JOHN WILLIAM BURGESS
THE EUROPEAN WAR OF 1914
Its
Causes, Purposes, and Probable Results
1915
CHAPTER VII
p. 179—188
179
CHAPTER VII
THE EXPORT OF ARMS AND MUNITIONS TO BELLIGERENTS
TO one viewing the subject from a purely
scientific and objective standpoint, the claim that an embargo by a
neutral government of the sale of arms and munitions of war to
belligerents is, under any circumstances or conditions, a violation of
neutrality seems either sophistical or hypocritical and in either case
unpatriotic. It is quite true that the inconsistency in principle still
exists that a neutral government may not furnish nor allow its subjects
to furnish ships of war to belligerents, but may allow its subjects to
furnish the guns and munitions which give to vessels their formidable
character as ships of war. But the permission to its subjects of
furnishing arms and munitions to belligerents is the right of
the neutral government, not
180 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
the duty
of the neutral government to the belligerent.
The neutral government may permit or may not permit,
as it may freely choose. Its duty is, that after having made its choice
it must accord parity of treatment to all belligerents. That is, if it
refuses to permit sales to one it must refuse to all and if it allows
them to one it must allow them to all, in like manner and extent.
Should it happen that conditions exist, or come to exist, independent
of the power or the act of the neutral government, whereby any
belligerent does not, or even cannot, make use of his opportunity to
procure from the neutral, the neutral government is under no legal
obligation to take any notice of this. If it be ready and willing to
allow its subjects to furnish such belligerent, it will have discharged
its duty of parity of treatment.
It is entirely free, however, to discontinue
allowing its subjects to furnish to both, and neither has any right to
complain if it does; for, as I have said, the permitting or the
181 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
forbidding its
subjects to furnish is the right of the neutral government to
be exercised by it at its own discretion and not a duty to the
belligerent, to be rendered to him at his behest. Were this latter
true, then the neutral would no longer be a free state, no longer
sovereign. It would, in case of obligation to permit, be bound to the
policy of the belligerent, the war policy of the belligerent.
The argument that where only one belligerent can
take advantage of the permission to procure, the neutral government
must continue to allow its subjects to furnish, on the ground that it
would otherwise be depriving the belligerent of an advantage which the
belligerent himself had won, or on the ground that it would thereby
assist the other belligerent, is manifest sophistry and, if advanced by
the neutral, is only a pretext for favoring the one belligerent. It is
one of the most fundamental rules of international law that indirect
consequences are not to be taken into account.
182 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
It was this
principle which prevented us from getting anything out of Great Britain
at Geneva in
1872, except the reimbursement of direct private losses. The
hundredfold greater indirect losses have never been atoned for in the
slightest degree.
If by any twist of logic, ceasing to help one
belligerent directly can be held to be helping the other, then this
latter assistance is indirect and is not taken into account in
diplomatic or international reasoning or acts. And when we go over into
the domain of morals, certainly, if there are two courses legally open
to the neutral, one of which helps directly only one of the
belligerents but the other helps both directly or neither, the neutral
should follow the latter course.
At the present time and under present conditions
only Great Britain and her allies can profit by our government's
permitting the free sale of arms and munitions. These conditions are
not of our government's making, and it does not in law need to take any
notice of them, provided it be ready and
183 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
willing to
allow Great Britain's enemies to be furnished in the same degree and
measure. It is surely difficult to determine whether private parties
are ready and willing to furnish both belligerents or not until the
actual test should be made and made in each separate case. The majority
of those now furnishing arms and munitions to Great Britain and her
allies, under the permission of this government, are undoubtedly doing
so, purely and simply, for the dollars there are in it. Such persons
would undoubtedly furnish them to the enemies of Great Britain, or to
His Satanic Majesty himself, if the opportunity offered and the
payments were satisfactory. There are some who, besides the dollar
inducement, desire to assist Great Britain and her allies against their
enemies, and would probably find some way of avoiding the sale of arms
and munitions to such enemies should the occasion arise. This would be
unneutral, but how could it be dealt with?
