The Washington times., 1915-07-27
HOKE SM|THREPL|ES
TO TIMES EDITORIAL
Explains His Contentious In Re.
gard to Lists Of Contraband
and to BIockades.
To the Editor Of THE TINES.

70 the Editor Of THE TINES:
VIII you permit me through your
columns TO make reply to that por-
ion of your recent editorial headed
Senator Smith on Cotton" which
charges me with having misstated the
'acts with reference to the treatment
of cotton by. the Federal Government
Turing the civil war;
The language which I used upon
This subject was as follows:
"The story being published. with
London origin. that the United
States declared cotton to be con-
traband during the civil wer ts
false and absurd. The United
traband.
THE right OF contiaband seiz-
ures by a belligerent applies alone
to cargoes in ships. The seizures
are made to prevent goods used
ing the forces OF an enemy. They
are to prevent the goods from get
ting in to the enemy country
THE Southern states produced
cotton in great quantities: They
port it. There was no occasion to
seize cotton during the civil war
- to prevent 1t from going In to
Southern states.
Inc story OTlsIHdteu lToHh notS
written in 1886 by Mr.. Bayard. Sec
retary of State. to Mr.: MuruaGa.
Spanish minister. Mr.. Bayard. In.
advertently, and In an untechnical
sense, used. with reference to cot
ton seizures on land. the word con.
the United States did not during the
civil war treat cotton as contra
band of war. Mr.. Bayard promptly
agreed that the United States had
To- n
ticles contraband Of war. (See House
documents. vol. l32. part 3, page 6s3)
'"Thc only effort by any country to
place cation on a contraband nst
was by the Russian government IN
war Great Britain promptly pro-
tested and declared British India
is by far the largest exporter OF raw
cotton into Japan. The quantity OF
raw cotton that might be utilized for
comparison with the hulk of the cot
ton exported from India to Japan
for peaceful purposes, and to treat
harmless carSoes OF this latter de.
scription as unconditional contraband
would be to subject branch OF IN
nocent commerce which Is especially
important In the form established to
most unwarranted interference.
Sir Edward Grey attacked the
Russian order. and demanded In par
sia on the free list. Great Britain
declined to yield to the action OF
Russia. and insisted upon the right
Of British citizens to ship cotton to
JapsT So SO, far .nfnrcs ss ts tbe esder
Using the language OF the Brl-
tish government. as applied to Rus
sia, the eff ort now by Great Britain
to interfere with cotton shipments
IL a most unwarrarted interference
hranch innocent COM
mcrce.'
In your editorial you insist that
was IN error. because early In 1856:
of a group OF Southern ports. and thii
blockade was later extended to all th'
ports Of the Southern States.
do not at all question the fact tha
under proclamation Of President Lincoli
every port OF the Southern States va
b!ockaded during the civil war. and a
a result of this blockade egress and in
gress Of goods of all character were t
a large extent prevented.
Where we differ is this: insist tina
a blockade is an entirely different thin
from a list Of contraband Of war.
blockade applies to particular portl
and its effect does not prevent deliver
Of goods to ports not blockade@ block
ade is conducted without regard to tn
| character Of the goods seeking egres5 o
! ingress A legal contraband list Is
| list Of commodities which from thei
peculiar character under the rules G
international law a bcl.igerent has tn
right to seize when destined to territor
Of the enemy. no matter whether it
upon a vessel sailing to an enemy poi
or to a neutral port. There are man
other distinctions I do not mention.
| II you will refer to the declaratio
Of London you will see that the sui
of a blockade are treated as entirel
different from the subject of the II!
of contraband and the effect OF a CON
modify being legally upon list {
contraband.
Cotton has not been placed upon an
list Of. contraband by Great Britain
The declaration of London expressl
declares that under no circumstanc'
shall raw cotton be placed upon III
of contraband This does not mea
against an enemy port that cotton ar
still go through to that enemy por
There is long list Of commoditi'
specified In the declaration of Londc
which under no circumstances are to
made contraband Of war. yet any
ing into or out Of an enemy's port
a blockade is being conducted again
the enemy port
WIN you pardon me for saying tn
your editor has confused two entire
different subjects, namely. a blockat
and a list Of contra band.
l have criticised the conduct OF Gre'
Britain because that country is endea'
orine to conduct. and Is conducting.
blockade of neutral ports. They al
seizing vessels carrying non-contr'
band cargoes to neutral ports. In disr
gard of established rules Of intern'
tional law.
This course on the part of Gre
Britain is, cutting off a market f
about 3OOO.OOO bales of cotton annual
and is seriously injuring the people
the state which represent.
May I not suggest to you that Il
stead of being the subject of CRITICS
for protesting In behalf of the righ
of NV constituents when those righ
are being trampled upon by Great Bri
ain. I am simply doing my duty al
should have the support. not the no
tility. of papers like your own?
Should not especially have your su
port in my protest when the same illeg
7 conduct of Great Britain which Is Gu
ting off a market for the chief produ
Of my State is interfering with
much Of the commerce of our enti
Very truly