The New York herald. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1920-1924, 1920-12-12


international disputes The question as to
which resort to this court should be made
compulsory is certainly debatable. the propo-
siticn to give to the court force to carry
out its decision opens new fields for argu-
ment but ii is plain that it Is for the United
States a matter of concern to participate In
the establishment of such court, or If one
prefer. in the extension of the existing
Hague court in the direction of greater
prestige and authority.
Treatment of Rights of NeutraIs
Another Vital Issue to Us
Nor is it less undeniable that the United
States is vitality concerned with a second
issue raised at Geneva, namely, the formula
ton Of the laws covering blockades and COW
ering the treatment Of neutral rights during
conflict. OF our three wars with European
nations. two were the result Of interference
with our maritime trade by belligerents. No
country in the world Is more Immediately
concerned with establishing international
law covering the question OF sea traffic in
time of war than is the United States. While
we were still neutral In the world war both
belligerent alliances invaded our rights. in
jured our nationals. involved us In dangerous
debates. and had the German conduct of the
war been less barbarous had the Lusitania
massacre not occurred. 1t Is not impossible
that We should have come to grave crisis
with Britain.
Any one who has read the recent articles
Of the italian historian, Ferrero. on the
peace conference will be struck with the fact
that he openly declares that the elimination
of the question Of the freedom Of the seas"
from the debate over the Paris settlement
deprived the United States of the only pos
sible practical reward that might have been
obtained in return for our very great con-
tributon to the allied victory. Capt. Mahan
long ago wrote that the dominant sea- Power
would inevitably write international law to
suit its purpose when a new war arrived.
This did happen. and the result was that
the United States was drawn into the war.
II we are to avoid future wars, nothing
can be more important for us than to have
international law. so far as 1t concerns ocean
traffic of neptrals as well as belligerents
during war; placed upon firm basis. The
alternative and the only alternative is
costly and dangerous rivalry in naval con-
struction between the United States and
Great Britain, now that the latter has
emerged the single considerable naval Power
in the world and the destruction of the
German feet has abolished any possible
balance of power at sea.
United States Only One to Aid
Smaller States in This Case
In the discussion Of this question the
United States is alone capable of giving to
the cause of the smaller States which We're
neutral during the recent world war that
decisive assistance necessary to establish
their rights and ours. And we are con-
cerned, as are they. We suffered materially
while we remained neutral; Holland. Dem
mark, Sweden and Norway suffered through
out the war; because they remained neutral.
For us and for them it is essential now to
rewrite or more exactly to write interna-
tional law covering the sea in such fashion
as to guarantee to neutras those rights