Iditarod pioneer., 1915-03-13
A LAWYERS ANALYSIS
 OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR WAR
lTacoma Ledger

If there were a supreme court of ClVlllZa- ton and the court had before 1t the evl dence contained in the British and German White Books, the Russian Orange Book and the Belgian Gray Book, would the verdict be in favor of the double alliance or the triple entente? James NJ. Beck, former as sistant attorney general of the United States, and one of the leaders of the New York city bar makes an impressive analysis of the evidence, as he finds it in the state papers, and reaches what he believes would be the conclusion of the supreme court of civilization.
 It is to be understood that bis analysis Is based on the case as made up by the diplomatic notes exchanged by the powers before the outbreak of the great war and since published There may yet come to light other evidence Austria Hungary has issued no book like the White Book of Great Britain or the Orange Book of Russia, nor has France issued such a book. It would be interesting to know why those two coun- tries, one on each side of the conflict, have preferred not to publish the notes sent and received by their diplomats. Austria did give to the world her ultimatum to Servla, but very little else of diplomatic nature has been made pubic.
 The publication of the discussions of their chancellories by Great Britain, Germany, Russia and Belgium signifies that each ot the countries recognizes a decent respect i, so the opinions of mankind' should be shown. Each is desirous of the support Of world opinion They all recognize the ex- istence of such a thing as international mo- rality.
 In MT. Becks notable argument based on study of the diplomatic papers he assumes there is such a thing as international mo rality, though this is challenged by writers like Bernhard, who hold that moral con alterations must be suborChnated to military necessity or manifest destiny.
 Inasmuch as Prussia, France, Austria, England and Russia in 1889 became the guarantors of the perpetual neutrality of Belgium, and Bismarck, as chancellor of the German empire, reaffrmed 1t Tn loI0; ln- asmuch as the German secretary of state and German minister of war Tn 1912 ex- pressed Germany's resolve to respect the conventions; and inasmuch as the German chancellor in his speech before the relchstag August f. 1914, admitted the violation of international law and said necessity knew no law, frankly acknowledging wrong was being done to Belgium, MT. Beck concludes that the verdict of the supreme court ot civilization would be speedily and lnexo1, ably against Germany ln thls matter ana would justify Great Britain.
 Mir. Beck's argument is more remarkable when he takes up the question ot whether Austria was justified in declaring war agalnst Servia and whether Germany was Justlhed in declaring war against Russia and France; He asserts that a court would be impressed not only by the documents made pubic. but "also by the significant omissions of documents known to be in existence" lie says that apparently the official defense Of Great Britain and Russia does not show any failure to submit all the documents ln 1 their possession, "but the German White l paper on its face discloses the suppression