Albuquerque morning journal., 1915-11-09
RRITISH WRITER
REGARDS NOTE
AS UNGENEROUS
Authority ON Maritime Law
Admits England Is Wrong
"A One Particular but Says
She Is Fighting for Her Life,

.,.os-,ss JousrAt SPECIAL ltAsso w,stl
r.nl5r Nov. 8 CS.00 p. ny
~,,ma. Gibson Bowles, one of Eng
.,g. hest known writers on mari
.rs law. speakins today with refer
30 the American note said that
Il many respects ne regarded it as
soneandid ungenerous and unfair.
ue was equally severe in his stric-
...res on the British foreign office,
sbirb he declared had invited and
.r,oopHaed new rules of sea warfare
,..fiua ia new principles. without
,,,rraui either from the recognized
,.,. of nations or from amy interna-
bonal instruments.
Aer,.es ON one Point Only.
The contention of the United states
aat Great Britain had not establish
.a an effective blockade he regarded
~ his, as this contention alone he
f,,nd worthy of consideration in the
no,e with the exception Of the com
nl.ip, respecting retained ships sub
soopently released, as the innocent
wore forced 60 bear the expense of
S.tepdon This, MT Bowles said,
ras unjust. though he thought the
matter a small one as compared with
me greater issued involved.
No Effective Blockade.
81 do hold he said, that in the
order OF council. especially in the
.,ggestion that it establishes an et-
fectiva blockade, Sid Edward Grey
has none wrong. that he has under
npen to harass neutrals by methods
n a way not sanctioned by the law
of nations So far ! agree with the
note Nevertheless the note itself is
h many respects ungenerous, unfair
nneoudid an the United States must
remember that We are fighting for
our lives and the liberty of the world
and that this not a time for quibbl-
ing'
Relative to the protest against
ships being seized and taken into pon
merely on suspicion, Mr.. Bowles ar
mes that il is ridiculous to think that
tbey can be effectively examined at
sen, adding
aThe suggestion that vessels
should not be stopped on bare sus-
pcion is nonsensical There can be
only bare suspicion when the vessel
is met and only bare suspicion even
after she has been visited and her
naners her officers and her crew eX-
amined. on no other grounds than
hare suspicion is a murderer ever ar
rested nor is he held guilty until the
court has 40 pronounced.
Saws Statement Is Untrue.
ITO say as the note does, that dur
inc the American civil war there We're
no instances when vessels were taken
into port prior to prize court pro-
ceedngs is to state what is at once
untrue and actually impossible. what
else was il but upon conjectural sus-
pleion that during the civil war the
springbok was brought in and the
ease submitted to a prize court? II
IS the court, ana the court alone that
hangs q murderer or confiscates
cargo, or condemns a ship.
Defends Prize Court.
Another argument suggested
rather than used in the American
note is that British prize courts, for
getful of their duty, which is to adj
minister the law of nations and no
other law whatever, municipal or
otherwise, have nevertheless decided
cases as the British government
wishes, not as that law prescribes'
This reproach is as unmerited by any
English, as it would by any Ameri-
can, prize court
Our courts have repeatedly de-
elared, ana more than once acted on
the principle, that when the will OF