Evening star., 1928-05-13

Continued from First Page
Gated program was to propose that
'contraband be abolished so that neu-
trail commerce should regain the free
dom it requires"
There Is little more than historical
interest now In this debate between the
British and the American delegations
at The Hague, for President Roosevelt
refused to accept the British proposal
as the British had refused the Ameri-
can formula. But, looking back over
II, IL seems to bear fatal resemblance
to the recent disarmament conference
at Geneva; for in both cases there wa
desire upon the part Of the govern
ments Of Great Britain and the United
States TO reach the solution OF a COM
mon problem. and each produced for
mula suited TO Its needs,
What prevented agreement in both
cases was an underlying, fundamental
difference in naval strategy. employed
on the one hand. by an island power de-
pendent upon the outside world for It's
suStenance. and. on the other hand to
maintain the external interests of q
continent. self-contained and self-sus-
tanning.
This Is the Gordian knot and so far
the attempt to diSentangle 1t by playing
with both ends of the complicated skein
has only added to the complications
The solution Is now seen 10 lie In elm
mating the knot altogether by the de-
nial OF the right of private" warfars
at sea under the terms Of the Kellogg
BRAND proposal
The further history OF this problem
but emphasizes the points that have
been made already The conference oil
London In 1908 left the law of the sea
unreformed. and the World War re-
vealed the danger which lay In this sit
uation, a danger so real that IL was
only the existence of still more vital
facts which prevented the involvement,
of the United States In the effort to
make Roadway against the steady In.
roads OF sea power upon neutral rights.
World War Situation.
II was In the heart Of this most Sc
rious phase Of the war that Col House
at that time President Wilson'S repre-
sentative In Europe. attempted 10 re-
vive the principle OF the freedom of the
seas and to use II as q formula of pos
sible agreement between Germany and
Great Britain. But his proposal found
little response In England, owing both
to the German diplomatic blunders OF
the hour and 10 the sinking OF the
Lusitania. and also to the fact that
Great Britain was at that moment de-
veloping the blockade Of the central
powers as one of It's other weapons OF
the war. A reform Of this far-reaching
nature needed peace e-time conditions for
It's fulftllment--or else the overwheim-
ing conviction on the part OF the bel
ligerents that In 1t lay the means of
ending their tragic struggle. This con-
vlction was lacking at the time, and the
effort failed Col. Houses insistence
was not without effect when President
Wilson made the principle OF the free
dom of the seas the second OF his IL
points. but In Paris the President drop
ped 1t from his program In the later
days Of the peace conference. With al!
the world organized In League Of Ma
tions. there would be no neutrals In the
wars 70 come and. therefore. the pro-
lection OF neutral rights would no longer
be valid claim.
Although President Wilson'S dream of
a universal League Of Nations was not
realized and the greatest neutral claim
ant to the freedom OF the seas still re-
mained neutral. nevertheless the project
has been little discussed In these post
war years. either here or abroad. In
England only few pacifist journals of
radical thinkers have referred to 1t from
time 10 time and their advocacy has
not counted for much with Britain as
a whole.
The dependence OF Great Britain
upon the protection of its fleet Is O con-
ception more deeply rooted In the Brit
ish mind than any other single fact
Convictions as well as conditions are
facts OF history: and any proposal
therefore, which seems TO hamper OF
restrict naval strategy Is regarded by
the average British citizen as direct
attack upon the security OF the British
Empire. the independence or even the
very existence Of the British nation.
The battle feet OF Britain to which
IL intrusts It's safety. was built for free
use, under It's own command, on those
seven seas which bind the empire TO.
gether doctrine which proposes to
deny henceforth the legitimacy OF The
strategy which has prevailed from The
day OF Drake and Frobishef 10 that OF
Jeiiic0e and Beatty~~wthe heritage oi
Nelson~-can only win Its way to serious
consideration by sheer weight OF ines"
capable realities Nevertheless. that Ia
Just what Is happening at the present
time.
The failure OF the Geneva conference
Uu nhVhi ulhhIuAuultut WAh kAAhA
shock 10 British opinion, especially TO
those, In all parties, OF q liberal trend
OF opinion. all the more 80 as II vas
felt that one OF the chief underlying
causes OF that failure. 40 far ~ Britain
was concerned. lay IN the new ooliga-
tions IL has assumed under the cove
nant OF the League and the treaty OF
LOcarno 10 guarantee the peace OF the
world against violation even when the
war was not Ito own,
Rights Of Neutrals.
A new and serious re-examination oi
the whole problem Of The security OF the
British Empire Is now under way, and
IN the forefront OF the discussion lies
the question OF the rights of neutrala
imeaning AmsfiGan) on The very aeas
which are both the nexuk Of the EN-
pire and The field Of strategy In case
Of League action,
II Ii recognized now that the eondi-
tions Of the last war, the alignment Of
the powers. at least might not be re-
/ peated In a possible conflict IN the fil,
! ture, and that II Great Britain had Ia
maintain Its food supply In the taee nj
at attack by, submarines with wide
cruising radius and vastly increased sea
coasts for refuge alnng neighboring
countries. u might 60 hard with q na.