The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1915-11-13
THE NOTE TO GREAT BRITAIN

Secretary Lansings Is, 000-word mote" 10 the
British government on the application OF the
latters so-called blockade Of Germany and Aus
tria 70 American shipping does not begin TO
evoke the same interest In this country as did
the correspondence with Germany over her at
tempted submarine investment of the British
Isles In the present case human life is not IN
volved: only commercial ana property rights
and interpretations Of international law
That much being admitted. It must be said
that the American note presents issues OF the
utmost gravity Reduced 10 its simplest terms
the contention OF the United States is that Great
Britain, under the accepted terms OF inter
national law, may use It's actual control Of the
seas so as to extend the blockade OF the ports
OF belgerents 10 the ports OF neutral nations
and may not plead the altered conditions Of mod
ern war and commerce 10 Justify departures
from international law at her own convenience.
That neutral nations contiguous 10 enemy
countries continue to tgads with the enemy Mr.
Lansing contends. does not justify Great Britain
In attempting what amounts practically 20 the
closure OF such neutral nations 20 commerce
with the outside world. Events OF the past year
prove conciusively that IL is impossible for the
British navy 20 distinguish between goods which
will In fact be consumed IN the neutral country
OF their destination ard those which will be for
warded thence TO belligerent purchasers. In
practice the attempt works out into a scheme
for holding UP practically all commerce between
one neutral nation and another contiguous with
or in communication with An enemy country. and
subjecting II 20 verftaby fatal obstacles and
delays.
The subjectmatter % this controversy. OF
course, is goods OF non -contraband and condi-
tional conuaband nature Munitions OF war and
equally unquestionable contraband fall into quite
a different category. Mr.. Lansing presents an
exceedingly strong case. not merely with respect
! 10 his citation Of the expressed opinions OF the
British government prior 30 the war but in the
fact that Great Britain has herself largely *.
banded her trade with the neutral countries of
Europe and Is similarly unable 70 distinguish
the ultimate place OF consumption Of specific
goods Here Great Britain has found il 1eccs.
sary 10 rely upon the responsibility Of the gov
ernments OF Holland, Denmark and Sweden FOR
/ the neutrality Of their respective citizens IA
respect 10 goods originating in the united States
she has attempted TO shift that responsibility 10
our shippers.
After all, the larger issue is simply what tho
lcontrol OF the seas shall mean hereafter In
Icontending for tho preservation of the liberal
provisions OF international law heretofore es
tablisheS the United States Is performing n
service for which Great Britain viii be as crate.
full as any other nation In the distant future.
The seas viii be ruled by some power able 10
do IT, The United States IL Interested onIy i'm
influencing Britannia's rule 10 the end that IL
may hereafter be acceptable 10 peace loving
peoples as a. has been Heretofore. Wall Street
Journal