The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1915-04-10

WI SiCilS > pOTlS ana COASTS ana TO
capture and condemn any vessel
taken when trying to break the block
detain and take to it's own ports for
judicial examination all vessels
which it suspects for substantial rea-
son to be engaged in ~contraband SER
vice and condemn them if the sus-
piciop is sustained. Blu such rights,
long clearly defined both in doctrine
and practice, have hitherto beer held
to be the only permissible exceptions
to the principle Of equality of sover-
eighty on the high seas as between
belligerents and nations not engaged
in war.
at is confidently assumed that his
maJesty's government will not deny
That it is a rule sanctioned by general
practice that, v though a blockade
should exist and the doctrine of con-
traband as to unblockaded territory
be rightly enforced, innocent ship
ments may be freely transported to
and from the United States through
neutral countries to belligerent terri
tory without being subject to the pen
alties of c~Ontraband traffic or breach
of blockade, much less to detention,
requisition or cOnfscation.
Moreover the rules of the declara-
ton of Paris in 1S56-among them
that free ships make free goods
will hardly at this day be disputed by
the s~ignatories of that solemn agree
ment.
His majesty's government, like the
government of the United States. have
often and explicitly held that these
rights represent the best usage Of
warfare in the dealings Of belligerents
with neutrals at sea. In this connec
ton / desire to direct attention to the
opinion of the chief justice of the
United States in the case of the Pc
terhof, which arose out of the Civil
war, and to the fact that that opinion
was unanimously sustained in award
or the arbitration commission of 1871,
to which the case was presented at
the request of Great Britain. From
that time to the declaration Of London
OF 1909. adopted with notifications of
the order in council Of the 23rd of
October, last, the rights have not been
seriously questioned by the British
government. And no claim on the
part of Great Britain Of any justiflca-
ton for interfering with these clear
rights of the United States and it's
citizens as neutrals could be admitted.
ITO admit it would be to assume an
attitude of immortality towards the
present enemies Of Great Britain
which would be obviously Inconsistent
with the solemn obligations Of this
government in the present circum-
stances, and for Great Britain to make
such a claim would be for her to
abandon and set at naught the prin.
ciples for which she has consistently
and earnestly %contended in other
times and circumstances.
THE note Of his majesty's principal
secretary of State for foreign affairs
which accompanies the order in coun.
Gil and which bears the same date
notifies the government of the United
States Of the establishment of a
blockade which is, if defined by the
terms Of the order in council. to in.
clude all the coasts and Iorts Of Ger
many and every port Of possible ac-
cess to enemy territory. But the noveI
and quite unprecedented feature OF
that blockade, if we are to assume il
be properly so defined, is that it en-
braces many neutral ports and coasts
bars access to them and subjects all
neutral ships seeking to approach
them to the same suspicion that would
attach to them were they bound for
the ports of the enemies of Great
Britain, and to unusual risks and pen
allies.
1T is manifest that such limita-
tons, risks and liabilities placed upon
the ships of a neutral power on the
high seas, beyond the right of visit
and search and the right to prevent
the shipment of ~contraband already
referred to, are q distinct invasion OF
the sovereign rights Of the nation
whose ships, trade or commerce are
interfered with.
The government Of the United
States is of course not oblivious to the
great changes which have occurred
in the conditions and means Of naval
warfare since the rules hitherto gov
erning legal blockade were formu-
lated. 1t might be ready to admit