Jasper County Democrat, Volume 18, Number 97, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 March 1916 — THE GERMAN REPLY. [ARTICLE]

THE GERMAN REPLY.

Through Ambassador von Bernstorff the German government announces that the pledges given in the Arabic and Lusitania cases will be strictly observed—only, they must be understood as applying only to unarmed merchantmen!. What is asked, therefore, is that we should accept the German interpretation of these pledges, which is quite different frpm the one that our government has given—and still continues to give—to them. It will, it is said, be impossible to reach any agreement on this basis.

But there is a chance for adjustment, though it may be slight. The real question is, not whether a ship is armed or not, but whether it is a peaceful vessel or a war vessel. This government has no thought of protecting war vessels from submarine or other perils. What has to be decided, therefore, Is what amount of armament and equipment it takes to convert a njerchantman into a ship of war, under the rules of international law. That is the issue, and it is one of great importance, and some difficulty. Yet if the German government Is reasonable and refrains from attacking ships on a mere chance till an agreement is reached there may be a settlement

that will be fair to all. But there is no possibility of an adjustment if the German statement is to be taken as meaning that armed merchantmen are subject to destruction, regardless of the character of the armament. That is the issue which we have been pressing on Germany, and which was fought out in congress last week. But those very people who have been insisting that the law shall not be changed in any vital particular during the progress of the war, would be the first to rgsent the suggestion that the law shg.ll be used to protect any belligerent ships that are not entitled to its protection. As it may not be illegally used as a sword by one party, neither may it be illegally used as a shield by the other. To admit that the latter may be done would be to admit that the ' law may be changed. To claim pro-! tection for a merchant ship that is really a warship would be as much ! a violation of the law as to demand the right to sink as a warship a 1 vessel that is really a merchant ship. We can accept neither con-j tention without surrendering our' whole case. And that is what we * do not propose to do. We do not propose to surrender any of it. If the German order, as 1 interpreted by the note that has just' been received, means that all armed ! enemy merchantmen are to be sunk without warning, and without insur-1 ing the safety of those on board, we are facing a very serious situation. I If there is action In the line of the order as thus interpreted, the situa-j tion will become critical. But if it is meant that attack will be directed ' only on those merchantmen which, by reason of their armament, have dost their legal status as peaceful' vessels, the German government will be back on legal ground, and there ’ will be no dispute with it. Every-’ thing, therefore, depends on the meaning of the order and on the ac-' tion of submarine commanders within the next few days or hours.—-In-' di an a polls News.