The star-independent. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1904-1917, 1915-01-25
Secretary Bryan'S An
swer to Charges That
us. Was Discrimina.
tiDgAgainstG Germans
.MISCONCEPTION
is SUMMARI
rs Business of q Belligerent Operating
on High Seas, Not Duty of Neu-
trail, to Prevent Contraband From
Reaching Enemy

Washington, Jan. 25.-Senator
Stone, chairman of the Senate Com
mittee on Foreign Relations, arranged
to incorporate IN the records of the
Senate to-day the long reply which he
received from Secretary Bryan defend
ing the Washington government s in
depreciation of its rights and duties
as q neutral in the present war.
The letter from the Secretary of
State prepared after consultation with
President Wilson, Counsellor Lansing
and the legal officers of the govern
ment constituted the administration s
answer to those who have been charg-
ing in numerous letters to the State De-
partment as well as in the press and
public speeches that the American gov
ernment IS neutrality Disseminated
against Germany and Austria.
Summarizes Popular Misconception
Secretary Bryan summarized popular
misconceptlon on this point and ex-
planned that the superiority thus far
of the British naval power had in real
ity been responsible for the inability
of Germany and Austria to fare as well
as their opponents in matters of ammu-
milton and contraband.
''1t is the business, he wrote, "of
billigerent operating on the high
seas not the duty of neutral to pre-
vent contraband from reaching an
enemy Those in this country who
sympathize with Germany and Austria
Hungary appear to assume that some
obligation rests upon this government
in the performance Of its natural duty,
to prevent all trade in contraband and
thus to equalize the difference due to
the relative naval strength of the bel
ligerents. No such obligation exists;
it would be an unneutral act, an act of
partiality on the part of this govern
ment to adopt such policy, if the ex-
ecutive had the power to do so. If
Germany and Austria cannot import
contraband from this country, it is not
because of this fact, the duty of the
United States to close its markets to
the allies. The markets OF this country
are open upon equal terms to all the
world, to every nation, belligerent or
neutral
Explains Administration Policies
While the letter was devoted largely
TO answering criticisms it revealed
many features of the administration 3
policies hitherto unexplained.
lne Washington government has now
announced Itself as opposed to legisla-
tion prohibiting the ex ort OF munitions
OF war. Other than the belief that the
passage of such legislation would be
unneutral if passed during the prog
ress of war, high officials here con
tend that such a law even after the
conclusion of the present conflict would
IN reality foster the growth of militar-
ism. They point out that weak nations
which might have depended in emer-
gencles on purchasing war supplies from
the United States would be compelled
to keep their armies constantly on a
war footing in respect to supplies, in
Volvlng tremendous expenditures.
The letter reveals also that the Unit
ed States has taken the position that
1t cannot permit belligerent vessels to
remove from American shics on the
high seas any passengers even though
they be Germans or Austrians, nor can
promises be exacted from them not to
participate in the war. Such protest
has been sent to France as result of the
search of American ships plying be.
tween two ports in Colombia.
Canadian Request Refused
Officials explained to-day that the re.
quest of the Canadian government for
permission to transport "war equip
ment' across Alaska which had been
refused, as disclosed in Secretary
Bryan s letter, referred to a shipment
OF guns from Northern Canada.
The fact that both Japan and Great
Britain had been asked to remove their
warshlps from proximity to Honolulu
and New York, respectively, and that
they acceded to the requests, attracted
attention here, in view of the possibil-
ity that such requests might be repeat
ed because of reports that belligerent
ships were again lowering near to the
American coast.
The Washington government s pro-
nouncement in Secretary bryan s letter
on the question of loans was received
with much interest because of the many
constructions which had been placed on
the administration s position. The let
ter states that so far as the State De-
partment is advised no war loans have
been made by foreign governments
since President Wilson announced his
disapproval of such transactions. The
purchase of supplies through the estab-
lishments of credits are regarded by
Secretary Bryan as purely commercial
transactions and not Objectionable.
Great Britain, France and Russia are
understood to have established many
million dollars worth of credits for war
aIInnlies with American firms