The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1917-03-14

I going to war If the good Americans
had backed up the president. Now,
/ which is the fairest and easiest way to
stop the submarine? Make both live
up to international law, or Is it to
stop Germany defending herself
against starvation or war against nom
combatants? II England. with her
large navy, is allowed to starve the
smaller nations who have not the
navy to defend themselves, surely this
is sad plight for the small nations.
What would we do IL we were in
Germany's place? Sef-defense is the
first law Of nature. Germany has
stated three different times up to date
that she would quit the submarines in
the way she uses them IL England
would quit. Three or four days be-
fore Germany gave out her last ulti-
matCm on submarines England broke
4 the freedom of the seas again by lay
| ing deadly mines around two neutral
countries, Denmark and Holland, no.
tifying US again that anyone going
| through there went through at their
own peril, only excepting IL small lane
/ to go through, just as Germany did
around her enemy's coast Of England
and France, so both are doing alike;
mines are just as bad as submarines,
if not worse.
| Our President Wilson sent a protest
Iagain to England, when England again
broke the freedom of the seas and
forced the neutral countries to turn
| in to Kirkwater, England, to rob our
mail and plumber orr commerce to
better her convenience. Still the good
Americans did not uphold the presi-
dent. 1t surely is an outrage to SUD-
NIT to these outrages.
We all remember about a week ago
when England changed Kirkwater to
Halifax, stating that any neutral ma
ton going from one neutral to an
other had to turn in to Halifax; If not
and the boats are caught, they would
be confiscated. England steals them
UNLESS we do as she states, and Ger
many sinks them because she has not
navy enough-both broke the freedom
of the seas.
Besides, if we submit to England by
turning in to Halifax, We are helping
England in this way: That she can
Iuse her full navy against Germany,
otherwise she would have to use about
one-third or one-half Of her navy to
find those merchant boats on the seas
and examine them there, according to
international law.
In February or March, 1916, England
gave out in our American papers that
she gave orders to her merchant cap
tains, IL submarine was seen COM
ing toward a. merchant boat or pas
senger ship. to sink the submarine on
sight. Remember the crews in sub
marines have no boats to get into and
one shot puts them out and they will
drown like rats. Where does self-de-
Tense come in for the submarine
crew? A merchant boat can sink a
| submarine on sight without warning,
but q submarine dare not sink mer-
chant boat on sight without warning.
We all know of a number Of sub
marines that lived up to international
law on the seas and were sunk.
Everyone knows of the U-9 submarine
crew when they tried to examine the
captains papers of an English mer-
chant boat and the merchant boat
sunk the submarine and all went down
to the bottom. Now, as stated, If our
good Americans backed our President
Wilson against the unlawful acts of
England as well as Germany, we
ing US in the face. Would it not now
be the proper or right method, be-
cause Germany has said three times
that she would quit the submarines
and save the noncombatants in war
If England would quit her starvation
Of the German mothers and babies
and quit laying deadly mines? What
would we do If we were in Germany's
place? Let us be fair and be true
Americans and stand by the president
against all nations; and it is every
ones duty to try to avoid war If Ii
can be done with honor.
G. schmallen. !.