New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-07-28
ENGLAND WILL
SEND NEW NOTE
ON SEA RIGHTS
Asks That Publication OF
Latest Communication
Be Delayed.
[From The Tribune Bureau J


Washington, July PA telegram to
the State Department to-day from Slr
Edward Grey asking that publication
of the British note received yesterday
he withheld for a week, to allow the
submission of q supplementary note
caused much speculation among ON
cials.
Secretary Lansing declined to ad'
vance any theory for the action. Inc
American note, which has been IT
preparation for some time, VIII DC
further delayed until the supplement
tary document is in hand.
officials first concluded that state
r,orts in the American note to Ger
manv which were of general applica'
,ion and set out in determined language
.ho intention of the United States gov
ernment to maintain the freedom OF
tho seas. nigh: have influenced the
British Foreign Office to deal WIN
that subject in the same note wh'c"
defends the order in council FROM
British sources, however, it was learned
that the main purpose Of asking the
rostponement was to afford opportunity
70 the British government 10 cohsiue'
and if necessary comment on the com
r,,nication cablcd from Washington
r,,,u II on cases before the British
prize courts.
Take I'D Prize Court Rights.
This caveat informed England thai
the American government would insis'
On recognition Of the rights OF Amer
lean citizens under international la"
90 hitherto established, governing neu
,ral trade in the time of war, withou
limitation by order in council or othei
legislation by the British government
and would not recognize the validity
of prize court proceedings in deroga
tion of the rights Cf American citizens
under international law.
The British note delivered yesterda!
ia understood to be framed on tn'
theory that the order in council does
not transgress the rights OF neutral'
as laid down in international law
though it is admitted that in some re
spects the application OF the lega
,ripcinleS is new.
In view of the sweeping objection o.
the United States, the Britisn govern
ment feels, il is understood, this phass'
reouires special treatment at tnl
time. At first it vas thought a separate
note might be sert in reply, Dut I'M
british government is understood u
have decided TO include this subJec
in the whole gens' al argument coverlni
the rights of neltrals TO the lreeuor
of the seas.
Suggest Change in Policy.
Several officials suggest that Eng
land has at last determined TO chang
the character of her campaign agalns
German commerce by legalizing 1t un
der the name of blockade, or by plac
ing Ihe articles in dispute on the con
traband list There has been a .grea
agitation in England and France latel
for declaring cotton contraoand,. a
well as many other articles over whic
there has been considerable dispute
and the English government may nav
Welded to the clamor.
The State Department is not at al
pleased over the delay, as II was hope
to send the reply to Great Britain 500
after the note 20 Germany. The NOR
effect of each note would thus ga
force from the other. Great Britai
has twice baked this design.
Until the complete note is receive
M official expression of this govern
ment's position will be obtainable, eS
cept the general assertion that ther
is little change from the attitude take
in the previous notes 70 Great Britain
Differ on Springbok Case.
Much has been made by the Britis
Foreign Office Of the Springbok cast
held to be a precedent for the method
now employed in the so called blockade
Officials here, however, hold that IN
two cases ara not parallel.
The SpringOok was seized on the wa
10 Nassau by an American vessel, ur
der the allegation tina the carg'
chiefly non-contraband. was in reallt
destined for a blockaded southern por
The Supreme Court sustained the priz
court in ruling that the cargo wa
liable 10 conhscation.
In the present cases, the cargo'
NAV be bound ultimately for German
but they are not destinesa for ar
Continued on page ?, column