EAGLE LIBRARY 
 
 INo. I8Q 
 
 The 
 
 United States 
 
 and 
 
 The War 
 
 President Wilson's Notes on the 
 Lusitania and Germany's Reply 
 
 Diplomatic Correspondence Between 
 
 Germany, England and the United States 
 
 On Events Preceding the Sinking of the Lusitania, with 
 
 Decrees and Incidents Affecting American Lives, 
 
 Property and Rights in the War Zone 
 
 A COMPLETE OFFICIAL RECORD 
 
 Published by the BROOKLYN DAILY EAGLE, Brooklyn, New York 
 
 Issued at least 
 
 once a mo: 
 
 nth. 
 
 Subscription price $1.50 per year, Including Eagle Almanac 
 
 Vol. XXX. (1915) 
 
 PRICE 25 CENTS 
 
 Year No. 6 
 
 Aur, 
 
 "^g- 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 Renskorf, Lyon & Co. 
 
 ] 
 
 
 33 New Street, New York 
 
 
 STOCKS 
 
 
 BONDS 
 
 
 
 COTTON 
 
 
 
 COFFEE 
 
 
 
 GRAIN 
 
 
 
 COTTON SEED OIL 
 
 
 1 
 
 MEMBERS 
 
 
 
 NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE 
 
 
 NEW YORK COTTON EXCHANGE 
 
 
 •.•••■• NEW YORK COFFEE EXCHANGE 
 
 
 
 NEW YORK PRODUCE EXCHANGE 
 
 
 
 NEW ORLEANS COTTON EXCHANGE 
 
 
 
 CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE 
 
 
 
 j ASSOCIATE MEMBERS OF 
 
 
 LIVERPOOL COTTON ASSOCIATION 
 
 
 Telephone 2o05 Broad 
 
 1 \ 
 
 11 
 
 I.. - — . 
 
 
 
THE EAGLE LIBRARY 
 
 THE UNITED STATES 
 
 AND 
 
 THE WAR 
 
 President Wilson's Notes on the Lusitania 
 and Germany's Reply 
 
 Diplomatic Correspondence Between 
 
 Germany, England and the United States 
 
 On Events Preceding the Sinking of the Lusitania, 
 vv^ith Decrees and Incidents Affecting American 
 Lives, Property, and Rights in the War Zone ^ 
 
 A COMPLETE OFFICIAL RECORD 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 THE BROOKLYN DAILY EAGLE, BROOKLYN-NEW YORK 
 
 Entered at the Brooklyn-New York Post Office as second-class matter. V^ol. XXX, No. 6, 
 
 of the Eagle Library, Serial No. 189. June, 1915. Trademark "Eagle Library." 
 
 registered. Almanac Number $L00. Yearly subscription, $1.50, 
 
 including Almanac. 
 
GRAVEL ROOFING A SPECIALTY 
 
 ■"■m.^\i^ -Muni 
 
 Steel Portable Buildings Fireproof Garages 
 
 MANUFACTURED IN BROOKLYN 
 
 WILLIAM BUCHANAN 
 
 488-490-490y2 Sumner Avenue 1587 Fulton Street, Brooklyn 
 
 ^' 
 
 
 W TELEPHONES— 27 South, 3410 Flatbush. 
 
 w 
 
 # 
 
 Thirty=five Greenhouses 
 
 HORTICULTURIST 
 
 734 Fifth Avenue 
 
 Branches: Fort Hamilton Parkway, 
 
 Gravesend Av., and 291-313 24th St. 
 
 PLOTS IN GREENWOOD CEMETERY IMPROVED AND CARED FOR. 
 
