The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1915-08-16
tional disputes.


.Perceivinx. a. II does. that the
adoption OF the principle that IL
l the duty OF . neutral To prohibit ths
sale OF arms and ammunition 10 =
@sr .cSId oS n.vIs.s ns siSs the
vantage to the bslliFerept which en,
coura Ged the manufactufs OF. mum
tions In time OF peace and which han
laid IN vast store: o. srms anu I the
government OF the United states Is
convinced that the adoption or tne
/ theory would force militarism In the
worid and work sFsinss that Ss., rn'y sno
purpose OF all nations which eSait
Justice and right progress In their
relations. with one another.
The soyernment of the United
| fer a reason why IL has advocated
and practiced trade In munitions OF
war. wishes to be understood as
/ speaking with no thought OF ex-
With regard to the circumstances OF
/ the present war. but as merely put
ting frankly. the argument In this
matter which has been conclusive In
determining the policy OF the United
while the practice OF nations. 80
well illustrated by the practice OF
Austria Hungary and Germany dur,
the manifest evil which would result
from a change OF the practice render
compliance with the suggestion of
the Imperial and royal government
out of.the question. certain ssssru 4, = :
statement a. for its contentious can
not be passed without comment.
These assertions are substantially as
o. That the expectation of arms
and ammunition from the United
states TO beliigerents contravenes
the preamble OF The Hague conven-
ton number Is OF 1907
iG That II is consistent with the
refusal OF this government to allow
delivery OF supplies TO vessels OF war
on the high seas.
(3) That according to all authori-
ties on International law who con-
Germ themselves more properly with
the question. expectation should be
prevented when this traffic assumes
such q form or such dimensions that
the neutrality. OF nation becomes
"As 10 the assertion that the eN-
portation of arms and ammunition
contravenes the preamble Of The
Hague convention No. IL Of 1907. this
l. made to the iaSt paragraph OF the
preamble, which IL as follows
Seeing that in this category of
ideas. these rules should not In prin-
war by q neutral power. except In
case where experience has shown the
necessity for such q change for tht
protection OF rights OF that power
chance t the rules laid down by tn,
convention. one OF which. II Should
he noted. explicitly declares that
neutral II not bound to prohiou IN
expectation Of contraband of war
the necessity OF neutral power t.
do 90 In order to protect its owl
rights. The right and duty to de-
termine when this necessity exists
fests with the neutral not with a
ana.scry n.nsras power does
not avail itself of the right. bel
liGerent 10 not privileged TO COM
plain. for In doing so IL would he In
the. position Of declaring TO the neu-
trail power what Is necessary TO pro-
tect that powers own rights. The
imperial and royal government can
not but perceive that complaint OF
this nature would invite just rebuke
consistency OF the course adopted by
this government in relation to the
expectation OF arms and ammunition
and that followed In not allowing
to ships OF war on the high seas. IL
In only necessary to point out that
the prohibition OF supplies TO ships OF
war rests upon the principle that
neutral power must not permit its
shores to become naval base for
either beiliEerent A warship may
under certain restrictions obtain fuel
and supplies In q neutral port once
In three months. To permit merchant
supplies more often than, three
months and In unlimited amount
would defeat the purpose OF the rule
and might constitute the neutral ter
ritory q naval base. Furthermore.
trn
Austro- Hungarian ship OF war has
sought TO obtain supplies from a port
In the United States either directly
or indirectly. THIS subject has. how.
imperial German government. to
which the position OF this govern
ment was fully set forth Dec -. 1914
I'm view Of the positive assertion
In the statement Of the imperial and
royal government as 10 the unanim-
ity OF the text writer's as to the ex-
portation of contraband being un-
neutral. this government has caused
pal authorities on international laws
to be made As a result OF this ex-
animation IL has come to the con-
clusion that the imperial and royal
government has been misled and has
Inadvertently made an erroneous as
seption. Less than one-iifth OF the
authorities advocate unreservediy the
prohibition OF the export Of contra
band Several or those VINO cOnsft-
tute this minority admit that the
practice Of nations has been other
wise. IL may not be inopportune TO
direct particular attention TO the
declaration Of the German authority.
Paul Ieinicke. who states that. at the
beginning Of q war. DelliRerents have
never demonstrated against the en-
actment Of prohibitions on trade in
cortraband but adds but such pro-
hibttios may be considered as viola
tons OF neutrality or at least as un-
friendly acts. II they are enacted
during a war with the purpose to
close Unexpectedly the sources Of
supply TO a party which heretofore
had relied on them
The government of the United
States deems u unnecessary to ex-
tend further. at the present time. a
statement TO the Austrian Hungarian
government. The principles Of inter-
national law. the practice Of nations
the national safety of the United
States and other nations without
great military and naval establish
ments. the prevention Of increased
armies and navies. the adoption Of
peaceful methods for the adjustment
~ International differences and nras-
! ~. neutrality itself are opposed to
! the prohibition by a neutral nation OF
the expectation OF arms ammunition
\ or other munitions OF war 10 beIli-
gerent powers during the progress
| "fsigned)