The Washington times., 1915-08-16
Answer Sent to Ambassador
PenfieId for Delivery to For
eign Office.
NEUTRALITY IS UPHELD
International Law Quoted to
Show the Injustice Of Claims
Made.
The Secretary Of state to Amoassa-
sador Penfield:
Department of State.


sador Penheld:
Department of State.
Warrington. August II. 1915.
Please present a note to the royai
foreign office In reply to IT'S no1 "
June 20. In the following sense.
The Government OF the United
States has given careful consloeLa,
ton to the statement OF the imperial
and royal government In regard 10
the expectation OF arms and aniliu-
milton from the United states t2 tns
countries at war with Austria-Hun-
gary and Germany. ,,,
The Government OF the Omteo
States notes with satisfaction the
recognition by the imperial and royal
government OF the undoubted fnVt
that Its attitude with regard 10 tne
exportation Of arms and ammunition
from the United states rs proi"p
ed nv its intention to maintain tne
strictest neutrality and to conform
to the letter of the provisions OF In. "
ternational treaties" but Is surprised
to find the imperial and royal gov
ernment implying that the ooserv.
law under the conditions which have
developed In the present war Is In
sufficient. and asserting that this
government should go beyond the
long recognized rules governing such
traffic by neutrals and adopt meas.
ures to maintain an attitude OF
strict parity with respect to poth
belligerent parties
Impose New Duty.
To this assertion of an obligation
to change or modify the rules Of in
ernational usage on account Of
special conditions the Government Of
the United States cannot accede.
The recognition Of an obligation
Of this sort, unknown to the in
ternational practice Of the past.
would impose upon every neutral
nation . duty to sit in Judgment
on the progress of war and to
restrict its commercial Intercourse
with . belliKerent whose naval
successes prevented the neutral
from trade with the enemy.
The contention Of the imperial and
royal government appears to be
that the advantages gained to a
belligerent by its superiority on the
sea should be equalized by the neu-
trail power: by the establishment OF
a system Of non-intercourse with the
victor. The imperial and royal gov
eminent confines its comments to
arms and ammunition. but II the
principle for which It contends 10
sound. 1t should apply with equal
IOTCe " al VI Soiiti iopohu'
Theory of Equalization.
A beihserent controlling the high
seas might possess an ample supply
Of arms and ammunition. but be in
want Of food and clothing.
On the novel principle that equal
isation 10 q neutral duty, neutral
nations would be obligated to
place an embargo on such articles
because one Of the belligsrents
could not obtain them through
commercial intercourse.
But. II this principle. % strongly
srssa the soas nf ssya 10 seS eS
tain by reason Of tho superiority Of
. belliEorent at sea. ought It not TO
operate equally. az to . belligerent
superior on land? Applying this
theory Of equalization. a belliEerent
to contend sueeessfYiiy on land
ought to be permitted to. purchase
them from neutrals, whiio bel
ligerent with IN abundance OF war
| stores or with tho power to produce
traffic.
Economic Confusion.
l. Manifestly the idea of strict neu-
| trality now advanced by the i'm
| psrial and royal government would
involve a neutral nation IN a mass
| Of perplexities which would obscure
tho whole field OF international obli-
cation. produce economic confusion.
and deprive MI commerce and In
dustry OF legitimate fclds OF enter
prise, already heavily burdened by
| tho unavoidable restrictions Of war
In this connection II IL pertinent
to direct the attention Of the impe-
rial and royal government to tho
| fact that Austria. Hungary and Ger
many. particularly tho latter, have
during years preceding tho present
sNrplps Gu1SHs'" Of war; arm. Dss snd munlsien.
| which they sold throughout the
world, and especially TO bsllisersnts.
Never during that period aid
either Of them suggest o. apply
the prinoipie now advocated ~
tho imperial and royal government.
Precedent Of Boer War.
During the Beer war between
Great Britain and the South African
republics the patrol Of tho coasts OF
ReiHhborinE neutral colonies by
British naval Vessels prevented arms
and ammuaitiena reaching the
Transvaai or the Orange Free State.
The allied republics we're In a situ.
atien almost identical tn that re.
Epeet With that in which Austria
Hungary and Germany fad them.
selves at the present time, Vet, In
Enite 6f the commercial iseiatiop OF
ahe heliigerent, Germany sold ia
Great britain, the ether beiiigerent
hundreds of Thousands of lilies 0i
explosives, gun powder, cartridges
shot, and weanansl and it is known
that Austria Hun gary also sold
similar munitions to the same pur,
chaser, though IN smaller quantities
While as compared with the pres
ent war, the quantities sold were
small, the principle OF neutrality In
volved was The same. n at that
time Austria Hungary and her pres
ent ally had refused to sell arms
and ammunition to Great Britain On
the ground that to do so would vio'
late the spirit Of strict neutrality
the imperial and royal government
II might with greater consistency and
greatsF force urge it's present con-
Il tentian.
DuFiRg Grimean War,
It misht be further pointed cut
that during the Crimean war large
quantities ct arms and military
| stores we're furnished to Russia by