 Palms,Vines and Fresh Flowers 
 
 Supplied and Artistically Arranged for Weddings at Reasonable Rates 
 
 FLORAL 
 
 DECORATIONS 
 
 FOR 
 
 ALL 
 
 OCCASIONS 
 
 
 
 
 wxsp^^^'^^y 
 
 PLANTS 
 
 AND 
 
 FLOWERS 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 ANYWHERE 
 
 
 JUN2bl9l5 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PACE 
 
 Introfliiction 7 
 
 President Wilson's First Note to Germany 9 
 
 Germany's Reply to the United States 11 
 
 President Wilson's Second Xote to Ck-rmany 13 
 
 German Xote on the Gulfliglit Attack 15 
 
 EXCHANGE OF XOTES WITH (iRKAT BRITAIX 
 
 Order in Council of Aiignst iO. 1014 16 
 
 Britain's "Military Area" 16 
 
 American Xote on Seizures 16 
 
 Grey's Preliminary Reply 18 
 
 Supplementary British Xote 20 
 
 American Xote on the Flag -;+ 
 
 British Reply on Use of Flag 25 
 
 Xote on the Wilhelmina 25 
 
 Memorandum on Wilhelmina 26 
 
 GERMAX WAR ZOXE AXD PROTEST 
 
 Germany's War Zone Decree 28 
 
 Memorial Explaining War Zone 28 
 
 Xote to Germany on War Zone 28 
 
 Cierman Reply to Our Xote 30 
 
 BLOCKADE MODIFICATIOXS SUGGESTED 
 
 American Xote to Belligerents 32 
 
 German Reply to Our Xote M 
 
 The British Reply 33 
 
 IXQUIRY OX REPRISAL METHODS 
 
 Reprisal Measures of the Allies 35 
 
 American Inquiry on Methods 35 
 
 French Reply to Inquiry 36 
 
 Reply of Great Britain 36 
 
 PAGE 
 
 BRITISH ORDER IX COUXCIL PROTESTED 
 
 Order in Council of March 15, 1915 i7 
 
 American Xote of Protest i7 
 
 British Memorandum on Detentions 39 
 
 Revised Br:ti^h and French Contrahand List 40 
 
 THE CASE OF THE WILLIAM P. FRVE 
 
 X'otc Asking Compensation for the Frye 42 
 
 German Reply to Our Xote 42 
 
 Second American Xote on the Frye 43 
 
 German Response to Second Xote 43 
 
 GERMAX COMPLAIXT AXD AXSWER 
 
 Amhassador Bernstorffs Memorandum 44 
 
 Our Reply to Bernstorft's Xote 44 
 
 THE SIXKIXG OF THE LUSITAXIA 
 
 Official (jerman Statement 46 
 
 Denials that Ship Was Armed 46 
 
 Germany's Xote of Regret 46 
 
 German Embassy's Warning 46 
 
 Germany's Xcutral Policy 40 
 
 SECRETARY BRVAX'S RESIGXATIOX 
 
 Mr. Bryan's Letter of Resignation 47 
 
 The President's Acceptance 47 
 
 Mr. Bryan's Formal Statement 48 
 
 STATUS OF THE DECLARATIOX CJF LOXDoX 
 
 Inquiry Sent to Belligerents 4S 
 
 British Reply t. j Xote 49 
 
 Memnrandum of Contrahand 49 
 
 Withdrawal of Our Suggestions 49 
 
 Treaty of 182S with Prussia 50 
 
 CUNARD LINER LUSITANIA 
 
 -XJ 
 
 w*.**»<rt "itaiS^ *_«*«— 
 
 
 The British steamship Lusitania, of the Cunard Line, was torpedoed and sunk by a German sub- 
 marine on May 7, 1915, while about ten miles off the Old Head of Kinsale on the south coast of 
 Ireland, and near the entrance to St. George's Channel, i he ship was struck by a torpedo at about 
 two o'clock in the afternoon and went down in fifteen minutes. The Lusitania was making a regular 
 trip from New \'ork to Liverpool, and had sailed from New York on May I, with nearly 2,000 
 passengers, including many .Americans. Over 1 , 1 00 persons were killed. Of this number over 100 
 were Americans, including Alfred G. Vanderbilt, Charles Frohman, Charles Klein, Mr. and Mrs. 
 Elbert Hubbard, and many others of prominence. 
 
THE 
 
 Canadian Natural Gas Corporation 
 
 Controls the 
 
 Entire Output of Natural Gas 
 
 In the Yamaska and Richeheu Valleys, 
 Just Outside of the 
 
 City of Montreal 
 
 Thereby Exploiting One of the 
 
 Most Important Natural Resources 
 on the Continent 
 
 With 
 
 IMMENSE TERRITORY 
 
 EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE 
 
 UNLIMITED MARKET 
 
 Present daily output from operating wells exceeds 3,000,000 cubic 
 feet. New wells now sinking should increase daily capacity to 10,000,- 
 000 cubic feet this summer. 
 
