BEGGING THE QUESTION

Evening Post, Volume XCI, Issue 107, 6 May 1916, Page 4

BEGGING THE QUESTION

Germany's reply to the United States Note serves to bring out once again the fact that, while Germany refuses to admit the. illegality of her submarine campaign, she really relies on the plea of reprisals. If Germany were candid,, her case would be as follows : "Britain illegally (?) stopped our food, therefore tve stop British trade by any means in our power, legal or illegal, human or inhuman. If we, in deference to tho United . States, cease our illegal submarine campaign, then the United States must compel Britain to cease her illegal starvation (?) campaign. If Britain does not cease her campaigu, we will not cease ours." The answer to this is simple enough. In the first place, determinate justice would be hopelessly handicapped if it was a sufficient defence to say that a crime was justified by the parallel existence of • another crime, or of a hundred other crimes, which crime or crimes must be stopped before the first crime can come to judgment. If that plea was admitted, justice would have no determination whatever. In the second place, having admitted that two wrongs do not make one right, such a defence becomes still more outrageous when the second wrong, with which a parallel is sought to be created, is (1) not proven, and (2) even if proven, can bear no comparison in nature with the first crime. Bloodless interference with sea-trade is not comparable with plain murder of non-combatants, and the United States cannot be led into the position of staying its course against redhanded piracy because of a pending chaxge of interference with the traffic bylaws. Germany's persistent effort to hale her foe before the same court, at the same time, on an altogether different issue, is simply begging the question. Whether the United States -will allow the question to be begged depends on the. Washington Government.