The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-04-03
The Submarine and the Trawlers Of
the Tyne.

Tyne trawlers by German suDma-
rlne. reported in yesterdays des-
patches, Il correspondent asks II such
an attack on fishing vessels Is not In
violation Of Germany's treaty obllga-
tons as recorded in the Hague Con-
yention of 1907.
This brings up again the question
Of the validity OF the international
agreements undertaken at the Peace
Conference OF 1907.
It was the intention OF the nations
participating in that conference that
peaceful fishing vessels should he ex-
empt from warlike attack. The third
article OF Convention NJ. in the series
of 1907 Is as follows:
Vessels used exclusively for fishing
along the coast o. small boats employed
in local trade are exempt from capture.
as we'll as their appliances, rigging.
tackle and cargo.
'"They cease to be exempt as soon az
they take any part whatever in host!li-
ties.
1.-THE contracting Powers agree not to
take advantage of the harmless char
acter OF the said vessels in order to use
them for military purposes while pre-
serving their peaceful appearance"
II, therefore, the Tyne trawlers were
not being misused for military pur-
poses their capture, and still more
their destruction. would have violated
the intent of this article. In Conven-
ton NJ, however. as in the other
conventions to which THE Sun has
heretofore referred by way Of illus
rating the chaotic condition of So
called international law. there is a
qualifying article declaring that the
provisions OF the convention apply
only when 'all the belligerents" are
parties to the agreement.
The eleventh convention was duly
signed by the representatives of all
the participating nations except
China, Montenegro and Russia. 1t
was subsequently ratified by Ger.
many. Belgium, Austria Hungary,
France. Great Britain and Japan; but
ii has never been ratified by Russia,
Servia or Turkey. II is therefore not
law" in the present case. So far as
the Hague Convention is concerned
Germany is technically at liberty TO
torpedo innocent and peaceful fishing
craft belonging to any Of the allied
belligerents to the hearts content of
Of war.
THE SUN, we believe. was the first
to point out the effect of the clause
al the belligerents" in exempting
Germany from responsibility. in the
strict legal sense, for many ruthless
acts OF war commonly supposed To
violate her treaty enga gements under
taken at The Hague. We have stead.
lily defended the German Government
from undeserved reproach on this ac-
count. We have also shown the i'm
possibility of protest from Wash.
ington based on Germany's alleged
violation of compact to which this
republic was also party. Such
protest by the United States was for
long time urgently demanded by
many Englishmen and by not few
Americans.
But does the fact thar the ohliga
lions Of international law" ard the
engagements of Hague conventions in.
terfere so little with Grrmanys IA.
vorite methods OF hostile procedure
tighten In any respect Germany's
responsibility to us for numbering in
the name Of war" American citizens
exercising their inallenable rights as
neutrals on the high seas?
Suppose that Berlin should now
think Ii best to decree a war zone
reaching all the way across the At
lantic. Suppose that after warnin.
the Allies that her submarines were
going to sink French and English
fishing vessels wherever found within
this zone "decreed' by Germany; anc
after giving notice to the rest of IN,
world that neutral fishermen mus
take their chances II they were i'm
prudent enough to get in unneces
sarily,' as Or. DERNBIRG so ingeni
Ously puts 1t, between the fightin,
lines in war;" suppose the mytseri
Gus feet OF submerged destroyer
should begin operations on the Bank.
Of Newfoundland.
Suppose then that through som
Seriscopic misunderstanding a Ger