popu-
iation.
.. Neutral countries OF l. rope may
declare embargoes I'm reexportation OF
con:raband or non-contraband. thus
preventing supplies from reaching
Germany. With this sovereign right.
the United States does not take issue,
but IL will insist on it's right to ship
to neutral countries. placing the bur.
den OF stopping further progress on
the latter nations themselves.
In considering the foregoing propo-
sitions. officials realize that Great
Britain and her allies have set up
the claim that their actions constitute
retaliatory measures against Germany.
but this. In the view OF tho Ameri-
can government. does not affect the
status OF international law as be-
tween the United sttaes and the bell
bgerents.
The American attitude has not been
changed materially as a result Of ex-
plantations in the exchange OF notes
with Great Britain and France.
After inqulring what would be the
disposition OF various kinds OF ship
ments. the American government
asked: Upon what principles of In
ternational law could 1t rest?"
And upon what rule. IL no block
sde is maintained and declared" IL
contained. could the cargo OF n
neutral ship sailing out OF Il German
port be condemned? II II Is not con-
demned. what other legal course Is
there but To release t?"
Great Britains answer has indl-
Gated that the cargoes diverted into
British ports and owned by ncutrals
must be restored To their owners but
this will not AFFECT the insstence oc
the United States on the legal rights