The watchman and southron. (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, April 10, 1915, Image 3
Prima Donna Who Is to Appear Here on the Last
Night of Chautauqua Week
ALICC NIELSEN OF THE METROPOLITAN AND BOSTON OPERA
COMPANIES.
TlfT MtJtl announcement of the appearance of Alice Nielsen, prlma
doom ?>r the Metropolitan and P.oiton Open Companies, at 120 Ued
parb Chnutnuquas this season has been vvide<Uy hi'ralded throughout
the musical uorNL This Is the first Instance in which so celebrated
a mush a I tffHil ha s npp? ared on a great chain of Chautnuquas. It Is safe to
aaj. however, tint with increasing demand among Chautauqua patrons fot
the best in music many other tours of world famous musicians will fol
low In years to come. I ? ??ding musical journals have commented upon this
tour as sn innovation which will open a new and broader held to the greatest
musical talent.
Allee Nlelsct?, unlike so many of our greifest artists, was not born In
Europe, hut Is a native of Nashville, Term. She is a beautiful southern wo
?Mil of whom the south is especially proud. lier fume as a singer is world?
wide.
DAVIDSON U INS OD \ \< ?1114 \1.
comf1 ?
dim uh.vJ<h? of isc*trtrte ?>? Placed on
Immlgrathn h\ tu i.i \ lot?
Able ^argument*.
Rock Hill. April I,?Duvldson won
from Clemson tonight in debute here,
the query b mm% !;? > Thut for?
eign Immigration n.tn tin- 1' i?i i I
Mieten wbmild be f mi her reutrttteel hj
the Imposition of a ll!? racy test?'"
The argument* r.f each side were ubl>
made und gave < \>- ,i. ?? that the
speaker* had "given much thought and
study to the question under discus?
sion.
The Helmte wu-i held ?n th?- audi?
torium of Winthrop colli get which 1?
ideal for oratorical display. \'i> M
doni 1?. H. Johnson preuMN I and a
large andiene?-, >n holing the the nt*
and Winthrop girK h?-ml tin- -
hutore with deep Interest. Tin- a'?
plaum> sflsggbtJ tt i? both v I i
many euppgfiejtl p* em.
The Judges for the ocrnggtafi wore
tf. M. l*ewK Chester; .1 L Otenn.
ri.e-.er. O. K s>'p? iu*?-r, York Tille; L? .
Da*, is L?.dk'?- <i,ifrm-\. .1. I'. Kennedy.
Clinton. The d. <a nm was In favor
of Davidson by a score of four to ?>n?.
Immediately aiu r tin- de<BgfOU had
been uuiounced thv fi and stu
d? lit body tendered U r<e?>pt|on III
honor of the de' .it<u e t1 ? a '
the visiting enlhw m
Heal i l.?le i ran i. | .
C. I* TlMdah- to II. I.. i "rom h.
lota on (*alhoun street,.
J. M. HroK?h>n t<* i'i.i'IIi Wllllanv
Iraets of 1? and 2.1 icr< i respectively
In Concord Town-duo. |3##,
Martha 0 W ? | fi | |g W. W. Ctm
nlnghaio. one .%<n 11 I'l-a ant QroVt
liapllst CmW h. < I M
Master lej W, I Whltcheau? I*
acres near city and lot mi Street I
gjgeji citv iimi". IT??n.
\V I. fhrtteg i I i . I ?? st i
t \ It aetl In ei.nn'N I I ."'in
Mllsf.t to W. I Whitehead. 7
Mjpejj i?.in'v. 1 ?.
MntefjNjr i.h mac iutel
A license tu mat a In I !?<?? n grant
ed |a Rugene liar no and Milt Kin
Ward. St. ?*l .il.
Jb? ? ?-?
I?ne tin a* n left In 'In bsM h
will brief mmnth ggotiulluea to pro
a p??sf to ah ? Mir*1 n< le.hlaH I.
mosqul'ocs cause iiuilaua.
