Macon beacon., 1916-08-18
The BlGcklistinG Decree

BY recent decree the British
government blackliStS large
number Of persons, firms and com.
panics in the United States, and
strictly forbids British subjects
to trade with them, says the
Youths Companion. The fact
that most Of the offending con
Germs bear German names indi
Gates why they are on such a list;
hut how the British government
can enforce the decree without
unVstifably striking at the trade
ofa friendly nation, and what is
the definite object it hopes to ac-
complish-all that is a puzzle to
every student of international law
In the first place the decree is
an innovation. Countries at war
have always prohibited trade with
the enemy, but the boycott has
extended only to enemies in an
enemy country-not to- enemies
doing business IN a neutral
country. Great Britain itself at
the beginning of the present war
declared that its prohibition did
not extend to persons in neutral
countries.
Again, what does the decree
mean! In the plainest sense it
means that no British subject
shall be allowed to buy from any
of the blackllsted firms or sell to
them. The government has the
undoubtcd right to prevent its
subjects from selling to enemies
anywhere; but when it says that
they shall not buy from the dcsig
mated concerns it is a different
matter. There are always two
parties to a trade, and when
foreign government says that its
shall not buy from Ger
tain Americans it says in effect
that those Americans, over whom
it has no jurisdiction, shall not
sell. Should one of them, in de
iance of the decree, sell goods to
a British subject and ship them
to Liverpool on n neutral vessel,
the most obvious way by which
Great Britain could enforce the
decree would be to seize and con
iiscate the goods, aud that would
be a clear violation of neutral
rights.
Finally, the decree may cause
British owned steamships sailing
between American and other neu
trail ports to refuse freight offered
by any of the blacklistcd firms.
That would be "A form of intcrlcr.
cncc with neutral trade that the
United States would find peculiar.
ly vcxatious. 1t is true that the
British government denies that it
means to enforce any such "sec-
ondary' boycott, but we must
wait to see whether that is never
thclcss the effect of the decree.
But the new decree is not mere
ly VcXatious; us far as Americans
can see it is needless and inef-
tcctlve The blackliStcd concerns
cannot in any event trade with
Germany the blockade prevents
them from offending in that way.
To deny them the privilege of
buying British goods in British
markets seems to injure British
merchants more than those of
enemy countries; and the harm
that would accrue to England
from the purchase of goods in
America, If the goods were bought
from a concern that bears a Ger
man name, rather than from its
next door neighbor of another
race, appears to be more senti
mental than real.
From this side of the water thC
publication of the blacklist, how
ever its legality may be defended
looks like a tactical blunder. II
is hardly worth while for Great
Britain to offend neutral scnti
ment unless it can render a cor
responding service to the Allie(
cause. And that, we believe
will not be the case.