New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-11-09
CALLSU. 5. NOTE
UNANSWERABLE
International Lawyer OF
London Agrees with
Lansing View.
nv Cable 10 The Tribunel

London, Nov. S.-London generally
takes the view that the United States
in its latest note fails TO grasp the real
situation and that for Britain TO yield
would be suic dal
Among lawyers the view is held that
any presidents introduced by Britain
into international law only follow the
footsteps of America in the Civil War.
but in n far less drastic fashion.
J. Arthur Barrett, a noted interna-
tional lawyer and member of both
American and English bars, disagreed
with this view in a conversation with
The Tribune correspondent to-day. lie
said;
"Tbe note seems TO me unanSwerable
think the governments legal advisers
brilliantly astute. but they Will have the
utmost difficulty n drawing any KIND
of a red herring across the track. Inc
crux of the whole situation is that II
the British persist in their present at
titude it will be tantamount to the en-
tire destruction of neutral commerce
II is no argument TO say that the
!. berty to act in certain ways is gwen
because Of unlawful acts of other bel
ligerents. No neutral can be salts
fed by a government eXcuslng us own
violations Of international law py
pleading the wrongful acts OF the
other. America now IS upholding
established principles of international
law as they have stood hundreds Oh
years. ,tr -, ,.s
ment of the president of the Prize
Court. Sir Samuel Evans, the fact re-
mains that international law denies
the right of search of neutral ships OF
grounds of mere suspicion. Further
more. il is impossible for a neutral 70
accent the working of purely municipal
rules lkc the Orders in Council as
binding her rights.
Britain now is attempting to iay
down presidents which may embarrass
her seriously in future wars where
She may be neutral. Nobody wants the
slightest ill-feeling between the t"o
governments, but this is case where
the British government must realize
that the American population IS apart
from the purely legal situation. The
argument regarding the increase OF
American exports is not only largely
failacious, but il ignores the fact that
the Americans are suffering heavy
losses because great volumes Of goods
which are normally exported, especially
to South America, are lying idle be-
cause the war has rendered ordinary
TRANSFORMATION facilities Impossible,
while there must inevitably be an
enormous decrease of shipments to all
neutral countries because of the uncer
tainty of arrival.
"The note is an admirable piece Of
work, which ought 10 command a reply
from the British government. | do no.
doubt that the United States will insis.
on this"
Thomas Gibson Bowles. one of Eng
| lands best known writers on maritime
law. said to-day that in may respects
he regarded the American note as "un-
candid, ungenerous and unfair"
Mr.. Bowles was equally severe in
his structures on the British Foreign
Office, which, he declared, had invited
and propounded new rules OF sea war
fare resting on new principles, without
warrant either from the recognized law
of nations or from any international
instruments"
The contention Of the United States
that Great Britain had not established
an effective blockade he regarded as
just, and this argument alone he found
worthy Of consideration, with the ex-
ception of the complaint respecting de-
tanned ships subsequently released, as
the innocent were forced to bear the
expense Of detention. This, Mr.. Bowles
said was unjust, though he thought the
matter a small one as compared with
/ the greater issues involved.
"The United States must remember
Mr.. Bowles said. that we are fighting
for our lives and the liberty of the
world, and that this is not a time for
nuihhlinpn