M si \i\s STATE COURT.
? -.
Codciul Podx upholds South < uro
llnu > 'Highest Tribunal In Three
* mi
Washington, April "?.?South Caro?
lina's Supreme ?'<mt was upheld *tO?
day by the 'UnitOd States Supreme
Court in thr? e ca- ^.
The ilrst was thai of Joe Molloy,
OOttVlCted of r11<1111 r of d entils Moore
in Marlunt ? COUnty and sentenced to
be elect roi uted. The argument on
which tht appeal was based was that
When the crime \\;is committed hang?
ing I 'la- m thod of capital punish?
ment proxide! !.s the State law anil
thai Beutow ?? to el ictrooutton amount?
ed to the application of an ex post
l o t,, |;w in \i latlon ot the conslitu
tton. The Federal (Supreme Court re?
lented Ihli argument, us it also re?
soled the argument of the Phoenix
Mutual Life in ui. nee Company in
two other appals from the south
Carolina Supreme Court, that Insur
ejiee COmmleeloner McMaator had
violated ihe fourteenth amendment
m denying thii company ?*? llcenee be*
can. it had ;n.t dopoeltod South Car?
olina's securities according to State
law,
< ilT PO MEMCAL COLLEGE,
Columbia. April OoV, Manning.
.m 11n^ pi? ildenl ol the Medical t'ol
leK?' ol South CnVnllna was today no?
un. I of a gift of H.ete to the eollege
bj Mm fefnllna H, Huger, of Charten?
Uov. v mi lag i? ; t at l o'clock to at -
tend a meetlni of tin1 Clemeon lrue>
i. ? *t i "i? meon.
. ^uddcidy.
I'. - Thl Kid.. I ft ni. Apt il 7.
I itt Wade, one of J, H, M\ era' c >n
Iracl hands, died vers suddenly 'IV s
iiay afternoon, it is reported, after a
luarrel with ? negro vornan. An ea?
imiiintlon ? n ide by the Coroner
? od i phj tii i n l ie . day evening, Lisi
althout an uu( >|?hj there were no
.. bl hI ns ol foul play. Hoai \e,\
i 'i "ii ? i , iif i|uarrel ol lh*.'
i i i 1 vornan, Narah Howard
i n mi'* led i i; 11 is now lodged
? i I he . i ? i hmise und ?'orner Scale
i ; j 'i i a> l ivent l lus afternoon
II |ni lul III au ii tit oos} ?. * tile hotly.
f i in r. \ ? 11 ? n ii. Indk utlon uf foul
d || an nape. IIt > dl be held.
NOTi: ol IMTI.D STATES TO M
Lli:s is GIVEN OUT,
Trade With Neutrals should Not ho
Interfered with in indue Manner
says Note?United states Conoedei
Klght to Henrch Neutral C raft, hut
Does not Want Blockade Operated
With Dieregerd to National l aw.
Washington, April 5.?The United
States government today made public
its note to cjreat Britain announcing
that it '?could not permit" either the
right Of the allies or their claims for
justification in placing an embargo
on all commercial Intercourse be
tWOen Germany and neutral countries.
"To admit it," says the # communi?
cation, "would he to assume an atti?
tude of unneutrallty towards the
prest nt enemies of Great Britain
which obviously would be Inconsist?
ent with the solemn obligation of this
government in the present circum?
stances and for Great Britain to make
such a claim wou'.d be for her to
abandon and set at naught the prin?
ciples for which she constantly and
earnestly has contended in other
times and circumstances."
The note reviews at length the
legal phases of a blockade of bellig?
erent territory and virtual blockade
of neutral coasts.
In conclusion the United States
states its expectation that Great Brit?
ain, after having considered the "pos?
sibilities of serious interruption of
American trade" under the order in
council "will take the steps necessary
to avoid them, and In the event that
they should unhappily occur would
be prepared to make full reparation
for every act, which under the rules
of international law constitutes a
violation of neutral rights."
