THE F ATHERLAND
Fair Play for
Germany and Austria-Hungary
GEORGE SYLVESTER VIERECK
FREDERICK F. SCHRADER
A weekly published and owned by The Fatherland Cor oration, 1123
Broadway, New York City. Telephone, Farragut 9777. able Address,
Viereck, New York. President, George Sylvester Viereck; Vice-President,
ayo Hans Hinrichs' Treasurer Cu .' Reisinger; Asst. Treasurer,
Walter W. Stake; Secretary, . M. Grill. Terms of Subscription,
including postage, in the United States and Mexico, $2.90 per ear. In
Canada, $3.25 per year; $1.25 for six months. Subscription to al foreign
countries within the postal union, $2.25 per year. Single copies, 5 cents.
Newsdealers and Agents throughout the countr supplied by The Inter-
national News Company. Manuscripts, addresse to t e Editor, if accom-
Eanied by return postage, and found unavailable, will be returned.
ditor, however, accepts no responsibility for unsolicited contributions.
European Representative, Louis Viereck, Suedwestkorso 8, Berlin-
Copyright, 1914, by The Fatherland Cor oration.
Ofhcc, New York, N. Y., as Second Class attcr.
Entered at the Post
HE-animus of the London dispatch that the German
and German-American insurance companies doing
business in the United States were not able to secure
funds from Germany to make good their policies, as
printed in the New York Times, is now explained. The
English companies found so many of their policies can-
celled by German sympathizers here, and transferred to
the German and German-American companies, that they
hoped to "stop the defection by using the American organ
of the British Foreign Office to alarm American policy-
holders. Under the laws, insurance funds are invested in
American securities, and no requisition has to be made
on Germany. But this shows how the Allied press is
subordinating itself to English schemes. German sym-
pathizers should patronize only American and German or
Austrian insurance companies.
AMERICAN “NEUTRALITY NOTES”
UST how the administration is executing its neutrality policy
may be gathered from a few incidents.
VVhen the German gunboat Grier ran into Hawaii her presence
was immediately heralded by the Marconi station. The message
was picked up by a Japanese cruiser. Assistant Secretary Roose-
velt of the navy ordered the suspension of the Marconi station.
His order was immediately rescinded by Secretary Daniels. The
Jap had time to block the harbor, and the German ship was
Her sister ship touched an American port in the Philippines
and asked for 1,500 tons of coal to reach the nearest German
port. By direction of Secretary Daniels she was told she could
take only 100 tons on the plea that coal was scarce, and she was
forced to interne.
British colliers and supply ships were violating the neutrality
of the Panama Canal zone. Governor Goctlials telegraphed the
Navy Department for American warships to uphold American
neutrality. He was so insistent on this that he was promptly
summoned to come to Washington. And now it is said that he
is tired of his position, and is to be sent into exile in Alaska to
build a’ railroad.
And the administration still keeps up its pose of neutrality.
TRIPPED of its cozzening verbiage, the British
reply to the American Government safeguarding
our sea-going commerce is a flat and defiant refusal
either to respect our material interests or our dignity
as a nation. England violates her own principles, ag-
gressively maintained by her for a hundred years, in
declaring that foodstuffs may not be taken prize
“without presumption” that they are intended for
military use. The actual principle is that they may
not be seized “without proof” that they are intended
for military use. Lord Granville, in 1885, when
France, then at war with China, undertook to stop
the shipment of rice to China, declared that
“There must be circumstances relative to any par-
ticular cargo, or its destination, to displace the pre-
sumption that articles of this kind are intended for
the ordinary uses of life.”
During the Boer war, Lord Salisbury declared:
“It is not sufficient that they (i.e., foodstuffs with a
hostile destination) are capable of being so used; it
must be shown that this was in fact their destination
at the time of the seizure.”
In short, a war vessel must have proof that the neu-
tral ship has aboard foodstuffs consigned to the army
or navy of its enemy before it can detain a neutral
ship and seize its cargo--but the presumption is the
other way. Thus, Secretary Hay in 1904 held that
“Articles which, like coal, cotton and provisions.
. . . are not subject to capture and confiscation im-
Iess shown by evidence to be actually destined for
the military and naval forces of a belligerent. . . .
This principle of the law of nations cannot be over-
ridden by the assertion that the owners of the cap-
tured cargo must prove that no part of it may even-
tually come to the hands of the enemy’s forces. The
Proof is of an impossible nature, and it cannot be ad-
mitted that the absence of proof in its nature impos-
sible to make can justify the seizure and condemna-
tion. If it were otherwise, all neutral commerce with
the people of a belligerent State would be impossible.
Mere presumption is in effect a declaration of W31’
against commerce of every description between peo-
PIC of a neutral and those of a belligerent State.”
It is up to the American people whether they will
allow.English warships to stop American ships from
Carrying American trade between our ports and those
“f Europe. convoy them into English harbors, hold
them there as long as they like, search them and con-
fiscate their cargoes upon the mere presumption that
they will ultimately find their way to the army OT
“WY; Or the government, of England's enemy.
Americans have flattered themselves that a E1-H0‘
P5311 War would mean a gain in prosperity, because
we would be expected to supply the belligerents with
fpodstuffs and the products of our factories. At 3
time when this opportunity arrives, our commerce is
prostrate, hundreds of thousands of wage earners are
thrown out of work, failures are increasing. and mi"
is more widespread than ‘in many decades.
The English note is an insult to our intelligence:
as it overrides the principles announced by England
herself and insisted on by our Government at 8
limes. Will the Wilson administration bow its head
In meek submission to the dictates of England? A1‘
low itself to be terrorized by British warships block-
ading our harbors? Or will it tell Sir Edward GT5)’
that its first duty is to American citizens? Mi11i0”5
of Americans are waiting to know,