WHO ARE THE HUNS?

American "Neutrality." 311
its weak-kneed and ridiculous attitude in the face of the steadilygrowing
indignation of the German-American and Irish-
American population, the government once more ventured to
protest to England against its dishonest use of other flags—
the real cause for Germany's procedure—a protest couched in
that tame and timid tone which offers so marked a contrast
to the language adopted towards Germany—then the United
States showed that it was determined to maintain its onesided
attitude to the last. For this injustice it is likely that
Japan in China may be the first indirectly to avenge the wrong
done the German people. (See the Note of the United States of
February 12, 1915.)
The answer which England returned to this Note on the
18th of February was nothing less than a contemptuous rejection
of all the justifiable American claims of neutrality. Its crowning
insolence was the citing of Bismarck as testimony for the
attitude maintained by Sir Edward Grey. The righteousness
of the English Government towards all "neutrals" was revealed
as in a glory of Bengal lights.
The answer of England to the United States, dated February
18th, 1915, lays stress upon the point that the difference
between food supplies for the civil population and the militaryforces
ceases to exist as soon as the difference between the
civil population and the military force itself ceases to exist,-—as
was the case with Germany. No matter what was imported for
the consumption of the civil population, this would nevertheless
be used by the military, whenever the necessities of
the situation required this to be done,-—especially at a
time when the German Government had assumed all control
over the supplies of provisions. While England was concerned
in avoiding all damage to neutrals, Germany's intention
to sink all merchant ships and their cargoes without ascertaining
their nationality and character, and without providing
for the safety of their crews, made it necessary for the British
Government to consider the taking of steps which would shield
their interests. It would be impossible for one belligerent to
remain bound by the customs of war in the event of the other
belligerent departing from the observation of these.
Concerning the right of declaring as contraband of war