SUBMARINE ORDERS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVI, Issue 16751, 5 January 1915, Page 10

SUBMARINE ORDERS.

PLACED IN UNITED STATES.

IMPORTANT LEGAL QUESTION. ("San Francisco Chronicle.")

WASHINGTON, December 2.

Formal inquiry was made to-day by the United States Government of the Bethlehem Steel Company to learn i c the firm intended the construction of submarines for use by any of the belligerent Powers of Europe. Charles M. Schwab, president of the company, and other officers of the concern, in response to an invitation from the State Dopnrtment, explained orally their position and agreed to submit it in writing in a few days. In the meantime neither they nor the State Department officials would disclose the exesut of the company's activities.

The question under consideration is how far American firms may go in the manufacture of materials for use in the construction of war craft without violating the neutrality laws of the United States.

Although the export, of arms and ammunition, horses, motor trucks, shells and even large guns is not prohibited by the laws of the American Government .and a neutral is not obligated by international law to prevent their shipment, a different attitude is assumed in law toward the building or equipping of a foreign warship on neutral territory.

According to high officials the point which will decide the position of tho Washington Government will be a determination of the stago at which tho materials to be used in the build ing of a vessel are delivered to a belligerent. They would not comment oil where the line of demarcation would be fixed. It was generally believed, however, that the shipment at ono time of all parts of a vessel, even though in separate cargoes, probably would be disapproved by the Washington Government. On the other hand, shipment of certain parts as noon as manufactured out of which ultimately belligerents could construct submarines abroad, it was thought, would bo regarded as a purely commercial . transaction not dissimilar to the export of other war materials which arc subject to seizure as absolute contraband on the high seas.

Under the laws of the United States it is a misdemeanour to fit out or arm any vessel, if it is to be employed in the service of any nation with which this country is at peace. Similarly The Hague Convention of 1907, ratified by the United States, says: " A neutral government is bound to use all the means at its disposal to prevent the equipment within its jurisdiction of any ship which it has reasonable grounds. to believe is intended to cruise or take part iu hostile operations against a Power with which it is at peace. "It is also bound to use the same diligence to prevent the departure from- its jurisdiction of any vessel destined to cruise or take part in such hostile operations, and which shall havo ,been adapted, wholly or in part, _' to warlike use within such jurisdietio.i." On the last part of the above article referring to the departure of "any vessel" which shall have been "adapted, wholly or in part," will the ruling of the American Government be based in the present case. Schwab recently returned from Europe, where he visited Germany and England. On his return it was said he brought contracts for many million dollars' worth of war supplies for the British Government. It was suggested to-day that he might also have discussed that feature with Secretary Bryan.