t7? if
V
VS
AUGUST,- 1915 '.
The Commoner-
,,
'
TTip1
greater consistency and greater force urgo its
nresent contention. .
1 ALSO IN CRIMEAN WAR
"It might bo further pointed out .that -during
the Crimean war largo .quantities of arms and
military stores, were furnished to. Russia by the
Prussian manufacturers. During the recent war
between Turkey and Italy, this government is ad
vised, ar.ms and ammunition were furnished to
tho Ottoman government by Germany, and that
during the.Balknn wars tho belligerents were
supplied with munitions by both Austria-Hungary
and .Germany,, While these latter .cases
are not analogous, as in the case of the South
African war, to .thejsituation of Austria-Hungary
and Germany in the, present war, thoy neverthe
less clearly indicate the long established practice
of the two empires in the matter of trade in
war supplies. '
"In view of the foregoing statements, this
government is reluctant to believe that tho im
perial and royal 'government will ascribe to tne
United States a lack of Imperial neutrality in
continuing its legitimate trade in all kinds of
supplies used to render the armed forces of all
belligerents efficient even though tho' circum
stances of the -present war prevent Austria-Hungary
from obtaining such supplies from the mar
kets of the United States, which have been and
remain, so far as thd action and publicity of this
government are concerned, open to all belliger
ents alike.
WOULD ASK" SAME RIGHT
"But, in addition to the question of principle,
thero is a' practical and substantial reason why
the government of the United States has from
the foundation of the republic to the present
time advocated and practiced unrestricted trade
in arms and military -supplies. It has never been
the policy of this ' country to maintain in time
of peace a large military establishment or stores
of arms and ammunition sufficient to repel inva
sion by a well equipped arid powerful enemy. It
has desired to remain at peace with all nations
;and avoid any appearance of menacing such
peace by the threat 'df its armies and navies. In
consequence of this standing policy, the United
Stales would in' 'the event bfitttaekhy a foreign
power be fronTthe ojitset df the1 war, seriously ,
if n6t fatally;' embarrassed ty lack of arflas.andj
animuriftibn and 'by the means to produce them
in sufficient quantities to supply the require
ments of national 'defense1. The United States
has always depended Upon the right and power to
purchase arms and ammunition from neutral na
tions in case of foreign attack. The right which
it claims for itself it can not deny to others.
"A nation whose principle and policy it is to
rely upon international obligations and interna
tional justipe to preserve its political and terri
torial integrity might become the prey of an agr
grcssive nation whose .policy and practice it is to
increase its military strength, during times of
peace with, the, design of conquest, unless the
nation can, after, wc.has, been declared, go into
the markets of the. world and purchase the
means to defend it3elf against the aggressor.
WOULD HAVE TO PREPARE
"The general adoption -by the nations of the
world of the theory that -neutral powers ought
to prohibit the sale of arms and ammunition to
belligerents would compel every, nation to have
in readiness at all times sufficient munitions of
war to meet any emergency which might arise
and to erect and maintain establishments for the
manufacture of arms and ammunition sufficient
to supply the needs of its military and naval
forces throughout the progress of a war.
"Manifestly the application of this theory
would result in every nation becoming an armed
camp, ready to resist -aggression and tempted to
employ force in resisting its rights rather than
appeal, to reason and justice for the settlement
of international. disputes.
"Perceiving, aa-it does, that the adoption of
the principle, that it is the duty of a neutral to
Prohibit the sale of arms and. ammunition to a
belligerent during. the progress of a war, would
inevitably give the advantage to the belligerent
which had encouraged the .manufacture of muni
tions in time of peace, and which had laid in vast
stores of arms and , ammunition in anticipation
of war, the -government of the TJnited States is
convinced that the adoption of the theory would
force militarism on thq world and work against
that universal peace which Is desired and pur:
Posed of all nations which exalt justice and
righteousness in their relations with one an
other. J .
