Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1915-09-18
ARABIC CASE
DURING JAP WAR
Representatives Of Packing intsrssts
to Go TO Washington to Protest
Against Inactivity in Regard TO asix-
urss Of Meats by Great Britain -
Former Secretary Of State Sustained
in Similar Protect Made 70 Russia.

anese war, Will be called to the atten-
tion Of the state department in con-
nection with the seizure Of meat
cargoes by the British prize court. Mr..
Faulkner and Harry Veeder. counse!
for Swif. & Co. expect to leave Chi
cago for Washington Monday to enlist
in the assistance Of the government in
the case.
In the case Of the Arabic" said Mr..
Faulkner, "a Russian prize court con-
demned a cargo Of American meat
which had been consigned to Japan.
The court had been animated much
in the same way as the British court in
similar cases, holding the shipper must
prove the consignment was destined to
a neutral port.
Hay Principle Sustained.
John Hay, then secretary Of state,
wired to the American ambassador at
st. Petersburg as follows:
"'This substantive principle Of law
can not be overridden by technical
rule Of the prize court that the owners
of the captured cargo must prove that
no part Of It may eventually come to
the hands Of the enemy's forces. The
proof is of an impossible nature and
It can not be admitted that the alb
sence Of proof. impossible In its nature.
can justify the seizure and condemna-
tion.'
This principle as laid down by Mr..
Hay was later accepted by the Rus
sian government"
Mr.. Veeder explained that the un-
usually heavy shipments to neutral
countries after the war was declared
was due to the fact that Germany
raked these countries dry Of foodstuffs
and the reutrals had to replenish.
Basis For Uitimatum.
This reference to Mr.. Hays dictum
to Russia. it was stated last night,
probably would become part of the
final ultimatum to Great Britain by
the United States on the freedom of
the seas.
The Hay rule was dug up following
the receipt Of the report from Consul
General Skinner at London. explaining
that the packers lost their case be-
cause they refused to accept the burden
of proof that the cargoes were not des-
tined ultimately for Germany. electing
on the contrary to stand by American
law and not the new Interpretation of
law as arbitrarily set
forth by the British orders in council"
English Ruling Absurd"
Concerning the latest development
C. j. Faulkner, Jr.. Of counsel for the
Armours, made the following state
ment:
1.-The English court asked US to ac-
cept the burden Of proving that the
seized goods would not eventually come
into the hands Of the enemies Of Great
Britain. This ruling evidently was
based on the orders In council provid-
ing that the shipper should sustain
such burden, and not the captor.
This means that England could
seize goods consigned to neutrals at
neutral ports and say to the owner:
Prove that they will not eventually
come into the hands of Great Britain's
enemies
Contrary to Law.
"Th!s ia, of course. contrary to the
principles of international law ana 10
common sense.
"The captor must. from the moment
the goods are seized and at all times, be
ready to prove that the goods seized
were subject to capture in order to JUS
tify such seizure. Any other rule Ia
placing an impossible burden on tho
neutral shipper and Its effect would be
to destroy neutral commerce.
vssdsr Demands Action.
Henry veeder, counsel for tho
Swifts, directly charged England with
as "nagrant violation" of international
law as Germany committed In the SUBJ
marine cases. His statement made
after conference with the Packingtown
heads amounted to a demand that tho
United States defy England in tho
meat cases and insist on show down.
In addition to declaring that the
prize courts decision has been
thoroughly inconsistent" Mr.. veeder
said England is now breaking faith
with the world when she repudiates
the principles Of international law to
which she subscribed in the declaration
Of London"
NsutraIs Prepare for War;
Resisting the new order in council
that cargo owners must prove the
goods viii not fall into the hands Of
the enemy at any time. thereby re.
yersing the rule Of international law
since civilized nations went to war,
Mr.. veeder says:
Germany cleaned out the neutral
countries Of Europe. buying food sup
plies when the war first was threat
ened. There was no surplus from
which the neutral nations could draw.
They looked to us.
"How does England know that these
neutral countries are not preparing
for war? None Of them is in a safe
position.
'..As for the consistency Of Engiand's
position in the seizure, take the in