New Britain herald. [microfilm reel] (New Britain, Conn.) 1890-1976, 1929-02-07

it. Anyone can ship goods anywhere
without molestation and travel
except for the inconvsnienoes and
expense OF certain formaiities-is a.
possible for anyone with the price.
But In time Of war-what becomes
of the freedom of the seas?"
Dispatches from Washington have
been mentioning 1t. The Senate add
ed q provision In the cruiser bill
about it.
The subject happens to have hung
fire since the dark ages. or before.
Violation Of the principle caused one
American war. In another American
war the United States turned away
from its traditional policy" and
adopted the traditional British atti-
tude, at the same moment inventing
. doctrine that was used against 1t
during the early days of the World
War.
"Ffne In Theory"
Freedom of the seas''-what an
idealistic phrase to twist between the
tongue! All nations are in favor Of 1t
in theory. but in practice during
wartime the universal practice IL to
interpret tho meaning of the phrase
AZ necessity demands.
The mind Of man cannot remem-
Der when rights at sea during wars
were not source of controversy. In
Plutarch's Lives 1t is related that
Pericles introduced a bill" which
provided that all Hellenes resident
in Europe and Asia SHOULD be invit-
ed to send deputies to = conference
at Athens -. to deliberate
concerning the sea. that all might
sail it fearlessly and keep the peace.
In 1894 the Consolato del Mare.
published at Barcelona, was tho first
important compilation OF sea law.
Since then numerous other attempts
have been made by international
conferences and by treaties to es-
tabIish the rights OF neutrals and
belligerents at sea in time of naval
warfare. But throughout the great
or part Of the worlds history the
rights Of neutrals during war have
been limited to those conceded or
enforced by the nation which hap
pened to be in control OF the seas.
-. Where Franklin Failed
At the birth of the American re-
public the United States was the
most vigorous advocate Of freedom
of neutrals at sea. Benjamin Frank
lin tried to obtain the insertion Of =
clause in the treaty Of peace with
Great Britain in 1883 providing that
''all merchants or traders with their
unarmed vessels, employed in COM
merce. exchanging the products OF
the different nations shall be
allowed to pass freely unmolested."
If this clause had been accepted the
war of 1912. which resulted from
violation OF American rights At sea,
would have been avoided. .
Franklin did succeed In nesotl.
ating treaty with Prussia that free
bottoms make free goods" Had q
similar treaty been successful with
France the undeclared naval war OF
1873 with that country would have
been avoided.
President Monroe instructed his
commissioners at the Client confer.
ence which brought tho war OF 1871
TO close to hold out for or
Acknowledgement of the American
position on points of maritime law
and for indcmnities for all illega
captures. But the American commits.
sioners found they were confronted
with adamant opposition by tn.
British commissioners and the at
tempt was abandoned.
We Wanted Priyatecrs
During the Crimean war in 1854
Britain conceded in reply to a not,
from Sweden that certain relaxa
tons" in regard to neutral commerc,
would be acceptable. Presiden
Pierce, in Z message to Congress
thought this was good time to pro
pose an agreement between the ma
tons on this basis. Russia accepte.
the American proposal. but tn
King Of Prussia wanted to 90 = bi
further and would abolish privateer
ing. This proposal was not accept
able to tho United States. Presiden
Pierce pointed out the British nav,
was ten times a. large as our owl
and that privateering rights wer
necessary. But 1t was stressed tina
the United States was willing to sur
render the right to employ privateer
if other powers were willing to &C
cept the American claim to full free
dom of the seas as a principle of in
ternational law. Nothing came Of tn
American proposal.
The powers, meeting in Paris Il
14B4 ~ ljnuidate the Crimoan ua,