The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-08-04

sea-borne exports and imports of his
 enemy. The contention which I un- derstand the United States Govern
 ment now put forward is that if a bel ligerent is so ctrcunstanced that his
 commerce can pass through adjacent neutral ports easily through ports in his own territory, his oppo- | lnent has no right to interfere, and
 must restrict his measures of blockade in such manner to leave such avenues of commerce still open to his adversary.
 This is a contention which his Ma jesty's Government feel unable to ac- cept and which seems to them unsuS- tainable either in point of law upon principles of international equity.
 They are unable to admit that a bel igerent violates any fundamental principle of international law by ap- | plying a blockade in such way as
 to cut off the enenay's commerce with
 foreign countries through neutral ports if the circumstances render such an application of the principles. of
 blockade thes only means of making 1 it effective. The Government of the
 United States indeed intimates its
 readiness to take into account "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 and recognizes that "the form
 of close blockade, with it's cordon
 of ships in the immediate oh1ng of the blockaded ports, is no longer prac-
 ticable in the fact of an enemy posA
 sessing the means and opportunity to
 make an effective defense by the use
 of submarines. mines and ai1i aft.'' 6. The only question, then, which can arise in regard to the measures resorted to for the purpose of car rying out a blockade upon these ex- tended lines is whether to use your
 Excellency's words, they conform to 1 the spirit and principles of the essence ] of the rules of war; and we shall be
 content to- apply this test to the ac- J ton which we have taken in so far } as it has necessitated interference with neutral commerce
 Civil War Precedent.
 T. It may be noted in this connec- ltion that at the time of the civil war
 the United. States found themselves l under the necessity of declaring a
 blockade of some 5000 miles of coast l line, military operation for which 1 the number fnvessels available was 1 at first very small It was vital to, l the cause of the United States in that great struggle that they should be able Itoacut off sthe trade of the Southern fStates The Confederate armies 1were dependent on supplies from I be obtained without exporting the cotton wherewith to pay for them i gro cut off this trade the United Estates could only rely upon a block I ade The difficulties confronting the I Federal Government were in part due tos the fact that netghborfng neutral lterritory afforded convenient centres from which contraband could be in I troduced into the territory of their
 enemies and from which blockade I running could be facilitated. Tour T Excelfency will no --Gioubt remember : To culty. the old principles relating to
 contraband and blockade were deve1- 1 oped, and the doctrine of continuous 'd voyage was applied and enforced. un- der which goods destined for the enE
 e1hy territory were intercepted be- fore they reached the neutral ports
 from which they were to be re-ex-
 ported.
 S. The difficulties which imposed I upon the United States the. necessity
 Of reshaping some of the old rules
 are somewhat akin tosA9those with
 which the Allies are now faced in
 dealing with the trade of their enemy. Adjacent to Germany are various neu-
 traI countries which afford her con .l venient opportunities for carrying on
 her trade with foreign countries. Her s own territories are covered by net Fl work Of railways and waterways, I which enable her commerce to pass as conveniently through ports in such neutral countries as through n6Gz own.
 A blockade limited to enemy ports would leave open routes by which ev- z cry kind of German commerce could pass almost as easily as through E the ports in her own territory. Rot 2 terdam is indeed the nearest outlet for some of the industrial districts of Germany.
 Blockade Extension Justified. B. As a counterpoise to the free S5lJ send his commerce across a. neutral 1 country without compromising it's neu- , tra-lfty, the other belligerent may fair 2 ly claim to intercept such commerce before it has reached, or after it has ; left, the neutral State, provided. of ; course. that he can establish that the Ill commerce with which he interferes is , the commerce of his enemy and not f commerce which is bona hde destin- ; led for or proceeding from the neutral q State. It seems, accordingly, that ii
 litfbe recognized that a block is in
 certain cases the appropriate meth E ods of interceptfng the trade of an enc my country and if the blockade car 5 only become effective by extending ii to enemy commerce passing through ] neutral ports, such an extension is de- fensibIe and in accordance with prin- ciples which have met with genera a acceptance.
 TO To the contention that such ac. | ton is not directly supported by writ . Ften auth ority, it may be replied that il n is the business of writers on nterna. ? tiona1 law to formulate existing rules a rather than to offer suggestions fol their adaptation to altered circumstan T sces, and your Exce1leiacy will remem n Der the unmeasured terms in whicf n Ia group of prominent internationa I lawyers of all nations condemned the n doctrine which had been laid dowr I byS the Supreme Court of the United ' States in the case Of the Springbok k s a. doctrine upheld by the Claims Com Y mission at Washington in 1873. Bu q the United States and the British T Czovernment took a broader view ant
 Hooked below the surface at the un