NEUTRAL ZONES

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20068, 14 October 1939, Page 5

NEUTRAL ZONES

EXTENSION AT SEA MATTER FOR AGREEMENT INTEREST IN LONDON OLD PRINCIPLES OUSTED (British Official Wireless.)

Reccl. 12 noon RUGBY, Oct. 13. 'lnterest has been aroused in naval circles in London by unofficial reports received of important decisions reached at the Panama conference of republics of America to the effect that a neutral, or safety, zone of variously stated depths from the coast is to be established.

It is understood that the zone is in no way intended as an extension of territorial waters, but belligerents are to be invited to accept a limitation of their operations which would be involved by the scheme in this way. The proceeding, it is agreed among experts here, is clearly the wisest, since while the belligerents, and particularly the Allies, may be anxious to assist all neutral countries in keeping the war from the proximity of their coasts, it must be for them to decide whether or not to accept restrictions which would limit their enjoyment of certain wellestablished rights. On the other hand, neutral States are entitled and bound to demand that belligerents shall abstain from hostilities in their territorial waters, and it is not a hostile act if a neutral repels, even by force, an attack upon his neutrality. During the Great War, Norway, Sweden, Spain and Holland forbade belligerents’ submarines to enter their territorial waters except in case of distress. Extravagant Claims

Authorities on naval history point out -that in olden times many extravagant claims were put forward by various nations as to the limit of their territorial waters, but since those days such claims had been drastically modified and it is now generally recognised that no country can properly claim jurisdiction over large areas of ocean, nor the right to control or exclude the movements of foreign ships on the high seas. This applies equally to belligerents’ operations, though a belligerent can, of course, restrict his operations of his own free will if he so wishes. Since the Great War, the importance of the limit of territorial waters has been brought to the notice of the public in several ways, among others by reason of the National Prohibition Act of America. Resulting from a discuesion with .Great Britain, an agreement was reached in Washington in 1924 whereby the United States was given the right to board and examine any British vessel suspected of being engaged in liquor smuggling at a distance from the coast that could toe traversed toy that vessel in one hour. By the same agreement, Britain and America declared their firm intention to uphold the principle that three marine miles, extending from the coastline outwards and measured from low water mark, should constitute the proper limits of territorial waters. Similar agreements were subsequently entered into by America with Germany and Sweden. Certain bays, straits and canals

have from time to, time been the subject of special international agreement, so that when questions of jurisdiction and sovereignty arise careful reference must be made to any agreements applicable to the particular case. The width of flic general belt of territorial waters is now widely accepted as being three miles.