Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1915-08-05

II IulduS 10 act IN uulS On-Te
CARELESS of everything but the
righteousness of the cause ant
for them to enthusiastically en-
dorse the one plan which offer,
every prospect of relief from thu
recent debt judgement.
Neutrality and War Supplies
The question of placing an embargo
upon war supplies shipped from thil
country is more comprehensive Ithar
some of its advocates appear to recog
nize. Those who are for peace at any
price would stop the shipment of arms
on the groud thathe should not con
tribute toward the killing Of fellow mer
with whom we have no quarrel, anC
that an embargo would not only keer
our own hands clean, but would at the
same tina hasten the end of the war.
If the question were to be considered
from this point alone, there would be
force in the plea for stopping the sale
OF war materials to belligerents. But
that it would hasten the end of the con-
fiict may seriously be doubted; for the
amount of supplies obtained in this
country is not SO great that the Allies
would not in time be able to supply
themselves. Hence, if they, being
ing stronger in numbers, and poten-
TALLY in materials, are to win in 1.-THE
end, our embargo would tend to pro
long. rather than to shorten the dur
alton the war.
There is, however, another view to
be taken of our exports of war materi-
ais. To place an embargo upon this
action now would be to do what we
have been protesting against Germany IS
doing, in destroying merchantmen with
out provision for the safety of non-com-
batants; that is we shorld be guilty Of
changing the laws of war while the
war is in progress, to the advantage Of
one of the belligerents. If no regard
be had for established costum--which
we dignity by the term, international
law-no country will be able to place
any dependence upon any other count
ry, under any given conditions in the
future. When given custom, having
the force of law, prevails, a nation can
guage its course in conformity with
that custom; but if that custom NAV
be set aside at will by another nation
must conduct themselves with view
to meeting such eventualities. If, for
instance, the trade in arms is recogniz-
ed as legimate, each nation can deter
mine for itself whether it were better
to have complete arms establishment,
with stored up materials sufficient to
carry it through any possible way. or
to buy these war materials as needen.
With trade in war materials forbidden,
however, it becomes necessary for each
nation that arms at(alI to have arms
plants, and reserves of materials suf-
ficient to meet all possible require
ments.
To accept this contention would be to
condone an enormous economic loss;
since such a course would make it
necessary for each country to have an
arms manufacturing plant equal to the
Krupp works of Germany. Suspend
ing the international trade in arms
after war has begun would work an
additional wrong, in that it would pena-
lie those nations that had not alreadv
made themselves independent in the
production of munitions, but had de-
pended upon buying in time of need.
What, for instance, would have become
# Turkey, during her recent war with
italy, had she been unable to buy arms?
Or what would be the fate of Austria
8 she should again be at war with
Germany, and be unable to get war
from abroad? Austria now
protests against the selling of arms by
his country; but should the circum-
tances of 1866 again arise she would
ind herself in sorry plight without
this international trade.
This applies with peculiar force to
he United states. Should it be our
ate to have another international war,
We would not be prepared for it; and
deprived of the right to purchase
var materials abroad we should findl
ourselves sorely handicapped. There
re those who look upon war between
his country and Germany as a possi-
ility. If we are to prepare for such
n eventuality, we must either con-
truct in this country an arms plant
quail to that of the Krupps, or insist
pom the right to buy war materials
broad. The arms embargo is not a
question at all, but.
uestion of international law; and this
ountry must observe that law now, as
he observed it in 1862, when she de-
vered up the Confederate Commits
ion Mason and Slidell, taken from the
British ship Trent by Captain Wilkes.
desirable as it was to hold those men, /
resident Lincoln was farsighted
nough to see that this country could
OF for the sake of temporary advan-
age, override principle for which it
ad contented from the foundation of /,
ne Government. And this fact should
9 kept in mind by those overzalous
artizans who are now seeking to set
side this same principle. It may
. said, therefore, in opposition to an
mbargo on arms that it would not
asten the ending of the war, and would ;
ot decrease the number killed and
ounded. but that it would arbitrarily
lanpe the fortunes of war. that II