The Wilmington morning star., 1940-02-22
Editorial Comments
From Other Angles
THE CASE OF THE ALTMARK
New York Herald Tribune

There is, undeniably. a good deal of grim
humor in the wild cries of anger, pain and out.
rageo moral virtue being sent up from Berlin
over the Altmark case. The nation whose gov.
errors have made brute force their deity, which
has torn up one treaty obligation after another
with no weak regard for law or decency. which
butchered the Polish civil population without
compunction, which has torpedoed crowded lin.
ers without warning, which has strewn murder.
Gus and illegal contact mines in the shipping
lanes without thought Of the rights either of
humanity or of neutrality and which has never
admitted that any feeble considerations of
ethics could stand in the
way OF Its sacred ambitions, has had the tables
turned upon 1t, in a relatively mild way. And
1t suddenly shrieks to high heaven over this
criminal" inversion of the natural order. The
British have used a little brute force on their
own account. The admiralty has written it's
own high-handed Interpretation of international
law ana back It up with artillery. That will
never do. 1t is only the Germans who are sup
posed to be clever enough to rise superior to
the limitations of international morality.
That the Interpretation was brusque and
high-handed there seems to be no doubt. When
H. M. s. Cossack steamed into losing Fjord,
BOARDED the Altmark and rescued her prisoners
by force, she was committing an act Of war
and therefore a flat violation of Norwegian
neutrality. It was a violation, however, by no
means without the justification of reprisal. The
Altmark no less clearly violated Norway's neu-
trality to begin with by bringing prisoners of
war into territorial waters and concealing them
from the Norwegian authorities. That there
is no misunderstanding about this principle
seems clear from the earlier case Of the City
of Flint. When the German prize crew first
brought that vessel, also carrying British pris-
oners Of war, into Norwegian waters the pris-
oners were duly presented and released.
II the facts are as stated, 1t would also seem
that the Norwegian authorities failed in their
duty of defending their neutrality when they
overlooked the presence of the Altmark's pris-
oners. Perhaps it would have been better if
Great Britain had left the German violation
and the Norwegian negligence to diplomatic
protest and litigation. But if she abruptly act
ed instead; if she sent in her ships and took
off her men, it would seem under the circum-
stances-especially considering the i'll treatment
which the prisoners are alleged to have been
suffering-scarce a heinous crime. 1t was
hardly on a par, for example, with spreading
contact mines in the paths Of neutral ship
ping.
Norway, Of course, is protesting with all her
power-with one eye on Germany, she has to.
The Germans, of course, are protesting with
all their power, hurting theats at the Norwe-
CLANS and imprecations at the "law-breaking'
British. But one really doubts that anyone out
side of Germany is going to be profoundly
shocked, or that Norway is going to be forced
into war as a result. Perhaps the Cossack's ex-