Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-11-08


inE 'thc least possible amount Of in
convenience to persons engaged in leg
itirnatc trade" would In practice not
unJustinably infringe upon the neutral
rights of American citizens
1T is. therefore, a matter of regret
says the note, that this hope has not
been realized, but that on the contrary.
interferenccs with American ships and
cargocs destined in good faith to neu-
trail ports and lawfully entitled to pro-
ceeh have become increasingly vexa-
lions. causing American shipowncrs and
American merchants to complain to
this government OF the failure to take
steps TO prevent and exercise OF bel
ilEerent power in contravention OF
thcir just rights AS the measures
complained of proceed directly from or
derS issued by the British government
are executed by British authorities. and
arouse reasonable apprehension that.
IL not resisted, they may be carried to
an extent even more injurious to Amer
lean interests this government directs
ment to the following considerations I"
POINTS OF UNITED STATES.
IN NUMBERED PARAGRAPHS
Here follow in numbered paragraphs
the points made by the United States
Summarized they are:
]. The statistics presented by Great
Britain to prove an increase rather than
decrease in American trade "rail
10 take into account the increased price
of commodities resulting from q state
Of war or to make any allowance for
the dininution in the volume Of trade
which the neutral countries in Europe
rcYiously had with the nations at war"
: Detcntions by Great Britain have
not beer uniformly based on proofs
obtained at the time OF seizure, hut
many vessels have been detained while
search was made for evidence" The
question has been one of "cvidcnce 70
support the belief of-in many cases a
pare suspicion of-enemy destination,
or occasionally of enemy origin of the
goods involved
Attention is directed with regard
to search of neutral vessels at sea TO
IN" instructions issued to the naval
commanders of the United states Great
hritain, Russia, Japan. Spain, Germany
and France from lsSS to the beginning.
OF the present war to show that search
in port was not contemplated By The
- -' ''''''' Va any ol lDtSr COunITieS.'
l An cXamii'ation OF the opinion of
the most eminent text writer's on the
laws Of nations shows that they give
practically no consideration 10 the
question of search in port outside of
prize court procccdings."
.. Answering the assertion Of r;r,,t
britain thar the position of the United
rIl nf
inconsistent with it's practice during
the Civil War, the note saws this &c
based upon 'nisconception.' a care
ful search Of the records shows conclu-
,SiTely that there were no instances
when vessels were brought into mort
Tor search prior TO lnstitut.nr prize
court proceedings" and that captures
We're not made upon other grounds
than evidence found on the shin under
Investigation, and not upon circu0-
stances asccrtained from external
sources" 1t is here that Secret ,rv
Lansing aprcnds a copy OF the ins,ruc
ions issued TO American naval officers
on August IS. 1852.
CITES RECENT REPORT
OF L. :. NAVAL ENPERTS
g. In answer to the British contcn-
ton that conditions relating to the
size and seaworthiness of modern car-
rlers justify bringing vessels into port.
there is cited the report OF a board
OF United states naval experts. lust
made, III which ii is declared that IL Is
not necessary 10 remove every mack
age o! ships cargo" TO establish the
character and nature of her trade: that
the facilities for boarding and inspcc-
tioh OF modern ships are in fact.
greater IMAM in former times, and that
70 permit ships to be taken into mort
would be a direct aid to the bclIig-
cFthts concerned. in that il would re-
tease belIiEerent vessel overhaulint.
the neutral from its duty of search and
set ii free for further belliEcrent
operations"
'-S-'. These points deal with new pro
cedures III the prize courts. the effect
OF which the United States comDlains
Is 10 subject traders to risk of loss.
oehhS ana expense so great and so bur
ueNSonlc as TO practically destroy much
OF me export trade of the United states
to neutral countries OF Europc."
io-ll. These discuss the question of
the burden OF proof as TO the noncou-
trahand OF goods CONSIGNED TO order -.
the United States arguing that none or
the cases cited by Great Britain proves
that the burden OF proof can rightly
be made TO rest upon the claimants.
~. The greatly increased imports of
neutral countries adjoining Great Rrit-
ans enemies cannot be accepted as
laying down just or legal rule Of evil
dence' that commodities are destined
for transportation to the belligerents
such rule. it is argued, "offers too
great opportunity for abuse by the bel
ligerents." and is opposed ito those
fundamental principles of justice which
are the foundation of the jurisprudence
or the United States and great Britain"
h. Attention is directed to the fact
that Great Britain admits that her ex-
ports to neutral countriey have also
materially increased since the present
war began. Thus Great Britain :"
says the note. "concededly shares in
creating condition which is relied
upon as sufficient ground to Justify
the interception of American goods
destined to neutral European ports. If
British exports to those ports should
DC stu further increased. it is Obvious