The American communication in?
terprets the circumstances under
which Great Britain's claims to be
Justified in adopting retaliatory meth?
ods towards her enemies as "merely
a reason for ertaln extraordinary ac?
tivities" by her naval forces "and not
an excuse for or a prelude to any un?
lawful action."
"If the course of the present
enemies of Great Britain," the note
adds, "should prove In fact to be
tainted by illegality and disregard
of the principles of war sanctioned by
enlightened nations, it can not be
supposed and this government does
not for a moment suppose that his
majesty's government would wish the
same taint to attach to their own ac?
tions."
Ambassador Sharp at Paris was in?
structed to present a copy of the
American note to the French foreign
office with the statement that al?
though the French admiralty decree
had not been received officially in
"Washington, it was understood to be
identical with the British order in
Council and the American government
there made similar reply.
The text of the note to Great Brit
:?i follows:
"The secretary of State to the
American ambassador at London:
"Washington, March iiO, 191.').
"You are instructed to deliver the
following to his majesty's government
in reply to your Xos. 179.r> and 1798
of March:
"The government of the United
States has given careful consideration
to the subjects treated in the British
notes of March 1". and March 15 and
to the British order in council of the
latter date.
"These eommunicatlons contain
matters of grave Importance to neu?
tral nations. They appears to menace
their rights of trade and intercourse
not only with belligerents but also
with one another. They call for
Hank comment in order that nhs
UndergtandlngS may be avoided. The
government of the United States
deems it its duty, therefore, speaking
in tile slncerest spirit of friendship,
to make its own view and position
w it It regard to them unmistakably
clear.
?The order In council if the 16th
of March Would constitute, were its
provisions to DO actually carried into
elicit, as they Stand, a practical as?
sertion of unlimited billigeren! rights
over neutral commerce within the
Whole European area, and an almost
unqualified denial of the sovereign
ii ids of tht- nation! now at peace.
"This government tikes it for
granteu that there can lie no question
What their rights are. A nation's
sovereignty over its own ships and
cltlseiM under its own Hag on the
high seas in time of peace is of course
unlimited; ami that sovereignty suf?
fers no diminution in time of war,
excepl in SO tar as the practice and
ei.ns<nt n| civilised nations huve*lim?
ited n by th)> roeognlxatloii of certain
now eU ail;, dctei mined rights, which
it is conceded may he exercised by
nations which are at war.
A belligerent nation has been con?
ceded tin right of visit and search,
and the right of capture and con?
demnation, If upon pxnmtnatlon n
neutral vessel is found to Im engaged
in unneutral service or t.> be carrying
i out m Im ||d ol v. It I intended for I lie
eueni) n government ui armed forces,
h has been conceded the right to I
establish and maintain a blockade of
an enemy's ports and coasts and to
capture and condemn any vessel
taken when trying to break tlie block?
ade, it is even conceded the right to
detain and take to its own ports for
judicial examination alU vessels
which it suspects for substantial rea?
son to be engaged In contraband ser?
vice and condemn them if the sus?
picion, is sustained. But such rights.
lOng clearly defined both in doctrine
and practice, have hitherto been held
to be the only permissible exceptions
to the principle of equality of sover?
eignty on the high seas as between
belligerents and nations not engaged
in war.
"H is confidently assumed that his
majesty's government will not deny
that it is a rule sanctioned by general
practice that, even though a blockade
should exist and the doctrine of con?
traband as to unblockaded territory
be rightly enforced, innocent ship?
ments may be freely transported to
and from the United States througn
neutral countries to belligerent terri?
tory without being subject to the pen?
alties of contraband traffic or breach
of blockade, much less to detention,
requisition or- confiscation.
"Moreover the rules of the declara?
tion of Paris in 1856?among them
that free ships make free goods?
will hardly a* this day be disputed by
the signatories ol that solemn agree?
ment.
