The Washington times., 1915-08-03

was eStaDnShed, OF DclilBercnt
seizing a neutral ship, bound from
one neutral port to another neutral
port, from which it was believed the
cargo was to be transported over
land to the enemy belligerent.
Here is what the Supreme Court,
Chief Justice Chase writing the de-
cision, actually said in the deciding
sentences of the Peterhof case.
the sentences that Senator Smith
suppresses so as to give the i'm
preston that the case was decided
exactly contrary to the fact:
"We are obliged to decide that the
portion of the cargo which we have
characterized as COZ. traband must be
condemned. .
"And it is an established rule that
the part of the cargo belonging to
the same owner as the contraband
portion must share its fate. So,
much Of the cargo of the Peterhof,
therefore, as actually belonged to
the owner of the artillery harness
and the other contraband goods,
must be also condemned"
1t will be noted by Senator Smith,
and by anybody else who will take
the trouble to familiarize himself
with the great literature of these
cases, that in the Peterhof case was
established exactly the right to do
what the allies are doing to cotton:
to seize the ship, take it to prize
fcourt, condemn the contraband in the
cargo, and give compensation for
the rest. There is nothing in the
law that requires a belligerent
power to permit an intermediate
neutral port to be used as con-
venience in breaking a blockade.
This is the law that the United
States itself laid down. Great Brit
ain accepted it. Even if the goods
are to be delivered to the neutral
port Of destination by sea, and
thereafter transported by land to
the enemy belligerent, they may be
seized, as in the Peterhof case. This
is precisely parallel to the allies
seizure of ships carrying goods to
neutral ports of Holland, Denmark,
etc. If the facts justify the con-
clusion that they are intended for
the enemy, contra6and may be con-
fiscated under the rules laid down by
our Supreme Court; non-contraband
articles in the cargo, owned by the
owner of the contraband, become in
fected with the taint of contraband,
and may be condemned; and the
non-contraband and non-infected
parts of the cargo may be appro-
priated on payment of the value.
That is just what Great Britain and
her allies are doingbwith our cotton.
Early in the civil war Mr.. Sew
ard, as Secretary of State, called
the British governments attention
to the fact that Havana, Nassau,
Cardenas (Cuba), and other neutral
ports close to the Southern ports
were suddenly enjoying an immense
increase of their trade with Eng
land; and it was pointed out that
this justified presumption that they
were getting articles destined to
pass the blockade and get into the
South.
This is exactly what the British
government has lately been calling
to the attention of the United
States: that our trade with the neu-
tral countries of northern Europe
has been vastly swollen since the war
began, and that it is common knowl-
edge that it has been swollen by
the quantities of blockade
goods intended for Germany.
People familiar with the language
used by the British government in
its various notes to the United
States on this subject have not
failed to observe that the London
foreign Office has a great liking for
the solemn employment of argu-
ments and even approximate phrase
ology taken from American notes to
England during the civil war. The
fact is that the boot is on the othe,
leg, now, and that England is hand.
ing back to us the self-same letters
that we wrote to her over the sig.
nature of Mr.. Seward in our owr
war times.
Senator Smith is at least candle
to the point of being delightfully."-
naive in one phase of his letter. He
says:
Since March | Great Britain has beer
seizing ships destined to these ports
and preventing the cotton from reach
ing them Prior to that time l have ne
complaint about the conduct of Grea
Britain. Citizens Of the United States
were shipping cotton to Holland and tt
Sweden. and this cotton was largely
distributed into Germany and Austria
''' have never complained of any
thing done by Great Britain with refer
ence to cotton prior to March l. Since
March /. and from now on. unless ou
Government compels Great Britain