New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-01-25
Our Rights and Duties as a Neutral.


Secretary Bryans letter to Senator Stone, out
lining what the government has done TO preserve
its rights and discharge its obligations as neu-
trial, is all the more convincing because IT avoids
concentrations and answers in Ietail the various
charges Of inactivity or unfairness which have
been brought by more or less excited partisans.
There can be no question about the governments
purpose to observe the strictest neutrality, basing
it's policy on the accepted principles of interna-
tional law and on the precedents which the United
States has set in the past when 1t was itself
behgerent The trouble with most of the people
who have made complaints is that they have not
been sufficiently familiar with the laws and prece-
dents on which the government has acted.
The only absolutely new problem with which
the State Department has had to deal in this war
is that Of communication by wireless. 1t was de-
cidcd to enforce a censorship Of wireless mes
sages. while leaving cable communication free.
This discrimination was attacked as inconsistent.
Yet a belligerent, by cutting a cable can prevent
free communication between another belligerent
and neutral The neutral is therefore absolved
from responsibility. I'm the case Of wireless no
interruption is possible and a neutral permitting
the free transmission of military infor' ion
may. in effect allow base for naval other
operations to be set up in neutral territory. The
United States was therefore undoubtedly on the
safe side in prohibiting the sending of any uncen-
sored wireless messages.
A noisy protest was also made against the gov
ernments policy of permitting citizens TO sell
munitions Of war. But the legitimacy of such
sales is beyond dispute. Every government is
committed to the practice and those who attack
into 10y
code As Mr.. Bryan says, the Executive would
have no power to stop the trade in munitions
without an authorization by Congress The ad
ministration has interfered to stop the sale of
submarines. but that was on the ground that the
building of warship involves the use of neutral
territory as a base for military operations.
A sufficient answer TO the many complaints that
the State Department has not stood up for neu
trail rights I'm our trade with neutral countries
is the State Departments recent note to the Brit
ish Foreign Office. This country has protested
strongly against some Of the methods used by
Great Britain in Selling and OBTAINING American
cargoes destined TO neutral countries. As Pro-
fessor Theodore S. Woolsey points out in an
article which we reprint in another column, some
of these methods are extreme and unjustiied.
But the State Department itself strongly holds
that view and as 20 the search Of American yes
sells on the high seas for German and Austro-
Hungarian subjects the department has given no.
tice that such a procedure is an unwarranted
exercise Of jurisdiction over American vessels in
which this government will not acquiesce"
Our neutral position in the present unsettled
state of international agreements respecting con-
traEand is more or less trying. But the gov
ernment's attitude Of reasonableness, admitting
the right of examination, without consenting to
an abuse of that right, promises to bring about
lust settlement. The State Departments letter
shows that the United states has tried TO observe
impartiality between belligerents and to treat
them all fairly. 1t is entitled TO expect from
them correspondingly fair treatment.