"His majesty's government, like the
government of the United States, have
often and explicity held that these
rights represent the best usage of
warfare in the dealings of belligerents
with neutrals at sea. In this connec?
tion I dosire to direct attention to the
opinion of the chief justice of the
United States in the case of the Pe
terhof, which arose out of the Civil
war, and to the fact that that opinion
was unanimously sustained in award
of the arbitration commission of 1871,
to which the case was presented at
the request of Great Britain. From
that time to the declaration of London
of 1909, adopted with modifications of
the order in council of the tSrd of
October, last, the rights have not been
seriously questioned by the British
government. And no claim on the
part of Great Britain of any justifica?
tion for interfering with these clear
rights of the United States and its
citizens ns neutrals could be admitted.
"To admit it would be to assume an
attitude of unneutrality towards the
present enemies of Great Britain,
which would be obviously inconsistent
?,T..
with the solemn obligations of this
government in the present circjm
stances, ?and for Great Britain to make
such a claim would be for her to
abandon and set at naught the prin?
ciples for which she has consistently
and earnestly contended in other
times and circumstances.
"The note of his majesty's principal
secretary of State for foreign affairs,
which accompanies the order in coun?
cil and which bears the same date,
notifies the government of the United
States of the establishment of a
blockade which is, if defined by the
terms of the order in council, to in?
clude all the coasts and ports of Ger?
many and every port of possible ac?
cess to enemy teritory. But the novel
and quite unprecedented feature of
that blockade, If we are to assume it
be properly so defined, is that it em?
braces many neutral ports and coasts,
bars access to them and subjects all
neutral ships seeking to approach
them to the same suspicion that would
attach to them were they bound for
the ports of the enemies of Great
Britain, and to unusual risks and pen?
alties.
"It is manifest that such limita?
tions, risks and liabilities placed upon
the ships of a neutral power on the
high seas, beyond the right of visit
and search and the right to prevent
the shipment of contraband already
referred to, are a distinct invasion of
the sovereign rights of the nation
whose ships, trade or commerce are
interfered with.
"The government of the United
States is of course not oblivious to the
I yreat changes which have occurred
in the conditions and means of naval
warfare since the rules hitherto gov?
erning legal blockade were formu?
lated, it might be ready to admit
that the old form of 'close' blockade,
with its cordon of ships in the im?
mediate offing of the blockaded ports,
is no longer practicable in face of an
enemy possessing the means and op?
portunity to make an effective defense
by the use of submarines, mines and
aircraft; but it can hardly be main?
tained that, whatever form of effect?
ive blockade may be made use of, it
is impossible to conform at least to
the Spirit and principles at the es?
tablished rules of war. If the neces?
sities of the cast should seem to ren?
der it Imperative that the cordon of
hlockudillg VeSS*, Is be extended across
the approaches to any neighboring
neutral poll or country, it would
seem clear thai it would still be
easily practicable to comply With Un?
well recognized and reasonable prohi?
bition of International law against the
hlockuding of neutral ports bj ac?
cording free admission and exit to till
lawful Ira tile with nt utral ports
through the blockading cordon. This
traffic would, of course, include all
outward bound traffic from the neu?
tral country and all inward bound
traffic to the neutral country except
contraband in transit to the enemy.
Such procedure need not conflict in
any respect w ith the rights of the bel?
ligerent maintaining the blockade,
since the right would remain with the
blockading vessels to visit and search
all ships either entering or leaving
the neutral territory which they were
in fact but not of right investing.
"The government of the United
States notes that in the I order in
council his majesty's government give
as their reasons for entering upon a
course of action, which they are
aware is without precedent in mod?
ern warfare, the necessity they con
I
ceive themselves to have been placed
under to retaliate upon their enemies
l for measures of a similar nature
which the latter have announced as
their intention to adopt and which
they have to some extent adopted;
Mii the government of the United
States, recalling the principles upon
which his majesty's government have
hitherto been scruphlous to act, in?
terprets this as merely a reason for
certain activities on the part of his
majesty's naval forces and not as an
excuse for or prelude to any unlawful
action. If the course pursued by the
present enemies of Great Britain
should prove in fact tainted by illegal?
