Evening star., 1921-12-30

| until the necessary number OF assehts
had been received to make IL ruie OF
| law. He said that great mass OF
nations agreeing might make .nter
national law, but the general rule was
that international law requires UNI
versal acceptance.
! Agrees to Suggestion.
He observed. speaking for himself
and without any opportunity 10 con
suit the other members of the Amer
lean delegation or without intending
to speak for them, that it would p"
entirely satisfactory as far as he was
concerned to have such an addltlon 10
this second prohibition as Mr- Ba.oGT
had suggested. 1t was an adcltloH
providing for the five powers VINO
| were here and who would be bounc
by such prohibition as between each
other, and he observed that ne was
quite sure that every power at the
conference intended to shape It's CON
duct IN accordance with the rule pro
posed. Such an intention wonid mare
for security. good understanding e1c'
| NJ. Root said he did not suppose
that such a course would in any de-
gree change the conduct of any power
here, but an assurance Of an Intention
as to that conduct would be of great
value in settling this disturbed ana
distracted world.
Mr., Balfour had asked a question as
to policy Mr.. Root did not want to
take uD their time about that. but II
was a very common thing in the legfs.
lation of all of their countries to deal
with Objectionable practices by broad
prohibitions, because broad and simple
prohibitions could be enforced while
complicated prohibitions filled with
many items were exceedingly difficult
to enforce But he supposed a very
broad prohibition ike that We now live
under here was necessary in order to
! civ a,,1n 10 trh
vent people from doing things in an
Objectionable way. in this case if they
tried to make the prohibitions in detail
it would be impossible to enforce them.
and so. it was impossible 10 have
glass of wine at dinner because It was
necessary to have broad prohibition TO
prevent lot of poor fellows from get
ting drunk on bad whisky. This was
a proposal of the same character as the
proposal made by the British delega-
ton, which had not received favor:
| that is to say. the proposal to ban all
submarines with a brocd prohibition
based upon the fact that though sub
marines may have a useful purpose.
nevertheless the painful purposes 20
which they might be put were so Ser1-
Gus, and so injurious. that they 1ust-
fed the establishment of broad and
simple prohibition of all submarines.
If you undertook to deal with Subr'&-
rines in detail You failed. You could
not make a prohibition that could he
enforced Therefore the abuses We're
so great that the world would he wise
to ban them altogether. Now thiS was
, a proposal the same in character. re-'t-
ing upon the same consideration: tir;t
is to say. it saved the submarine for
|: legitimate purposes and banned only
the injurious use of submarines. i
substituted general prohibition for
, detailed prohibition. The rule which
they had just recognized in their Gc-
tion upon the first resolution. and the
wisdom OF which did not rest upon
theory. 1t rested in their memory o.
the most painful events of recent times.
When the German Submarines beGa:
itorpedoing innocent merchant ships
, and when they had stopped them for
the purpose of visit and search, and
had begun to place bombs in ths&aull.5
, i and blow up vessels, lndlSnantYpro-
tests were made.
German Answer.
The German answer was that II was
, impossible 10 comply with the rules that
had been made 10 govern the actions
of surface ships. There WAS an asrec-
: ment upon that. Germany declared il 10
!, be impossible. and il WAS impossible. The
! submarines could not successfully carry
on warfare against merchant ships ana
summon them in the ordinary way Il"
stop for visit and search. And when a
Vessel had been stopped for visit and
search, the submarine could not put its
. crew and passengers in safety because
the work was done while the submarine
: itself was in a danger from which II
2 could escape only by swift submersion.
The subma rine could not take great
I boat load of passengers and crew into its
: interior where air had 10 be furnished
artificially. Th- distressing circur-
8 stances OF the crew and passengers of
S merchant ships deemed the prey Of sub
= marines and left to die were obvious
E Germany's assertion that il was i'm
possible for the submarine to war on
e merchant ships in accordance with these
\ rules was well founded. and for one. The
s government of the United States assent
: I'd 10 it. agreed to il. admitted il. But
f they said the consequence was not that
= the rule failed. but that such warfare
must end There was no fact more firm
ly established than that all the tempta-
: tions that beset a helligerent to gain its
point at Whatever cost would stand be-
s tween the submarines and conformity
y with civilized procedure.
VI The only way TO secure the safety
/ of innocent passengers and crews.
non -combatants. neutrals. women.
{ children. etc-the only way to secure
their safety was to say that no he'll
ligerent should attack merchant
ship through an lnStrumentality which
= cannot achieve the attack without
, viola ting the rule. II created a sim
+ pie and forciblc rule in the place of
: the complicated and detailed rules
: which were required by the weak .
) ness of human nature. Mr.. Root said
, a forcible rule. Mr.. Root said forci-
BILE rule, because a rule that could he
understood by the people. He 70
, peated again with regard to what he
had said before regarding the first
. resolution, that he granted that con-
, tracts between nations would not en-
: force themselves. He granted that
, the rules made by diplomatiats. con-
, ference and foreign offices. might not
: be enforced. But he also asserted that
when a rule is based upon the prin-
ciples of humanity and when the pub
lie of all free countries had go, holl
, , of it. understood il. and adopted il a
= a guide in its conduct of bellIrere nj
t operations, the public opinion of all
: civilized countries would furnish Suf
ficient support of the Iule-becauSc
! the condemnation of the public of th"
! world brings with il condign pun
r ishment for any nation that offends.
e a punishment that no nation dares to
t face.
Two Propositions.
, The chairman said that there We're
. two distinct propositions before the
committee. The first, broadly stated.
was an attempt to amend and improve
existing international law in the sense
that submarines should not be used at
, all as destroyers of commerce. There
might be some difficulty in deterinin-
ing definitely when international IA"
had actually been amended. hut he be-
tl;eved that some means could probably
: be found of establishing j criterion,
as. for example by stating that the
agreement should be effective en- the
adherence Of powers named.