The Stratford Evening Post WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1915. THE GREAT STRUGGLE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXV, Issue 37, 15 February 1915, Page 4

The Stratford Evening Post WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1915. THE GREAT STRUGGLE.

Though the optimism of those who predicted a dramatic and speedy ending to the great war was in itself an admirable thing, the desirable end is not yet, and to-day it seems that Lord Kitchener’s view 'that the campaign would be fairly long, is probably the right one. The progress of the Allies is certainly most satisfactory, because in both the Eastern a> d Western theatres the Allied foices have been able to withstand the reckless and terrible attacks which the Germans have been making. Certainly Germany is concentrating all energies on effecting some sort of showing at, this time, and the hazard that this desperation is for the purpose of having some foundation for offering peace, may be near the truth. The war-fed spirit of the German people still presents a formidable power of resistance, and it will not do to permit any relaxation on our part. Those who are actually meeting the Kaiser’s hosts in conflict on land and sea, do not disparage or underestimate the might or valor of thoil opponents, though they may deplore their barbarity and the brutal treatment meted out to defenceless peoples. No good purpose would he served either hv those who are not

actually in the fighting front attempting to belittle German might and power. But more than ever must it he determined that nothing less than a final reckoning must lie the issue, and that nothing we can do will he too great in the help we render at this most critical time in our nation’s history. German ideals, as revealed to the world to-day must never he allowed to stand. Civilisation cannot permit such criminal disregard of the laws of humanity as Germany has shown. These would-he world-inasters have said everything must give way to German necessity—even the nation’s pledged word and honorable undertaking. The population of unoccupied territory which defends itself should ho treated as belligerents—Germany has executed hundreds of such people without trial. The Germans have disregarded the sanctity of the Red Cross. They have violated the Hague Convention in improperly using enemy uniforms, in unnecessarily devastating enemy property, in putting prisoners of war to military tasks, in bombarding undefended towns and dwellings, in wantonly destroying “buildings devoted to religion, science, art, and charity,” in levying contributions not required by the necessities of the army in occupation. The list is a long one and the dreadful charges made have boon fully proved. Therefore at any cost Germany must be crushed. Slowly but surely the neutral nations of the world are waking up to a realisation that they must play their part for the sake of nationhood and freedom.

THE DECLARATION OF LONDON.

One of the most rigorous rules in regard to warfare and the control of shipping at such a time was introduced to prize law practice by the United States courts. This is the so-called “doctrine of continuous voyage,” and was applied to contraband by the American courts as far back as 1866, without any protest by Great Britain. This doctrine, briefly, means that if contraband is shown to have an illegal destination, the fact that tire ship will land it at some neutral port' is immaterial, and will afford no protection. An important change in the practice of dealing with contraband was introduced by the much-discussed* Declaration of London. This was a 1 general international summary of the* laws of prize. To become law it had to be accepted by Parliament, but was thrown out by the House of Lords. On the outbreak of war an Order-in. Council was issued adopting the Declaration for guidance, but there is divergence-of opinion as to its legal, ity. An important clause provides that when the amount of contraband! found in a ship captured at sea is not sufficient to involve the condemnationj of the ship by the prize courts, thej commander of the captor warship shall he allowed to take out of the merchantman all such contraband and destroy it, and then permit the captured ship to proceed on its way. This is contrary to all previous British practice. Every ship, whatever the charge against her, had to be sent into a British port and tried by the prize court before her cargo could he touched. It would ho interesting to see what view the courts would take, in a test case, of the conduct of any naval officer who followed the Declaration of London in this matter.