ity and disregard by enlightened na?
tions, it can not be supposed and
this government does not for a mo?
ment suppose, that his majesty's gov?
ernment would wish the same taint
to attach to their own actions, or
would cite such illegal acts as in any
sense or degree a justification for
similar practices on their part in so
far as they affect neutral rights,
"It Is thus that the government* of
the United Sttaes interprets the lang?
uage of the note of his majesty's
principal secretary of State for for
j eign affairs which accompanies the
copy of the order in council which
was handed to the ambassador of the
United States government in Lon?
don and by him transmitted to Wash?
ington.
"This government notes with gratifl
tion ? that 'wide discretion is afford?
ed to the prize court in dealing with
the trade of neutrals irt such manner
as may in the circumstances he deem,
ed jjust and that full provision is
made to facilitate claims by persons
Interested in any goods placed In the
custody of the marshal of the prize
court under the order;* and 'the ef?
fect of the order in council is to con?
fer certain powers upon the execu?
tive officers of his majesty's govern?
ment;' and that the extent to which
the powers will he actually exercised
and the degree of severity with which
the measures of blockade authorized
will he put into operation are mat?
ters which were discussed in an ad?
ministrative order issued by the gov?
ernment and the decisions of the au?
thorities especially charged with the
duty of dealing with individual ships
and cargoes according to the merits of
each case. This government notes fur?
ther with equal .satisfaction toe dec?
laration of the British government
that 'the instructions to be issued by
his majesty's government to the fleet
and to the customs officials ar.d ex?
ecutives concerned will impress upon
them the duty of acting with the ut?
most dispatch consistent with the ob?
ject in view and of showing in every
case such consideration for neutrals
as may be compatible with that ob?
ject, which is, succinctly stated, to
establish a blockade to prevent ves?
sels from carrying goods for or com?
ing from Germany.'
"In view of these assurances
formally given to this government, it
is confidently expected that the ex?
tensive powers conferred by the or?
der in council on the executive offi?
cers of the crown will be restricted by
orders issued by the government' di?
recting the exercise of their discre?
tionary powers In such a manner as
to modify in practical application
those provisions of the order in coun?
cil which, If strictly enforced, would
violate neutral rights and interrupt
legitimate trade. Belying on the
faithful performance of these volun?
tary assurances by his majesty's gov?
ernment the United States takes it
for granted that the approach of
American merchantmen to neutral
ports situated upon the long line of
coast affected by the order in council
Will not be interfered with when it
is known that they do not carry goods
which are contraband of war or
goods destined to or proceeding from
ports within the belligerent territory
affected.
"The government of the United
States assumes with the greatest COn
lidence that his majesty's government
will thus adjust their practice to the
recognised rules of international law,
i because it is manifest that the British
government have adopted an extra?
ordinary method of 'stopping cargoes
destined for or coming from the en?
emy's teritory, which, owing to the
existence of unusual conditions In
modern warfare at sea. it will be diffi?
cult to restrict to the limits which
base been heretofore required hj Ihe
law oi nations. Though the urea of
operations is confined to 'European
waters, including t tie Mediterranean,'
so geat an area of the high seas is
covered and the cordon of ships is so
distant from the territory affected
that neutral vessels must necessarily
pass through the blockading force in
order to reach important neutral ports
which Great Britein as a belligerent
has not the legal right to blockade
and which, therefore, it is presumed
rhe has no intention of claiming to
blockade. The Scandinavian and
Danish ports, for example, are open
to American trade. They are also
free, so far as the actual enforcement
of the order in council is concerned,
to carry on trade with German Baltic
ports, although it is an essential ele?
ment of blockade that it bear with
equal severity upon all neutrals.
"This government, therefore, infers
that the commanders of his majesty's
ships of war engaged in maintaining
the socalled blockade will be instruct?
ed to avoid an enforcement of the
proposed measures of nonintercourse
in such a way as to impose restrictions
upon neutral trade more burdensome
than those which have been regarded
as inevitable when the ports of a bel?
ligerent are actually blockaded by the
ships of its enemy.
