Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-06-29
CARRYING SHIPS.

/ ers in Selling liquors on board
three ships in New York harbor
was probably designed as a test
case. One ship was a government
owned vessel operated by the ship
ping board. One was a privately
owned liner operated by the Ward
line, and carrying the American
flag. The third was a Norwegian
freighter flying the flag OF Nor
way and having aboard a limited
quantity of German liquors. The
New York authorities making the
raid are somewhat reticent as to
the reasons for their action, but
there is no intimation so far that
either Of the three vessels were
selling liquor inside the three-mile
coast limit. If that is later con-
firmed the seizure of a foreign YES
sci for having liquor aboard is
likely to raise some very interest
ing international complications.
When the prohibition law first
went into effect the state depart
ment held that our treaties with
foreign nations were such that we
could not prevent foreign vessels
from carrying a stock of liquors
and coming into our ports with
them, provided they were sealed up
and not used or sold within the
three mile limit. It also held that
foreign diplomats were entitled to
import liquors for their own use
at their embassy buildings, that be-
ing considered their own territory
in theory while covered by their
flag. There is also a theory gen.
orally held in international law
that ships are to be regarded as the
territory Of the nation whose flag
they fly on the high seas, and they
are entitled to the use of our ports
under treaties of commerce and
friendship made by our government
with foreign nations. Most coun-
tries have laws forbidding the car
rying of arms or the possession OF
arms without a government license.
Yet if an American vessel visited a
port in Norway or any other coun-
try which has such a law, and con-
fiscated all revolvers, rifles, or
other weapons found on board our
ships, we have no doubt this gov
eminent would make sharp protest
in spite of the fact that the foreign
laws of that country forbid the
possession of arms without special
license.
OF course if the American pro-
hibition enforcers have evidence
that the Norwegian vessel was
smuggling liquor into this country
that creates an entirely different
status, just a it would do if an
American ship was smuggling arms
into a foreign country in violation
of its laws.
AS to the vessels flying the
American flag that also is a differ
ent question. In fact in the face
of affairs they were violating the
law in having possession of liquor
intended for sale, according to the
decision of the attorney general
under the Wilson administration,
a decision that up to this moment
has not been reversed, though At
torney General Daugherty has been
asked to review it. 1t is a well
known principle of law that for ad-
ministrative purposes the decision
of the attorney generals office as
to the meaning Of the law is bind
ing until reversed by himself or
the courts. That is where Chair
man Lasker of the shipping board
gets in bad by refusing to accept
the attorney generals decision that
the prohibition law follows the flag
even on the high seas. He accept.
ed a contrary opinion from his
lawyer. He might do so with pro-
priety if he was a private citizen
and was willing to take his chance
on an appeal to the courts against
such decision. But as a govern.
ment agency it was clearly his duty
to abide by the decision of the at.
torney generals office or get i,
reversed.
This action in New York will
certainly have the effect 1t bring
ing the issue of booze carrying