The Washington herald., 1915-08-15

had been sent to Aatamoras to enter
generally into the trade of Matamoras.
they should not have been seized and
could not have been held.
The Bermuda Case.
The Supreme Court sustained the seiz-
ure of .non-contraband goods belonging
to the owners of the contraband upon
the ground that the guilt Of the owner
of the contraband infected all merchan-
disc belonging to him on the vessel.
The Supreme Court in this case also
answered the contention of counsel that
the Bermuda and similar cases sustained
the right OF seizure of the goods upon
the Peterhof, by pointing out that in
the case of the Bermuda and similar
vessels the seizures were not based upon
the right of the United States to block
ade Nassau, but upon the ground that
the goods on these vessels were started
by their owners from England with the
purpose of having them carried by wa
ter. upon either the vessel they origi-
nally sailed on, or SOME other vessel. into
the blockaded ports of the Confederate
States. The justification of the seizures
was based upon the fact that these goods
were being used by their owners in a
continuous voyage to run the blockade
of the ports of the enemy country.
% Nothing can be clearer than that the
United States Government did not block
ade neutral port during the Civil War,
but, on the contrary, our Supreme Court.
in the Peterhof case, held that a neutral
port could not be legally blockaded and
that it was the duty OF that court to
administer the laws of nations and not
to be governed by the plea of expedi
ency.
No lawyer will examine this case and
deny the correctness of my statement
when / said that:
THE United States committed no act,
and our courts have rendered no decis-
ion which justifies the present blockade
of neutral ports by Great Britain
Must Furnish Proof.
/ go further Conditional contraband
cannot be legally seized by Great Brit
ain unless Great Britain can prove that
II Is intended for the army or navy of
the enemy. 1t cannot be legally seized
IL being sent to a neutral port there to.
enter into the general stock in trade.
Citizens of the United States have the
right to ship conditional contraband to
Holland, to Denmark. to Norway and
to Sweden. if intended to become a part
of the general stock in trade of those
countries, even though those countries
EiiSHt subsequently snip IL INTO GerIna-
ny or Austria, and under well established
rules of international law. any seizure
upon the ocean of such goods by Great
Britain is a violation of the rights of
citizens of this country.
Should We not maintain the rights of
all the citizens of the United States even
where Great Britain is concerned?
OF course, We should maintain these
rights. whether they involve the import
ers who wish to bring their goods bought
in Germany from Rotterdam. or the food
producers who wish to ship their pro-
ducts to neutral ports, or the tobacco
producers, or the cotton producers.
We should not permit Great Britain
arbitrarily to limit the freedom of the
sea in defiance of the principles laid
down in the Peterhof case, and in def
ance of principles laid down over and
over again by the text writer's and courts
of Great Britain. HOKE SMITH.