"The possibilities of serious inter?
ruption of American trade under the
order in council are so mnay and the
methods proposed are so unusual and
,seem liable to constitute so great an
j impediment and embarrassment to
; neutralize commerce, that the govern
|men1 of the United States, if the or?
der is strictly enforced, apprehends
many interferences with its legiti?
mate traue which will impose upon
his majesty's government heavy re?
sponsibilities for acts of the British
authorities clearly subversive of the
rights of neutral nations on the high
seas. It is expected, therefore, that
his majesty's government having
considered these possibilities, will
take the steps necessary to avoid
them, and, in the event that they
should unhappily occur, will be pre?
pared to make full reparation for ev?
ery act which under the rules of in?
ternational lawT constitutes a violation
of neutral rights.
"As stated in its communication of
October 22, 1914, 'this government
will insist, that the rights and duties
of the United States and its citizens
fh the present war be defined by the
existing rules of international law
and the treaties of the United States,
irrespective of the provisions of the
declaration of London and that this
government reserves to itself the right
to enter a protest or demand in each
case in which those lights and duties
so defined are violated or their free
exercise interfered with by the au?
thorities of the British government.'
"In conclusion you will reiterate to
his majesty's government that this
statement of the views of the govern?
ment of the United States is made in
the most friendly spirit, and in ac?
cordance with the uniform candor
which has characterized the relations
of the two governments in the past,
and which has been in large measure
the foundation of the peace and amity
existing between the two nations with?
out interruption for a ceuntry.
(Signed) "Bryan."
In The Police Court.
The following were tried in the po?
lice court:
Sam Jackson, Osbourne Porter,
John Harvin, Frank Johnson, "Wash
Moore, Henry Robinson, Boozier
Dozier, Elijah Byrd, Bowman Hunter,
gambling; Harvin and Moore forfeit?
ed bond of $15 each. Henry Robin?
son was found not guilty and dis?
missed and all of the others plead
guilty and were given sentences of
$30 or 30 days each.
Henry David, drunk, $15.
Lizzie DeDane, storing whiskey, $50
or 30 days.
Tom Singleton, storing whiskey, $30
or 30 days.
No Joke^To, Be*Deaf
?Every Dssf Person Know* That.
I make myself hear after being deaf for SI yeeri with
these Artificial Kar Drama. I
wear tbera da/ and nicht.
They are perfectly comfort-i
able. No one aaa* them. Write!
me and I will tell you ? true'
atory, how I got deaf and how ^
1 make rayaelf hear AJdr?aa ?p? v .'
CEO. P. WAY, Artificial KM
* 8 Adaialde St . Oatrolt,
Our Foreign Advertising is in Charg* of
Jacobs & Co., Clinton? S. C.9
SOLICITING OFFICES:
New York?118 F. 281 li St.F. L. iJould
tiUcaeo?420 Advertising Bldg...W. P. Port lier
Detroit? Hotel Tidier..C, L Wias
Bt, Louie?lfiSS Central Nat' BaukMdg..
It, B. OsauBon
Kaahvflle?161 8th Ave. N..1. If.Riddle, .lr.
Atlanta?Wesley Memorial Mdg....i. li. Keough
Asheville, N. C.-H21 s Main St.?;. H. I.icon
Philadelphia--1421 Arc h M. A.<> l>?mei
Richmond, Va.?-Murphy Hotel_' . Li con
DEATH T0VER
RAT CORN
D i rat and mice exterminator made.
gillsquickly and sosetetel y without odor.
Mummitle*?thus preventlim decomposi?
tion. Better thas alt the trsps Is the
id. luMsi on lienulne RAT FOttN.
2.V.0OC, Jl at dealers or by mall, post?
paid.
\ BOTANICAL MFC. CO.
n^s^ 4th <ft Nac* St:. Philadelphia. Pm