The Lexington intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1901-1949, 1915-08-20
UNITED STATES QUOTES HISTORY REPLYING
TO AUSTRIA-HUNGARY REGARDING MUNITIONS


Following is the text of the American reply to the AustrO-
Hungarian note regarding expectations of arms and ammu-
milton from the United States to the Allies:
The Secretary of State to Ambassador Penfeld:
Department Of State, Washington, August IL, 1915.
Please present a note to the Royal Foreign Office in re-
ply to its note of June 20, in the following sense:
The Government of the United States has given careful
consideration to the statement of the Imperial and ROYAL Gov
eminent in regard to the expectation of arms and ammuni-
ton from the United States to the countries at war with Aus
tria-Hungary and Germany.
The Government of the United States notes with salts
faction the recognition Of the Imperial and Royal Govern
ment Of the undoubted fact that its attitude with regard 70
the export OF arms and ammunition is prompted by its inten-
ton to maintain the strictest neutrality and to conform to
the level OF the provisions of the international treaties, but
IS surprised to find the Imperial and Royal Government implv-
ing thatthe observance of the strict principles of the law I'M
der the conditions which have developed in the present war is
insufficient, and asserting that this Government should 90 be
yond the long-recognized rules governing such traffic by neu-
trals and adopt measures to maintain an attitude of strict
parity with respect to both beligerent parties"
Holds Austria's Claim Novel
10 this assertion of an obligation to change or modify
the rules OF international usages on account of special condi-
tons the Government of the United States cannot accede The
recognition OF an obligation of this sort, unknown to the in
ternahonal practice Of the past, would impose on every neutral
nauon a duty to sit in judgment on the progress of a war and
TO restrict its commercial intercourse with a beIigerent whose
naval successes prevented the neutral from trade with the
enemy.
The contention of the Imperial and Royal Government an
pears to be that the advantage granted to q beIIioerent nv
its superiority on the sea should be eoualized bv tbe nantroI
powers by the establishment of a system of nonintercoursa
with the victor. The Imperial and Royal Government confines
ls comments to arms and ammunition, but, if the principle
for which it contends is sound, it should apply with equal force
to all articles of c~ontraband. A beHigerent controlling the biob
seas might possess an enormous supply of arms and ammu-
nlClon, put be IN want of food and clothing. On the novel nrin-
ciple that equalization is a neutral duty, neutral nations would
be obliged to place an embargo on such articles because one
o! tne oellgerents could not obtain them through CONNER
cha. intercourse.
Cites German Precedents.
But if this principle, so strongly urged by the mperial
ana Royal Government, should be admitted to obtain by rea-
son of the superiority of a benigerent at sea. ought not if tn
operate equally as to a beligerent superior on land? Apply
ing this theory of equalization, a beIigerent who lacks the
necessary munitions to contend successfully on land ought to
be permitted to purchase them from neutraIs. while q beuio-
erent with an abundance Of war stores or with the power To
produce them should be debarred from such traffic.
Manlfestly, the idea of strict neutrality advanced by the
Imperial and Regal Government would involve a neutral ma
ton in a mass of perplexities which would obscure tbo whole
held OF international obligation, produce economic confusion
ana deprive all commerce and industry of legitimate fields of
enterprise already heavily burdened by the unavoidable re-
strictions of war.
In this connection it is pertinent to direct the attention
OF the Imperial and Royal Government to the fact that Aus
trla-Hungary and Germany, particularly the later have DIR
ing the years preceding the present European war produced
a great surplus of arms and ammunition, which thew sold
throughout the world, especially to beligerents. Never DIR
ing Cnat period did either of them suggest or apply the prin-
clple now advocated by the Imperial and Royal Government.
BOur War Sales Recalled.
During the Boer War, between Great Britain and the South
Aferican Republics, the patrol of the coasts of n%eighboring
neutral colonies by British naval vessels prevented arms and
reaching the Transvaal or the Orange Free State.
The allied Republics were in a situation almost identical in
that respect with that in which Austria Hungary and Ger
many find themselves at the present time. Yet, in spite of the
commercial isolation of one b~eligerent,G Germany sold to Great
Britain and the other beligerents hundreds of thousands of
knOs OF explosives, gunpOwder, cartridges, shot and weapons.
and II is also known that Austria Hungary also sold similar
munitions to the same purchasers, though in small quantities..
While, as compared with the present war, the quantities were
smaI( a table of the sale is appended), the principle of neutral
ity involved was the same.
II at that time Au~stria-Hungary and her present ally had
to sell arms and ammunition to Great Britain on the
ground that to do would violate the spirit of strict neutral
the Imperial and Royal Government might with greater
consistency and greater force urge its nresent contention