The Dominion. MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 1911. THE DECLARATION OF LONDON

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1032, 23 January 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 1911. THE DECLARATION OF LONDON

During the past few days there have been many references in our cable news to what appears to be a steady cannonade of protest against the Declaration of London. Such further protests are recorded to-day' as enable it to be said that there is in British shipping and commercial circles a very strong feeling against Britain's adoption of the proposals of the International Naval Conference. This Conference, arranged by Britain, and attended by delegates from practically all the Powers, sat -in London from December, 1908, to February, 1909, and formulated an extremely comprehensive mass of laws of naval warfare. Rightly or wrongly there began to grow, upon the publication of the report of-the Conference, a feeling that Britain had mado some very serious sacrifices. The points about which hostile criticism has chiefly settled are: The addition of foodstuffs to tho list of conditional contraband" and the undesirable scops of this list in other respects, the disadvantage to Britain in the immunity given to neutral vessels carrying conditional contraband to neutral ports, the provisions relating to neutral prizes, and the absence_ of any agreement about the conversion of merchant vessels into ships of war. In a memorandum to the Foreign Office the Bristol branch of the Navy League put tho princiobjection in these terms: "Whilst enemies' cruisers can search, sink, and destroy our vessels, we should _bo precluded from interference with those bound for a neutral port," and no really satisfactory reply to it has been made. The strongest reply than can be given was Sir Edward Grey's statement in the House of .Commons on April 7, 1909: Is it more or less likely that a foreign warship in timo ot war will attempt to interfere with food, supplies coming into this country under a neutral flag than it was before? Whenever it does our-hands aro just as free as they were before." • But under the new laws there is nothing to prevent the carrying of food and other conditional contraband to a neutral European port, thereafter to be. sent by land to the miropean cijcmy. Since there are no neutral . ports in Britain, she will have her _ food supplies carricd at _ a risk which can bo easily avoided by any Continental or non-insular Power. Tho Foreign Office, in reply to a protest from tho Edinburgh Chamber . of Commerce, declared that under the Declaration food supplies could not be declared "absolute'' contraband, whereas "instances have occurred-in recent years in which a powerful belligerent has, with tho approval of other ' great Powers, declared food supplies to be absolute contraband, and such instances may occur again at any moment in time of war." But little reflection is required to see that this is not an improvement that will greatly assist Britain. The temper of some of the critics of the Declaration will be seen from tho following extract from an article in the Morning Post by Mr. Wyatt, who, after enumerating some of the articles that are ' "conditional contraband"—including foodstuffs, forage, grain, fuel, clothing, coin or bullion, vessels, boats, floating docks, railway or telegraph material, balloons, flying machinos, horseshoes, etc.—adds:

All these goods, many of tliom invaluable for purposes of war, may bo carricd by neutral vessels, under tbo very noses of British cruisers, smitten into impotence by Sir Edward Grey, into Antwerp, into Amsterdam, or any other nonGerman Continental port, whence their transit can bo immediately continued by land, until they aro handed over to the German naval or military authorities. Imagine, if we can, tho sentiments of the captains and officers and men of a squadron of British cruisers who; under this "Liberal" provision, have to watch neutral merchant ships, loaded with stores for their enemy, pass unmolested on their way. Is this arrangement an instance of the superhuman wisdom of the Liberal party and of tho Liberal Secretary for Foreign Affairs? Is this the proof of their anxious solicitude for tho poor man's interests? Or can tho records of any nation supply a parallel on tho part of any Government to such rank imbecility, to-such callous-indifference, or to such brutal neglect? But what is sauce for tho German gander is not to bo sauce for the English gooso. Truly, Sir Edward Grey and Mr. Lloyd-Georgo and Co., do not believo in reciprocity. They prove that by tho Declaration of London. For tho great and substantial benefits thus conferred upon Germany aro denied to Britain. The German is to be allowed, to draw on tho supply sources of the world, brought over the seas of tho world, and forwarded by the briefest of journeys by land. Tho Briton is to bo refused Buch help. Every neutral .ship which brings towards our shores either foodstuffs (with ono notable exception) or 'any of tho articles enumerated above will do so at tho samo deadly risk which will 1m encountered by one of our own merchantmen.

Objection is also urged against the character and powers of the Prize Courts, and against what is alleged to bo such slack rules governing blockade that Britain loses much of the advantage of this weapon. Even the Manchester Guardian had to protest against Sin Edward Grey's reply to. tho argument of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce that conditional contraband carricd by a neutral to any British port could be captured, since any such port could bo regarded as "a base for the armed forces of tho enemy." Sir Edward Grey said the effect of this clausc was "merely" to throw' the burden of proof that goods are not in fact intended for the use of the armed forces of the Crown from the captor to tho owner of the captured goods. At present the captor can prove little. But under the Declaration proof of innocence by the owner will bo so very difficult that tho change,, will "make all the difference between' normal condemnation and normal immunity." The Guardian, by .the is responsible for the record

cabled last week, that the Foreign Office has decided not to proceed with the ratification owing to an intimation by tho Australian Government that it desires to discuss the Declaration. The colonics are, as Admiral Fuemantle said a few days ago, immensely interested in the question. If tho Guardian's report is accurate, it is not without its significance for its bearing on intcrImperial relations where international issues arc concerned.