NO OPINION ON WAR
. "The government of the United States in the
wregoing discussion -of- the practical reason why
UonsaSnfaiV0CatC,d,aild Practiccd trade a ni"
lnK th 7,8he,8t0 be undcrtood as speak
ing with no thought of expressing or iraplvlnc
l7tZ WUh ??frd to thegcir0cumstancnCs
or tho present war, but as merely putting very
frankly tho argument In this matter which has
SUt determini theGpoyCof the
tnZhhZ e PraCtAce of nations' 80 wcl1 Illus
trated by the practice of Austria-Hungary and
ma?Sr "fi1?6 S0Uth Africa ar ami the
manifest evil which would result from a change
or that practice, render compliance with the sug
gestions of the imperial and royal government
put of the question. Certain assertions appear
ing in tho Austro-Hungarian statement aB
grounds for its contentions can not' be passed
over without comment. These assertions are
substantially as follows:
"1. That the exportation of arms and ammu
nition from the United States to belligerents con
travenes the preamble of The Hague convention
No. 13 of 1907; .
"2. That it is inconsistent with the refusal of
this government to allow delivery of supplies to
vessels of war on the high, seas;
"3. That, according to all authorities on in
ternational law who concern themselves more
properly with the question, 'exportation should
b prevented when this traffic assumes such a
form or such dimensions that the neutrality of
a nation Incomes involved thereby.'
REFERENCE TO PREAMBLE
"As to the assertion that the exportation of
arms and ammunition contravenes,, the preamble
of The Hague convention No. 13, of 1907. the
government presumes that reference is made to
the last paragraph of the preamble, which is as
follows:
' " 'Seeing that in this category of reasons, these
rules should not in principles be now altered in
times of war by a neutral power except when
purchase has shown the necessity for such
change for the protection of the rights of that
.2N
power
"Manifestly the only ground to change
the , rules . laid, down by the convention,
one-of which it should- be noted explicit
ly declares that a neutral is not bound to pro
hibit the .exportation of contraband of war, is
the necessity oIsl neutral power to do so in order
to protect its own rights The. right and duty
to determine when this necessity exists rests with
the neutral, not with a -belligerent. It is dis
cretionary, not mandatory. If a neutral power
does not avail itself of the right, a belligerent
is not privileged to complain, for in doing so it
would be in -the position, of declaring to the neu
tral power what is necessary to protect that pow
er's -own rights. The imperial and royal gov
ernment can not but perceive that a complaint of
this, nature would invite just rebuke.
AS TO INCONSISTENCY
"With reference to the asserted inconsistency
of the course adopted by this government in ref
erence to the exportation of arms and ammuni
. tion and that followed in not allowing supplies
to be taken from its ports to ships of war on
the high seas, it is only necessary to point out
that the prohibition of supplies to ships of war
rests upon the' principle that a neutral power
must not permit its territory to become a naval
base for either belligerent. A warship may, un
der certain restrictions, obtain fuel and supplies
in a neutral port once 'in three months. To
permit merchant vessels acting as tenders to
carry supplies more often than three months and
in unlimited amount would defeat the purpose
of the rule and might constitute the neutral ter
ritory as naval base. Furthermore, this govern
ment is unaware that any Austro-Hungarian ship
S war has sought to obtain supplies from a port
in the United States, either directly or Indirect
1? This subject has, however, already been dis
cussed with the imperial German government, to
which the Position of this government was fully
set forth December 24, 1914.
