| OCR Text |
Show PRO-GERMAN VIEW IS PRESENTED. The Chicago Tribune, which is known as a strong pro-German paper, presents the very strongest argument argu-ment on the side of those opposed to thr- "armed merchantman" in the following: fol-lowing: "The present issue between the German government and our own respecting re-specting the conduct of submarine operations op-erations seems to be this: Shall German Ger-man submarines concede to aimed merchantmen of the enemy the first shot because citiens of the United Slates have elected to travel on such merchantmen? "The structure of the submarine Is and at this stage of its development must be suclr that the first properly directed shot Is virtually certain to be the last, in that qnly one shot, even that of a one pounder, is fatal to the submarine. "Put in another form, the issue is whether a merchantman armed sufficiently suffi-ciently to destroy a submarine with one shot is defensively or offensively arnipd. "Under a rule formulated before the creation of the submarine the presence pres-ence of a relatively small gun is held consistent with the presumption ot defensive armament, i "That rule was founded on the tacts. A small gun could not seriously seri-ously injure a warship It could not j be made offensive at the will of the commander of the merchantman summoned sum-moned to surrender "The rule does not square with the facts of the submarine. The principle upon which the rule Is founded does not apply to them. A one pounder .an destroy a submarine. The pre- j sumption that such a gun will be used 1 only In defense must rest entirely upon the will of the commander or his instructions "The position now -taken by our government therefore is that a Ger man submarine approaching a British, ; French, or Italian merchantman which carries a gun capable of de- i stioying such submarine shall chal I lenge the merchantman to surrender g and accept the hazard of destruction j "Furthermore, the presence of de- S fensive armament on merchantmen i was justified by facts now non-exist 1 ent namely, the practice of privateer- a ing and the existence of pirates As I pirates have disappeared from Euro- ! rean waters and privateering is no j longer permissible under lntemation- j ol n- nn nrp;iiTnnlinn rf defense win I attach to the presence of guns on merchantmen. "Enemy ships consist of only two kinds, combatant and non-combatant. If a ship is non-combatant it will not be equipped to combat. If a ship Is equipped with armament sufficient to ' destroy an enemy warship, as in the case of a merchantman mounting a i six inch, four inch, or one pounder E gun, such merchantman having no I use for such armament except against I enemy craft, it cannot claim the char- 1 acter of an "unarmed" merchantman, I but should be held what in. fact It is1, I a combatant sliip. I "The object of any armament on a I ship of the belligerents is one and I one only, to use against enemy war- 1 ships to bo explicit, the submarine. 1 It is therefore an armed ship and the I distinction as to defensive and offen- P sive armament, founded on the prac I tico of privateering and piracy, and 1 having no application to use against enemy war craft, is not involved. I "This is the Issue as between Great I Britain and Germany. R "What is the issue between the United States and Germany? It is J whether the right of citizens to travel J on unarmed merchant ships jaf bel- ligerent nationality is a right to trav- I el on merchant ships of Great Britain 3 armed in fact against German subma- rznes. u "Or, put in another way, the Issuo g is: Does the presence of Americans i on a British ship compel a German submarine to allow the -British ship to pass or by challenging It accept the hazard of destruction? I "If this were conceded Groat Brit- ain by mounting guns on Its merchantmen mer-chantmen and Americans by travel Ing on them can insure such part of the British merchant marine from otherwise lawful operations bj- Germany Ger-many against what are In fact arnfed and therefore combatant enemy craft. "The object of arming the allies' merchant craft Is to protect them from capture or destruction by German Ger-man or Austrian submarines. Such destruction is of great importance to the central powers in their conduct con-duct of the war and a legitimate measure of sea warfare. British shipping ship-ping is conveying necessary supplies to the allies. The Interruption of this eervic, is of great If not vital importance import-ance to the central powers. If It Is to the Interest of the United States to liuro this supply, the government should do so as an ally and not under the pretense of defending neutrality. "The president asserted the right - - of neutrals to travel on "unarmed" merchantmen of the belligerents. He asserted the duty of war craft to challenge chal-lenge 'unarmed and unresisting' merchant mer-chant ships. Both these contentions have been accepted by the German government. "Yet -we now assert that by virtue of. a rule framed to meet facts not now involved merchant ships armed In fact are not armed, and must be accepted as unarmed by Germany be-' cauBe Americans are traveling" on them. The principle that rules of international in-ternational law must not be altered during the course of the war begs the whole question of whether tho xule as to defensive armament applies ap-plies to merchantmen armed In fact offensively against submarines. "If American honor is involved in this controversy, it calls upon us to look the facts in the face, to apply to them principles, not a mere formula, form-ula, and to adopt fearlessly the course which justice dictates. "If It Is American sympathies or interests in-terests that are involved, let us not Lalk about honor and let us consider bonsibly and candidly what those interests in-terests are." 00 |
