The Washington times., 1915-08-04
MAINTAIN SEA RIGHTS.

''se ~ss(~y 90
MAINTAIN
For France and Great Britain have
disagreed widely In many matters az
fecting application Of the law of con-
traband. blockade. and general rights
at sea- England and the United States
have been the most advanced nations
in the world, ever since the civil war
at least. in maintaining the right OF
nation to make the utmost use OF Its
sea power. even though injury be In
!iicted on neutrals, In order to win In
war.
The British government. though 1t
sympathized with the South during our
civil war. was scrupulously correct in
its diplomatic attitudes. always keep
ing In mind that every concession 1t
might then make toward strengthening
the privileges Of naval power would
accrue to It's own benefit In future
wars In which her own dominating
naval force would be the right arm ot
the empire.
After waiting a half century. Britain
Is now getting the benefit OF the FOR.
bcarance she displayed during the clNii
war. She Is occupying exactly the po-
sition the North assumed " Zen 1t block
AIDED the South. The North insisted on
making some rules that fairly TOOK the
breath away from British commercial
interests, and 1t was not always easy
for the London government to satisfy
ship and cargo owners with what thcy
denounced as q weak-knced attitude be-
fore the Washington authorities. .
To this day there are thousands OF
well-informed Englishmen who think
their governments acquiescence In pre-
porterous doctrines laid down at Wash
ington was a demonstration of unhtness.
Lord Palmerston. then head OF the gov, 3,
ernment. would have been well pleased
both ne and his foreign secretary. Lord
John Russell, received many Of the
slirEs and arrows Of contemptuous
criticism because they didn't enforce
what the commercial classes considered
was accounted In England man pecu-
l!nrly distinguished, because he Eener-
ally got what he wanted In these re-
Serds
Code Of Maritime Law.
But the day has come for the vindi-
cation Of Palmerston and Russell be-
fore the very British classes who re-
viled them. Their policy permitted the
Of the very code Of mari
time law to which Britain today appeals
In her time OF greatest trial.
That Is why the London government
has been intrusted by the allies with
American shipping. There have been
some few cases OF French interference
with American vessels: but they are
very infrequent. and 1t Is pretty deh-
nitely understood that the conduct OF
all the discussions has been purposely
turned over to Britain.
The American Government. In protest.
ing against British interference with
American trade to neutral ports taxes
to that which 1t took In civil war times:
In this regard It is fairly to be said
that England Is the one Consistent
power. Germany, In sinking the William
p. Frye. violated her treaty of 1873 with
this country. The treaty was incon-
venient. 30 1t was brushed aside.
Reversing Position.
The United States in sustaining It's
right to ship to blockaded Germany.
through neutral ports-for that Is what
II amounts to-is fatty reversing its po-
sition Of half a century ago. France.
which never acauiesced in the doctrine
of the continuous voyage and It's inpli-
United States during our war-iS now
on the other side of that question. Eng
land alone is reasonably consistent
a government when 1t changes front on
a great principle of this sort were nicely
illustrated in an incident In the civil
war The Emily St. Pierre. a British
ship. was seized trying to get into
the master. steward and cook. were
taken off. and q prize crew of fifteen
were put aboard. with orders to take
her into Philadelphia and before
prize court.
on the voyage northward. the three
members Of the vessels crew managed
to get hold Of weapons. took the prize
crew by surprise. and, despite the dis
parity OF numbers. actually got posses
sion of the ship. The fifteen men of the
prize crew were thrust into irons, and
the three captors undertook the task
of navigating her back to Liverpool.
Before long some of the captives on
board. firing of their durance In arms
and the brig, pledged themselves to "be
they should be released. They were re-
leased. but there were only three or
four OF them. and not one a sailor Yet
the vessel was taken home. through a
long and stormy voyage. Its story is
one of the wonder tales Of the sea.
Act of Piracy!
Arrived at home to be lionized, the
crew were greatly downcast when the
American Government demanded that
return the vessel to the custody
Of the American prize court. charging
that the rescue was an act Of piracy
The correspondence was getting tedi-
BUS, with each government insisting on
It's position the American, that the
vessel be restored; the British that 1t
was not the governments affair. and
that 1t couldn't be done. Finally
curious thing happened. An attache Of
the American legation in London. por-
ing over records and precedents. discov-
cred an exactly similar case that hap
pened in the year 1900. An American
vessel was captured by a British war
ship for blockade running; turned over
10 a prize crew rescued ny her own
crew. and sailed back home in safety.
demanded its restoration, and
he Washington Government peremptor-
ly refused
That ended the negotiation over the
Emily St. Pierre. Washington didn't feel
disposed completely to reverse itself,
and the discussion closed abruptly.
Before the civil war. the law of con-
Iinuous voyage as laid down by Lord
stowall In the British courts was. that