Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1916-03-07

II would bc curious doctrine which
should ask ono country to weaken ts
methods OF protection against anoth-
err so that It's enemy might moro cas-
lily attack II II the submarine Is
practically powcrloss against an arm
ed merchantmen, It had better not at
tempt TO hold up quarry stronger
law Of every creature hunting It's
prey OF course the United states
might step in and add its might TO
the puny strength OF the submarine.
That really would amount to inter
vention. II might take the form Of
n note, but 1t would be backed by
Americas potential strength
Would American Intervention in
this question on the side of the sub
marines be in accordance with our
traditional policy 10 defend the rights
Of humanity. our own general inter-
csts, and the security of sea borne
commerce?
Americas action would be hurtful
from all these points OF view. 1t
would break down "a recognized rule
Of International law and thus shake
the foundations of the system upon
which the rights of an humanity ana
our own national security rest II
would further Inconvenience the in
ternational commerce of the United
states with all other countries, since
it would help to place thousands Of
tons Of shipping at the mercy Of Ger
man submarines
Has the United states right to
modify rule of international law
while the war is going on?
Neither In peace nor in war can q
single nation h9 It's own action change
an accepted international rule We
could not, therefore, expect during the
war 10 change the rule of the seas
that merchantmen have a right TO
arm If. however, il We're very dam
gcrous TO our security to permit such
armed merchantmen TO our harbors,
We might decide to shut them out Il
our munitions works we're located at
our ports aud shot from a morch-
amman would explode them, We
might refuse the admission Of such
merchantman for the sake of protect
ing our own muniton plants That Is
an instance OF vital interest which
would give good cause for the ox-
olusion, just as wo might for the
safety OF the locks, decide to prohibit
ships carrying great quantities of high
explosives from going through the
Panama canal Unless. however We
have some such reason az that, the
exclusion Of armed merchantmen
/ from our ports might wen be regard
! friendly nct In time of war is a good
ground for war But even If we
should SO TO war to prevent armed
merchantmen from counting into our
harbors, that would not deprive mer-
ehantmcn Of the right 10 sail armed
on the high seas
What effect viii Secretary Lam
sings proposal TO disarm merchant
men have ON the Lusitania case?
10 leaves tho Iusitania case the
WY it was on May {. l9i5-the day
she was sunk. 1t may, indeed, pos
sihly Doc interpreted as justification
for Gcrmanys whole submarine con
duct.
Why does Germany think she has
the right 10 torpedo armed vessels
! without warning
Germany has practically admitted
chat her procedure was illegal under
International law but has justified
her conduct ON the ground Of retail
alton for Great Britains interference
with nautral commerce bound Il
Germany ENGLAND in her attempt tc
helcaeucr Germany has brought the
German civilian population TO want
nd Gcrmgny retalates by sinking
passenger Vessels containing noncom-
atlantis. women and children, ant
reps bombs from her Xeppelins upon
ne English population. This policy
+ one countrNs getting even for tn,
nisdeeds of another Is called roprisal
Is there anything in this reprisa
dea?
! can only answer that our who'll
egal system of punishment has beer
slow development from the PRINT
i've forms of retaliation. The Rib,
makes constant reference To the law
Of retalation--an eve fvr an eye am
a tooth FOR tooth
What kind Of lcprisais should Am
erica approve OF and be willing &c
practice herself i'm case of war;
Rcprisals smell of harharism, Get
ting oven soon gets belllgerenis IN
% state OF complete savagciy.
civilized country should exercise IN,
otmos, age ln the matte, 81 repris
ais. Il should never employ any re-