The Hattiesburg news. (Hattiesburg, Miss.) 1908-1917, 1916-03-02
EDITORIALS WORTH
READING
THE SUBMARINE AND AMERICAN
INTERESTS.
Chicago Tribune.)

| ing to accomplish by its submarine
policy. Congressman, even the Demo
cratic leaders of Congress, confess
that they are both perplexed and
afraid Again war is being spoken of
in Washington. The president is los
ing the support of prominent men in
his party, but the issue is not de-
fined and purposes are not apparent.
Mr.. Wilson has made frequent con-
fession of his fears, and the congress
men say that the situation is one Of
great seriousness, but the nation can
not understand it.
A declaration of intent ought to be
made. 1t is incomprehensfble that the
country should be exposing itself to
danger again on an issue OF armament
ON merchant vessels.
The policy of this country has been
one of strange hostility to the sub
marine. 1t is a weapon particularly de-
signed for the use of such a nation
as the United States, which regards
its military preparations as defensive
and is likely never to find them ade-
quate in emergency.
It has been our policy to read inter-
national Jaw strictly when the ques-
ton was one of restricting the opera
tons of the submarine. We have adj
mitted, in the case of the British
blockade not only of Germany but
of neutral ports through which Ger
many might be supplied, that the sub
marine has changed international law,
but with that precedent we have re-
fused to make concessions in favor of
the new method of marine operations.
We conceded that the close Gordon
which was demanded by international
law to make a blockade effective could
not be maintained. We agreed that a
long distance blockade should be re-
garded as an effective blockade. Our
administration thus confessed that
laws which had been framed before
the submarine was known for what it |
is did not apply.
Now it is a question of admitting !
that usage and regulations which per
nit peaceable ships to carry guns for |
defensive purposes cannot apply, but |
the administration, having faltered a !
declines to agree to this.
If law can be altered to protect |
cruisers from the submar-
me, it can BE altered to protect sub
marines from peaceable ships. We |
cannot honestly be indulgent in one
and precise in the other.
We seem obsessed with the idea that
| submarine is piratical craft We
always think of it in relation to the
sinking Of the Lusitania, and seem
seldom, if ever, to think of it as |
)oat best suited for the defense of a
,reat shore line.
A gun of very small caliber can
ink a submarine if the undersea boat
exposes itself. To give a peaceable
hip warning it must expose itself.
We do not insist that the peaceable
hip maintain its peaceable charac-
er. We insist that the submarine shall
AXE the chance that the peaceable
hip suddenly will assume belliger-
Mt character and fire on it.
1t does not appear that this serves
american interests. Some day in time
f peril the United States may put
great deal of reliance on submar-
les, and we may regret that we have
cen compromised by the policies de-
ned in 1915 and 1916
1t is the thought that American in
erests are being compromised by in
stence upon formulate of law that
isconcerts many Americans. This
lay not be true. 1t may be that the
has a real strategical
eheme back of a policy which thus
II has remained inexplicable.
1t must be the hope of Americans
lat such is the case. 1t may be that
lie administration is watching only
lie wider currents in the struggle and
as decided that the safety of the
nited States will best be advanced
the defeat of Germany. Upon that
the government of the Unit
States may be framing it's poll
es.
The purpose of such a policy can
. respected. At least it is down out
the clouds and has it's feet upon
e earth. 1t is obvious that whenever
controversy arises with Germany
g United States is adamant, and
at wherever one arises with Great
'itain the United States is flexible.
Is this, the explanation? If it is. and
the nation is again in danger, why
n it not be told what is behind the
1;cv of tho