Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1915-02-27

property and to secure to Ameri-
can citizens the full enjoyment of
their acknowledged rights on the
high seas
1t is safe to assume that this warn
ing will not be disregarded and that
the "recklessness' with which the Ger
man plans are to be executed will stop
short Of the torpedoing of American
ships. 1t might be wise precaution,
however, for the German government
to guard against the possibility Of such
an accident" by promulgating a de-
cree announcing that, if an American
vessel should be destroyed, the officer
performing the exploit shall be decor
ated with the iron cross for his cour-
age and summarily hanged for his
rocklessness.
1t Is to the credit of German candor
that no attempt is made by the imper-
ial government to justify its procedure
on the grounds of international law. It
does not pretend. as some of it's apol-
ogists are doing, that the war zone in
stituted by it is in effect a blockade.
Such position is clearly untenable.
For in international law blockade is
blockade--not psychological con-
dition,' not reign of terror, but an
actual investment of the enemy's ports
with a force maintained continuously
at strength sufficient to turn back
neutral commerce; and the right of
the blockading force is to turn back,
not to destroy, the commerce which
1t aims to prevent.
But the worst aspect of the "blood
and IRON policy upon which Germany
has entered is not the disregard Of
neutral rights-indefensi as this is
but the cynical violation of public
right in the destruction Of ships,
whether neutral or belligerent, with
their crews and passengers; for this
not to mince matters-is neither more
nor less than piracy. Nothing is bet
ter established in international law
than the principal that, where the ex-
igencies of naval warfare require the
destruction, instead of the capture, of
an enemy merchant vessel, "The cap
tor is bound to provide for the safety
of all persons on board" To act in
disregard of this humane principle is
q. plain reversion to barbarism which
no exigency can excuse and which is
bound to react disastrously on any ma
ton which practices it.
Is it necessary to remind Great
Britain that the application of the lex
talionis can no more be tolerated from
her than from her enemy? One wrong
begets another but does not excuse 1T.
If it is settled law that an enemy mer-
chant ship shall not be destroyed with
out first securing the safety of the per-
sons on board, it is equally well set
tied in the laws of nations that food
stuffs and other innocent goods in
tended Tor the civil population OF
bellige1ent state shall have free pass
age in neutral ships. For Great Brit
ain to confiscate the cargo of the Will
helmina, if the fact is established that
the goods are not for the use Of the
military or naval forces Of Germany,
or to declare all foodstuffs intended
for Germany contraband of war, would
be as high-handed, if not as savage a
proceeding as that of Germany in wag-
ing her war on British and neutral
commerce. 1t is to be hoped that our
government will notify Great Britain,
as we have notified Germany, that we
shall tolerate no infringement of the
acknowledged rights of American
ships on the high seas, that we stand
for and will maintain the public right
which this war has done SO much to
impair.
err and the Philadelphia Public Ledger.)