The Ontario Argus. (Ontario, Or.) 1???-1947, 1917-08-09

complications ON the seas might put
us in risk OF being drawn into the
conflict No neutral nation could
forotol what violations OF It's vital
interests at sea might be attempted
August 6. 1914, our secretary OF State
dispatched an identical note 20 all tho
powers then nj war, calling attention
TO the risk OF serlour trouble arising
out OF this uncertainty OF noutrals as
20 their maritime rights aud prcpos-
ing that the declaration OF London be
accepted by them for the duration for
tho war.
But the British Governments ro-
aponse Will, expressing sympathy
with the purpose OF our suggestion
and declaring that .'keen desire TO
consult so far as possible the interests
Of tho nuetral Countries" announc-
ed'their decision TO adopt generally
the rules Of the Declaration In apes-
tion. subject to certain notifications
and additions which they Judge In
despensable TO the effective condrct
OF their naval operations The De-
olaratlon had not been indorsed by
nny power In time OF poauo. and there
was no legal obligation on Great Bri-
tain TO accept Il. Her reply. however.
WIS disappointing. for II did nothing
10 clarity the sltuption. Great Bri-
tain recognized as binding certain
long accepted principals OF interna-
tional law and sought now TO apply
them 70 the peculiar and uaforeseen
conditions OF this war. Dat theGe
principals werc ofton vague and
therefore full OF dangerous possibili-
ties OF friction.
Controversies soon arose between
Great Brltiaa and this Nation. Ia
practice their ruling sometimes seem
ed 10 cur Government inconsistani
with the spirit OF international law,
and especially with the established
prec dents with which they Invoked,
But painful as this divergence OF
opinion sometimes war. Il did not
seriously threaten our position OF
neutrality. for the issues thet arose
involved only rights OF property aud
were amply covered by tn srbitra-
ton treaty signed only short time
before by Great Britain and the Unit
ed states
And this controversy led 10 a clear
or understan ding ON our part OF the
British attitude towerd our ideal OF
the freedom OF the seas. They were
not willing To accept our classified
ton OF the seas as being distinct
from the Old World. We had con
fined our interests 10 matters Affect
ing rights at sea and had kept care
fully alc0f from issues Affecting the
Interests OF European nations ON the
land. Tho British were interested
In both They explained that they
had participated in the London naval
conference in the hope that Il would
lead 10 a sound and liberal entente
in the interest OF tho rights OF all
nations on the sea and on the land
as we'll. and that they had refused
TO ratify the Londcn pceclaration
because, no compensating accord TO
the contenent had resulted They
could not AFFORD 10 decrease the strik-
ing power OF thoiF navy unless their
powerful neighbors on land agreed TO
decrease their armies.
That this attitude OF England deep
ly impressed our Government ls
shown by the increasing attention
given by the United states TO the
search for ways and means Of in
suring at the end OF the war. last
ing peace for All the world. The
address Of our president, on May 27,
I9l6. before the League % Enforce
Peace was milestone in our history
Eie outlined the main principals on
which stable peace must rest. price.
iples plainly indieate that this ma
tion would have % Give up lsg posit-
lon OF isolation and assume the re-