 An investment today in the stock of the 
 
 Cianadian Natural Gas Corporation 
 
 Offers an Exceptional Opportunity for Large and Early Profits. 
 
 Full Particulars, Engineer's Reports, Etc., on Request. 
 
 FIELDSTEEL & CO., 
 
 Tel. 343-4 Broad. 50 Broad Street, New York 
 
THE UNITED STATES 
 
 AND 
 
 THE WAR : 
 
PRESIDENT WILSON AT HIS DESK 
 
 P 
 
 25 1315 
 
 )CI.A4tllsn5 
 
The Eagle Library 
 
 Introduction 
 
 THE complete history nf this Oovern- 
 ment's connection with the maritime 
 I'hases of the World War and especially 
 with the incidents leading up to the 
 Lusitania tragedy and the exchange of 
 notes lietween the President and the 
 German Foreign Office is given in the 
 documents published in this issue of The Eagle Library. 
 President Wilsiiii's appeal in behalf of a broad neu- 
 trality, addressed to the American people after the 
 series of war declarations and the beginning of hos- 
 tilities last August, was the beginning and the end of 
 our official connection with the war until December. 
 Before tliat time, however, it became apparent that 
 the jjosition. even of an isolated neutral nation, in a 
 world war. was extremely difficult, and it was clearly 
 recognized that American interests were not confined 
 to this continent, and could not be so re.garded. With 
 no lioundaries or borders to bring us into close touch 
 with the belligerents in such a way as to cause a clash 
 of interests there remained the sea, and it was on the 
 sea that the acts of the belligerents provoked diplomatic 
 exchanges between this country and the nations at war. 
 It is neces.sary. in order to follow the sequence of 
 events, to recount briefly the leading incidents in the 
 first months of the war on the sea. There was a pos- 
 sibility, at the beginnin,g of hostilities, that the naval 
 contests would take the form of general engagements, 
 with the German fleets giving battle to the navies of 
 the allies. There have been several sea battles, but 
 in the main the naval power of the belligerents has 
 been differently employed. Germany, instead of send- 
 ing her larger ships to meet the enemy in an unequal 
 conflict, confined lu-r activities in the beginning, to 
 isolated but frequent raids along the English coast, em- 
 ploying submarines, fast cruisers and mines, and other- 
 wise harassing the commerce of Great Britain and her 
 allies. This activity was followed by Great Britain de- 
 claring the whole of the North Sea a "military area." 
 This declaration was made in a speech addressed to the 
 Hmise of Commons by Mr. Asquith, on November IT, 
 Later, Great Britain instituted the so-called "starva- 
 tion" policy which was applied in a long ran.ge blockade 
 
 of the German ports and involved the interception of 
 neutral cargoes which were under suspicion of being 
 intended for delivery to Germany through neutr.al 
 channels. On Decenilier ^6. the Government of the 
 United .States addressed a note to Great Britain pro- 
 testing against the interference with American com- 
 merce which the British policy entailed. 
 
 This was the first of a series of notes exchanged 
 between the two countries on the subject of neutral 
 commerce. This government dispatched a more specific 
 note at a later date, on the seizure of the Wilhelmina 
 by Great Britain, which was duly answered. There 
 was also a note from this government to Great Britain 
 on the use of the American flag by the Lusitania, 
 which l:irou.ght a reply from Sir Edward Grey. For 
 the convenience of readers, all these documents have 
 Iieen grouped and an effort has been made so to 
 arrange the exchanges that all those pertaining to a 
 given subject will be found under a comprehensive 
 heading. Thus the German Government's "war zone" 
 decree warnin.g netitrals that all the waters of Great 
 Britain and Ireland were unsafe for neutral ships and a 
 memorandum explaining the decree are grouped with 
 the American note to Germany on the subject and 
 Germany's reply. The American note to the belligerents 
 suggesting a modification of their methods of warfare 
 in the interest of neutral shippin.g is grouped with the 
 replies of Germany and Great Britain. other di>cu- 
 ments are similarly arranged. 
 