HAS' BEEN MISLED
"In view of the positive assertion in the state
ment of the imperial and royal government as to
Se unanimity of the opinions of text writers as
to the Exportation of contraband being unneutral,
this government has caused a careful examina
l, ? tie Principal authorities on international
ii0fn h?made As a result of this examination
?T to ?onS to the conclusion that the imperial
11 ?ov?l Government has been misled and has
and royal g overnm Gu assertion. Less
inadvertently maae an ero rnnRuIte(1 advo.
s&BSsr.
than
export of contraband.
who constitute this minority admit that the nrae
- ,..
ucc oi nations uas neon otherwise, it may. not
bo inopportune to direct particular attention 'to
tho German authority, Paul Elnicke, who
states that at the beginning of a war belligerent
have never remonstrated against tho enactment
of prohibitions on trade In contraband, but adds:
" 'Such prohibition may bo considered viola
tions of neutrality, or, at least, as unfrlondly
acts, if thoy are enacted during a war with the
purpose to close unexpectedly the sourcos of sup
ply to a party which heretofore had rolled up
on them.' .
"Tho government of tho United States deem
it unnecessary to extend further at the present
timo a consideration of tho statement of th
Austro-Hungarian government. The principle
of international law, tho practice of nations, the
national safety of the United States and other
nations without great military and naval estab
lishments, tho prevention of Increased armies and
navies, the adoption of peaceful methods for the
adjustment of international differences, and
Anally, neutrality itself, arc opposed to the pro
hibition by a neutral nation of tho exportation
of arms, ammunition or othor munitions of war
to belligerent powers during the progress of the
war. . (Signed)
"LANSING."
The Political Situation
Interview given Portland, Oregon, papcrs
Q. "What do you think of the political situa
tion next year, Mr. Bryan?"
A. "No one," replied Mr. Bryan, "can speak
with any certainty in regard to the campaign of
1916. It Is difficult to look ahead a year In or
dinary times and these aro not ordinary times.
It is just a year ago that tho war broko out in
Europe, and It wo look back over last year and
noto the problems which havo been forced upon
ub, wo can unaerstanu now Impossible It Is to
calculato political conditions a year hence. It i
we were dealing with domestic questions alone
wo might reasonably rely for our hope of suc
cess in 1910 upon tho manner In which tho proa- '
ident, wij.li tho aid of a. democratic senate" and
a democratic house, has dealt with economic
questions tho tariff question, tho curroncy ques
tion and tho trust question. In each caso dem-
ocratlc principles have been applied. The tariff
law, new currency law and anti-trust law deal '
with these questions from tho people's stand
point and in the people's interest, and if the
people were free to consider these questions
alono we could hardly doubt that a largo ma- '
jority would register a verdict of approval.
"If we turn to international affairs wo Hud
that the administration has had to deal With
many difficult problems and it has dealt with "
them successfully. The, Mexican question, the
Japanese question and tho European question,
each in its own turn and sometimes all together, j
have produced acuto conditions and tho president
should bo given credit and I havo no doubt will
be given credit for having so dealt with them
as to avoid war. What tho future will develop
no ono can foresee, but tho democratic party
has earned the confidence of tho people and a
democrat, therefore, has reason to expect a dem-
ocratlc victory in 1916."
Q. "Will you be a candidato for the demo
cratic nomination for president ncrft year, Mr.
Bryan?"
A. "I have no political expectations whatever
and no plans looking to tho holding of any office .
in the future. Tho work which I havo mapped '
out for my remaining years does not include the
occupying of any political position. This answer i
covers every contingency and ought to bo sat- "
isfactory to all classes except one. Thero is one
class in this country that has insisted that
should prrimlso never under any circumstances
to be a candidate for anything. I havo never
felt that it was, necessary to gratify this class hy
making a promise of that kind, and I do not
think it necessary to make that kind of a'prom
ise now. Friends will be satisfied to know my
plans, and it is not necessary that I should un
dertake the hopeless tack of pleasing those whe
count themselves mong tho politically unfriend
ly. It is enough for those who are unfriendly
to know that I shall remain In politics for the
rest of my lifo and that it will bo my purpose
hereafter, as it hag been heretofore, to advocate
that which I believe to be good for the masses
of the people and to expose and oppose the '
(Continued on Page Fourteen) r "
'ti
. j
.
S3
I
if
A
z