New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-02-09

hesitating whether to sail. The state
Department has issued a somewhat
enigmatic statement, which leaves the
shippers in almost as great quandary
as before it was given out. 1t IS neces-
sary for the protection Of our dignity
and commercial interests to reach with
out delay a solution based upon cor
rect understanding Of the facts OF the
situation and the principles OF inter-
national law involved.
The statement of the American gov
eminent does make it perfectly clear
that American vessels have the same
rights to clear for British ports which
existed before the German announce
ment of the submarine zone; but, IN
view Of the possibility that Germany
may not permit our vessels TO pass
through unless we accept the humiiiat-
ing conditions set forth in the memo
randum of January 81, it is necessary
to determine how they may be pro-
tected. There are three possibilities:
convoy by American cruisers, convoy
bv British cruisers, or armament
against the Illegal attacks Of German
submarines.
Courses Open to Merchantmen
Even from the German point of view
there can be no legal objection to our
neutral merchantmen carrying any
armament they may desire, but as long
as this government preserves condl-
ton of neutrality toward Germany an
armed merchantmen would have no
right 10 fire on a regularly commas
stoned cruiser or submarine belonging
to any of the belligerents. To do so
would be an act of illegal warfare
which might result in most serious con-
sequences to those responsible for hay-
ing recourse TO such a measure.
The armament might, however, be
carried merely for the purpose OF US
ing il against German submarines only
in the event that a wireless dispatch
should inform the vessel of the out
break of war between this country and
Germany Armament placed upon our
vessels cannot therefore be used 10
protect them against German subma-
rines until we are at wax with Ger
many.
Should our merchant vessels accept
the convoy of British cruiser, the Ger
man submarine would have the UNI
doubted right to torpedo the vessels
thus placed under the protection of the
British naval force. There would be
nothing contrary 10 international law
If a private vessel should so accept bel
ligerent convoy, but IL would be sub
jcCted TO the risk of destruction with
out warning.
The remaining course is for our gov
eminent itself to convoy our vessels to
British ports. The German govern
ment itself suggested that we should
adopt such course TO bring our ship
ments safely through the British inter-
diet to Germany.
German Note Suggested Conveys
In its note Of February 16, 1915, the
German government said:
in order to meet in the safest man
ner all the consequences of mistaking
an American for a hostile merchant
vessel the German government recon-
mend that although this would not
apply in the case of danger from
mines) the United States convoy their
ships carrying peaceable cargoes and
traversing the English seat Of mari
recognizable. In this connection the
German government believe it should
be made a condition that only such
ships should be conveyed as carry no
merchandise which would have TO be
considered as contraband according to
the Interpretation applied by England
against Germany. The German gov
eminent are prepared 20 enter into I'M
mediate negotiations with the Ameri-
can government relative TO the manner
Of convoy
Whatever may have been the rea-
sons, we did not adopt this suggestion,
although we had an undoubted right TO
employ our cruisers for that purpose:
It has always been the traditional
policv of the United States to defend
the right of convoy, and our traditional
attitude received confirmation by the
rules adopted at the London Naval
Conference. As every one knows,
those rules have not become law be-
cause the Declaration Of London was
not ratified. Whatever may be the
value of the articles of the London
Declaration, generally speaking, the
articles relating TO convoy were
adopted because OF the emphatic stahd
of the American delegation in support
try. and they do but represent what
this country has always considered the
correct principle.
Point Covered in Treaty
Il would be hard for Germany to
deny the right Of our government to
convoy our vessels everywhere on the
high seas except in those regions which
might be subjected TO an international
law blockade. The prescribed subma-
rinc zone about Great Britain cannot,
however. be regarded as 4 blockade.
In addition 10 her suggestion contained
in the note of February is, 1915, that
We should employ convoy for our YES
sells, Article II Of the Prussian treaty
Of 1928 reenacts, among others, Articles
If and % Of the treaty OF 1893, where
in the right of convoy is expressly
recognized in conformity with the prin-
ciples adopted by the London Naval
Conference.
3 II. therefore, our government should
convoy its peaceful vessels toward Brit
ish ports every German cruiser or sub
marine would be obliged By the terms
of that treaty TO accept the word OF the
commander of the cruiser that there
was no contraband on board.
The essential idea Of neutral convoy
is TO protect the neutral merchant YES
sells from belligcrent interference in
defiance Of international law. This
question used formerly to arise fire.
quently in connection with the extern
sion of the list Of contraband 70 in
clude many articles of innocent and
legitimate neutral commerce. Convoy
might still to-day serve that useful
purpose in view Of Germany's violation
Of the treaty stipulatious, as shown by
the sinking Of the Frye.