Still further, there are unquestionably a few who
think that by furnishing arms and
184 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
munitions to
Great Britain and her allies alone the war may be shortened. Such
persons also would probably find some way to avoid furnishing the
enemies of Great Britain with the means of warfare, which, as I have
said, would be unneutral indeed, but difficult, if not impossible, to
deal with.
Finally, there is one man, so far as I know only
one, who has assumed the firm, courageous, unselfish, and humane stand
that he and his company will take no advantage of the permission of our
Government to furnish arms and munitions to the belligerents in this
war and has distinctly and definitely refused to fill any orders
offered him. This man is Charles R. Bryson, President of the
Electro-Steel Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Mr. Bryson says:
We believe that the time is at hand when any
firm or individual who accepts a contract to further add to the
horrible slaughter now going on in Europe will do so to his own
disgrace.
These words should be printed in gold and in letters
large enough and upon a tower
185 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
high enough to
be seen all over these United States. Mr. Bryson is right not only from
the point of view of highest humanitarianism, but from every other
point of view, practical and legal. It will bring no permanent gain to
this country in dollars and cents to furnish the means for killing and
maiming the men and destroying the property of Europe, thus lessening
and crippling our legitimate trade with Europe in times of peace. It
will not secure victory for Great Britain and her allies nor enable
them to shorten the war that they alone can take advantage of the
permission of our government to procure arms and munitions here, while
their enemies cannot. We may reasonably conclude that Germany and her
allies will not be able to invade the British Islands, and will not
probably undertake to go much further into Russia, but they will, in
all probability, hold the line substantially as now fixed so long as
they desire, and there is no power on the face of the earth sufficient
to crush the German Empire. At the begin-
186 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
ning of the
War in 1756,
Frederick the Great had five millions of souls to draw
from and his enemies one hundred millions, and yet he waged war against
them seven years and came out victorious. Today, the German Empire has
alone seventy millions of souls to draw from and with its allies one
hundred and sixty millions, while its enemies have all together not
really three hundred millions of equal capacity. If Prussia could
triumph over twenty to one in 1763, cannot that same Prussia, better
prepared, more united and far more capable, hold her own against less
than two to one in 1915? No, the furnishing of arms and munitions of
war to Great Britain and her allies by the people of the United States
will only prolong the war without altering the final result.
I verily believe that, except for that aid, the war
would be very near its end, if not practically over, today; and I agree
with Mr. Bryson that any man in this country who furnishes further the
implements of death and destruction to the belligerents in this war
187 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
will do so,
"to his own disgrace." Mr. Bryson is also entirely right in assuming
that he and his company do not violate the neutrality of the country in
refusing to furnish arms and munitions of war to belligerents under any
circumstances or conditions, nor would his government do so in
forbidding them to be furnished. The contrary view is not only false as
having no basis in international law, not only unpatriotic as
subordinating the policy of our country to the war policy of a foreign
country, but it is promotive of hypocrisy as turning the scales between
conscience and dollars now balancing in the minds of many fairly honest
men.
If men wish to sell arms and munitions of war to the
belligerents for the dollars that are in it, let them say so. They have
the legal right to do so, so long as the government permits it. If they
wish to do this in order to help one belligerent against another, let
them say so, for while this appears unneutral, there is no way to reach
it, so long as our own government permits it. But let
188 THE EXPORT OF ARMS
us not
encourage men to take refuge under the view that they must do so to
preserve neutrality for that is false, unpatriotic, and hypocritical.
Neither the individual nor the nation nor the government can, in the
eye of God or in the eye of history, escape the guilt of having aided
in the prolongation of this terrible war by seeking shelter under any
such flimsy pretext, any such patent subterfuge.
Last update: August 11th, 2014
