Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-09-19
'ENTUATES UNTESADLE
POSITION OF GREAT BRITAIN

VI POSITION OF GREAT BRITAIN
e OF the packers has accumulated
uutenable position of Great Britain.
which she claims that the packers
ducts. when they left the United
ties, were making substantially q
lht!nuous voyage.
tAn authority on which the State De-
\ tment relies 10 combat this posi-
Mn OF Great Britain is the intcrna-
|Inal law digest OF John Rassett
ore. After discussing the case Of
!h SpringboE and that OF the Essex
IA opinion quoted by Mr.. Moore says:
ITO permit one belligercnt 10 shut
II neutrals from 4 commerce which
NJ other belligerent may open TO them,
n h a commerce not being in contra
HID of war or in evasion of blockade.
lluld impose upon n~--Jal!ty burdens
!, intolera bic, as TO Mnke war, on its
lit. preferN.-.e TO peace. The doctrine
D., 'contipayas voyages also. as thus
Ierpret, !. is open TO all the obiec-
ms of paper blockade: il enables
llpellieerent cruiser to seize all neu-
Ills going TO beillgerent port Il they
,IYgerent, though there be no pre-
II e of blockade OF either colony or
II mother state. Great Britain also,
was urged. had no right to complain
II this relaxation by n hostile SOW
High of his colonial regulations, since
" had repeatedly varied in war her
I.onial policy of trade. relaxing it so
10 enable her colonies TO have the
Vantage OF neutral commerce"
|jt was stated by officials that by the
"a blishment OF n paper blockade" OF
ports of neutrals Great Britain has
.ctically put those ports in the same
SIS as the ports of belligerent. and
brefore assumes the right to stop
ltchant ships with her cruisers.
lIt was added that Great Britain has
Heated TO this government that she
III abides by her laws OF 1896 and
h5, and that her acts need not be
l|arded by this government as "diplo-
lite questions"
HSOLUTE DISAGREEMENT
\ ON POINT IS PREDICTED
lAll that would be left for the United
ties 10 do under this arrangement
luld be to contend vigorously with
eat Britain that there was no justi-
.tion of blockade Of neutral ports,
I,ecially under the assurances given
this country by Germany that she
uld see that foodstuffs sent through
atrial ports were not used by the Ger
in army or navy State Department
licials predict an absolute disagree
mt between England and the United
ties on the point.
liz was learned to-day that the United
ties has fully answered Iii the pend
II note the supplementary contention
the British Foreign Office that, as
\ United States seized British ships
Ting the Confederate war on the
'nnd that their cargoes might get
the confederate States. Great Brit
has ample justification for the ex-
sion Of that policy.
he State Department holds that
es of seizure during the Civil war
re based on exact and undeniable
ormation, not only military buttons
a part of the cargo. but as to their
|tination. 1t was said by a State
bartment Official to-day that when
itary buttons and paraphernalia used
ly in war were found on the vessels
Ipped by the United States their
Inmate destination" was absolutely
fved. This showed, 1t is held, that
| United States never adopted the
ttifcation of suspicion alone as suf
lent to prove ultimate destination Of
cargo.
IN the absence Of Secretary of State
fsing there was no one here who
Iuld say at what time the note, which
\ in shape for transmission, will be
t to Great Britain.