Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1915-06-09
PRESIDENT WILSON'S REPLY TO
= - 81: ERMANY.$s$5't III T..

i = 3
reply to the German Government has
not been forwarded, but will probably
be made public before this paper is
| in the hands of its readers. Accord
ing to the law of the sea, President
Wilson's demands, as 4 riginally
made, were clearly within his coun-
Itry's rights. But there is of neces-
sity or at least a good reason for a
growth in the law of the sea the
same as there is in the common law.
When conditions change, the law
should grow until it becomes large
enough to cover the changed condi-
tons, deal Justly by all parties and
ibe powerful enough at all times to
protect human rights. K si.S, {. 4.
1t must be admitted that the sub
marine is new feature in naval war
fare, feature that calls for new
rules not inconsistent with human
rights, nor unjust to any country.
There is food for thought on this
subject in the following editorial
from the Chicago Tribune: |
The American government, we
trust, sees the, need Of accepting the
fact that sea law must be progress
tvely modified to conform to the
{ course of mechanical development.
! 1t would require wise statesman
to say where our interests lie,
but one OF ordinarily, perceptive in
telligence can see that conditions
have changed and that law must be
modified to. meet the change.
| We think it is the desire of Amer
leans to deal with all peoples as fair
,ly as prejudice will permit. The
force OF prejudice has to be con-
ceded, and it will warp the thought;
but SO far as it can be recognized as
a factor It'll 8 thus far minimized.
| What we must grant the Germans
If we are to maintain q position NOR.
ally defensible is the right to stop
the shipment Of ammunition by any
means at, their disposal, It would
be hideous injustice If we were to
/ assert on one hand the right ofAmer
!! lean manufacturers to sell any con
traband that purchaser could come
for and then deny the Germans theil
right Of stopping such shipments.
If anything seems plain and clea1
in this war 1t Is the fact that the
J, decision will rest with the force!
!, able to supply themselves whit
most ammunition. Whichever fore
lean get the most shells will win. !
} is not q question Of men. It Is
: Question OF explosives. .%g x
II BY our rightful insistence tina
; American manufacturers may n sci
: iwhatever a purchaser wishes to bu.
: we have put ourselves In the posi-
! ton Of becoming a deciding facto
= in. the war. We must not, directly
or indirectly, and cannot; guarante
i the delivery of the ammunition.
t That would be a sin against inter
j national fair dealing. Boats carry
i ing explosives must not have tn
protection of passengers for who's
security this government holds itsel
responsible. We must admit. that &
,, submarine cannot conform to sea LAY
I formulated before submarines wer
used. A change has been made b
mechanics.
!. The. United States must meet Gel
!. many fairly on this question. w
! have no right to say that German
shall deprive herself OF the use O
her only effective sea weapon in pre-
venting the delivery Of ammunitio
!, (which may be the deciding factor i
, the war. .....'- ..., 49,
We must recognize that the move
ment of military supplies Of this chal
acter is a military movement. l.
,, easily demonstrate fact it is NOR
dangerous military movement tina
that Of sending regiment of troops
No one would deny the right <of
: submarine to sink q transport, an
if we are to maintain the moralit
of our position we must not 1nsis
: upon tile acceptance Of principles Q
international law which governed bt
fore the mechanical change made b
the submarine. H. -