27.12.2012 Views

WHO ARE THE HUNS?

WHO ARE THE HUNS?

WHO ARE THE HUNS?

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

290 Breaches of Sea-Law by England.<br />

the German coast. But a blockade to which neutrals are also<br />

supposed to submit, can be recognized as valid, according to<br />

international law, only if it is proved to be effective, in other<br />

words it must be maintained by a fighting force that is sufficient<br />

to prevent all actual access to the enemy coast. The<br />

Paris Conference has established the law that a "fictive blockade"<br />

no longer exists. But England now attempts to make this<br />

"fictive blockade" valid everywhere.<br />

According to undisputed reports, the British, as early as<br />

October, 1914, demanded a deposit from all neutral ships that<br />

left English ports,—this guaranty to be three times the value<br />

of the cargo. This sum is paid back only after the British<br />

consul in a neutral port has certified the arrival of the vessel.<br />

This was intended to prevent the neutral ship from proceeding<br />

to a German port. Surely this "paper blockade" in connection<br />

with neutral ships is something which must shortly become<br />

unendurable.<br />

In other cases the English have determined that relative<br />

contraband was to be forwarded only upon a written declaration<br />

ofj the shipper's that this relative contraband was really<br />

destined for the needs of the neutral land in question. Here<br />

England returns to her theory and practice of the "continuous<br />

voyage." This was done away with in the London Declaration<br />

upon the proposal of Germany, as is clearly established in<br />

Articles 33 and 35. This is as much as to say that relative<br />

contraband, even though it be eventually destined for the<br />

enemy, is not subject to seizure even when it is to be unloaded<br />

in a neutral intermediate port. England on the contrary, seizes<br />

as contraband, or as that which she considers as contraband,<br />

all in violation of the most express provisions regarding<br />

positive contraband, wares upon neutral ships—even when these<br />

are under way to neutral ports.<br />

II.<br />

It appears to be the chief endeavor of England to antagonize<br />

all neutrals by the way in which she interprets the accepted<br />

customs of sea-law as laid down in the Declaration of London,<br />

and to reveal to them by drastic object-lessons the whole<br />

brutality embodied in the English tyranny of the seas. And

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!