Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1918-04-04
THE STATEMENT.

THE STATEMENT
The statement follows:.
with painful surprise the govern
ment and whole Dutch nation has TAX
on notice of the presidential proclama-
ton and the statement of March 20 rel
alive 20 the seizure of part Of the
Dutch merchant feet.
The seizure en- bloc of a neutral
mercantile feet, If only fer the dura-
ton of the war, Is an act !ndefensible
from the viewpoint of international law
and unjustifable towards friendly
nation, apart from considerations of
legality.
But the manner also in which the presi-
dental statement defends this act Of vio-
lence does not contribute towards LESSEN
ing the sting thereof for this defense has
plainly been drawn up under the influence
of completely incorrect representation
of affairs.
THE manner in which the Dutch mer-
chant feet has been treated in the past
months in the United States. the incessant
difficulties placed in the way of our sail
ings from American ports repeated re-
fusals Of bunkering facilities and forced
unloading of cargoes already bought all
this may be within the rights of the Uni
ted States.
ut surely was against the traditional
friendship between the two countries, al
though on this point the presidential
statement keeps silence.
CLAIMS PRESIDENT IS WRONG.
According to President Wilson's proc
lamation the Netherlands owing entirely
to German pressure. failed to observe the
preliminary arrangement which was pro-
posed for the purpose Of leaving no longer
idle the Dutch tonnage in American ports
and furnishing and opportunity for MAX
ing voyages within a period Of 30 days.
pending a definite agreement on Dutch
tonnage and rationing. This is distinctly
incorrect. 1t is equally as incorrect as the
allegation that Germany had threatened
to sink two ships which were to sail from
Holland in exchange for two from Amer
lea which were to sail to Holland with
Americas approval, and that Germany
| had made increasing threats to prevent
! both the observance Of such a preliminary
arrangement and the conclusion of a per-
manent one. The real facts Of the case
are as follows:
After the (American) war trade board
had insisted that Dutch ships in American
ports make trips pending definite ar
rangement the Netherlands government
proposed that some of the ships should
make voyages for the commission for re-
lief in Belgium. When information was
received that Germany objected to Amer
ica's demand that Dutch ship sail'fr
Holland each time in exchange for relief
sailing from America, the Netherlands
government deemed it duty imposed by
good faith to inform American authori-
ties thereof Immediately, so that ship
which was then on the way toward Ar
gentina could be given different desti-
nation. The direct consequence was that
those ships were kept moving. which was
exactly in consonance with the provi'
sional agreements.
Respecting sailings to Cette (France)
| the ship owners agreed thereto completei!
as soon as France gave assurance thai
the ships would not be detained at Cette
Accordingly, several ships were chartered
for this service.
1.-THE fact Is that a majority OF the ships
had been chartered under the provisional
agreement through the war trade boaro
and part were already sailing to Soutf
America but were stopped en- route by thu
American authorities, while in the Pacific
ships plying between the western coas
of the United States and the Dutch Eas
| Indies made regular voyages without an!
impediment, direct, or indirect. by the
Netherlands government The ships now
in British ports, in and outside Europe ant
in the Portuguese port Of st. Vincen
were prevented from sailing by the Brit
ish and Portuguese themselves.
HOLLAND NOT POWERLESS.
THE allegation that the Netherlands
owing to German pressure, was powerles
to observe the provisional! agreement II
contrary to fact.
AFTER the incorrect allegation tina
Holland was unable to observe the pro
visional agreement. Great Britain OF
March made Holland a final proposal
whereupon Holland came forward will
a counter proposal which was unaccept
able. Even had the arrangement bee
concluded Holland would have been un
able to keep II. in actual practice, TO
which reason the seizure was determines
upon. This reasoning, strange though
may seem. lacks one important link whic
is indispensable to place the matter in
proper light. What were the facts?
ION February 22 the Netherlands. l
view Of the food shortage threatened
the coming summer, asked America
advance 100000 tons of wheat on accoun
of 100000 to be definitely arranged for ]
Is true that the associated government
, on March replied affirmatively regardin
the 100000 tons. without giving a def1nit
reply about the 100000 but to that ar
D parent acquiescence they attached tn
onerous condition that they were to obtai
} Immediately the disposal of all Of tha
, part of the Dutch merchant fleet to which
according to the projected London Mai
5 they would eventually become entitled
The Netherlands government was
r a position to accept, because 1t was VI
' derstood strictly that Dutch shiI
+ would be employed only outside ii
J danger zone.
I Suddenly the aforesaid London Ell
! gagement was broken. on March.
4 when the cardinal point. that ships gi'
1 en- In exchange for-the advance OF 100
900 tons of grainAships with tomas
amounting to about half million
were not to be used In the danger zon
was revoked.
The powers In question. owing to II
loss of ships. felt constrained to repia
r the tonnage by obtaining the dispos
o of q very large number of ships whi'
Q belonged not to them but to the Nethe
Q lands They became aware that Il
r | Netherlands government could not pc
NIT the ships to sail in the interest