Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1922-01-03
SUBMARINES AND MERCHANT VESSELS

When the German government entered upon
its malignant enterprise OF destroying merchant
/ vessels without warning it answered the protests
OF civilization by saying that because of the char
acter and limitations Of the submarine it was i'm
/ possible for it to observe the usual rules of visit and
search without itself running the risk of destruc-
ton. To apply the usual rules to the submarine
would, it was carefully explained, so seriously i'm
pair the effectiveness of the submarine as TO almost
eliminate it entirely as an agency for interfering
with: enemy merchant traffic.
The calraness with which this explanation was
\ given had its parallel a little earlier in the fnality
with which the German chancellor pointed out that
while the invasion Of Belgium was a sad and un-
lawful thing, Germany had no choice in the mat
ter, as she could not get to France without going
through Belgium. Where law stood in the way OF
desire, law must stand aside. The suggestion that
If the submarine could not be used without COM
uniting wholesale murder and violating laws of
humanity which had been accepted by all nations
the submarine might be kept at home met with no
4 response.
That situation is very effectively dealt with in
the resolutions on the submarine framed by Mr..
Root for the arms conference. Those resolutions
undertake to enact no new law. international lazy
IS not made at a meeting where most OF the nations
are not represented. But the resolutions state very
explicitly what the nations present understand the
aaw to be. 1t is stated that the sicnatory powers,
desiring to make more effective the rules adopted
by civilized nations ior the protection of the lives
of ~neutrals and noncombatants at sea in time Of
war, declare that among those rules those which
are enumerated ARE to be deemed an established
part Of international law"
The first rule sets forth that a merchant vessel
must be ordered to stop for visit and search to de-
termine its character before it can be captured
that it must not be attacked unless it refuses to stop
after warning: and that it must not be DESTROYED
unless the crew and passengers have first been
placed in safety. Those rules are general, and ap-
ply to the procedure OF any war craft whatever
which overhauls a merchant vessel. Then comes
the application to the submarine specifically:
zs Belligerent submarines are not under
any circumstances exempt from the uni
ycrsal rules stated, and if a submarine can
not capture a merchant vessel in confor1ni-
ty with these rules, the existing law Of ma
tons requires it to desist from attack and
from capture, and to permit the merchant
vessel to proceed unmolested.
That is a clear statement Of what the powers
represented understand the existing law to be and
to mean. They invite the adherence of all civilized
powers to that statement, to the end that there may
be no question Of what the law is.
There is the added declaration of recognition
that the submarine cannot in practice be used as
commerce destroyers without violation of the rules,
and they invite the assent of all nations to a prohi-
bitlon OF the use of the submarine for such purpos-
es. They further ask for a universal agreement
that any commander violating any Of these rules,
whether by order Of his supericrs or not, shall be
deemed guilty Of violation Of the laws Of war, and
shall be liable to punishment as for an act of piracy
on proper trial.
With what grace can any nation refuse to as.
sent! And, If assent be- given, the ubnarin dis
appears as a menace to ocean commerce.