Prev | Current Page 179 | Next

Various

"New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 2, May, 1915 April-September, 1915"


If the course pursued by the present enemies of Great Britain should
prove to be in fact tainted by illegality and disregard of the
principles of war sanctioned by enlightened nations, it cannot be
supposed, and this Government does not for a moment suppose, that his
Majesty's Government would wish the same taint to attach to their own
actions or would cite such illegal acts as in any sense or degree a
justification for similar practices on their part in so far as they
affect neutral rights.
It is thus that the Government of the United States interprets the
language of the note of his Majesty's principal Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs, which accompanies the copy of the Order in Council,
which was handed to the Ambassador of the United States by the
Government in London and by him transmitted to Washington.
This Government notes with gratification that "wide discretion is
afforded to the prize court in dealing with the trade of neutrals in
such a manner as may in the circumstances be deemed just, and that full
provision is made to facilitate claims by persons interested in any
goods placed in the custody of the Marshal of the prize court under the
order." That "the effect of the Order in Council is to confer certain
powers upon the executive officers of his Majesty's Government," and
that "the extent to which these powers will be actually exercised and
the degree of severity with which the measure of blockade authorized
will be put into operation are matters which will depend on the
administrative orders issued by the Government and the decisions of the
authorities especially charged with the duty of dealing with individual
ships and cargoes, according to the merits of each case.


Pages:
167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191