 While an attempt has been made to present the 
 official documents chronologically, where possible, the 
 American notes to (Serniany on the sinking of the 
 Lusitania and other cases, and the German reply are 
 given precedence because they are, in effect, a sum- 
 mary of the more important incidents that have trans- 
 pired and are of vital significance. Beyond this 
 transpositiiai there is no break in the continuity of 
 (he exchanges. Tile documents, with few exceptions, 
 are reprinted from official copies .secured from the State 
 Department in Washington, and the original phrase- 
 ology is preserved, as well as the form, with the 
 oniission of the stationary heading "State Department," 
 and the names of embassies. 
 
Copyright, 1915, 
 
 nv 
 
 The Brooklyn Dai^^y Eagle 
 
The Eagle Library 
 
 PRESIDENT WILSON'S FIRST NOTE TO GERMANY 
 
 American Protest on the Sinking of the Lusitania and Other 
 
 Cases in Which American Lives Were Lost and 
 
 the German Government's Reply 
 
 The Secretary of State to the American Ambassador 
 
 I'lease call on ihe Minister of Foreign Al'fairs and 
 after reading to liini this coniniunication leave with 
 him a co])y. 
 
 Ill view of recent acts of the <Jerman authori- 
 ties in violation of American rights on the high 
 seas, which culminated in the torpedoing and sink- 
 ing of the British steamship Lusitania on May 7, 
 1915, by which over 100 American citizens lost 
 their lives, it is clearly wise and desirable that the 
 Government of the United States and the Imperial 
 German Government should cunie to a clear and 
 full understanding as to the grave situation which 
 has resulted. 
 
 The sinking of the British fiassenger steamer 
 Falaba by a German submarine on March 28, through 
 which Leon C. Thrasher, an American citizen, was 
 drowned ; the attack on April 28 on the American 
 vessel Gushing by a German aeroplane ; the tor- 
 pedoing on May 1 of the American vessel Gultlight 
 by a German submarine, as a result of which two 
 or more American citizens met their death : and, 
 finally, the tor])edoing and sinking of the steamship 
 Lusitania, constitute a series of events which the 
 Government of the L'nited States has observerl with 
 growing concern, distress, and amazement. 
 
 Recalling the humane and enlightened attitude 
 hitherto assumed by the Imiierial German Govern- 
 ment in matters of internation;d riglit. and particu- 
 larly with regard to the freedom of the seas; hav- 
 ing learned to recognize the German views and the 
 German influence in the field of internatiorial obli- 
 gation as always engaged upon the side of justice 
 and humanity ; and having understood the instruc- 
 tions of the Imperial German ('"lovernment to its 
 naval commanders to be upon the same plane of 
 humane action prescribed by the naval codes of 
 other nations, the Government of the L'nited States 
 was loath to believe — it can not now bring itself to 
 believe — that these acts — so absolutely contrarv to 
 the rules, the practices, and the spirit of modern 
 
 at Berlin: 
 
 DEPARTMENT ( )F STATE, 
 W:\SIIINGTON, May 13, 1915. 
 
 warfare, coukl liax'c tlu- i-duntenance or sanction of 
 that great government, it feels it to be its dutv, 
 therefore, to address the Imperial < iernian Govern- 
 ment concerning them with the utmost frankness 
 and in the earnest hope that it is nut mistaken in 
 expecting action on the part nf the Imperial Ger- 
 man Government, whicli will currect the unfortu- 
 nate impressions which lia\e lieeii created, anil vin- 
 dicate once more the ]i(isition of that (jovernnieiit 
 with regard to ilie sacred ireeijnni of the seas. 
 
 The ( II \erninenl uf the I'niteil .States has been 
 apprised that the Imperial German Government 
 consiclered themsehes to be obliged liv the extra- 
 ordinary circumst.ances nf the ]iresent war and the 
 measures adopted by llieir adversaries in seeking 
 to cut German)' off fnun all commerce, to adopt 
 methods of retJiliatinn which go much be- 
 yond the ordinary methods of warfare at 
 sea, in the proclamation of a war zone 
 from which they have warned neutral ships 
 to keep away. This ( 'lOvernment has already 
 taken occasion to inform the Imperi.al ( ierm.m (Inv- 
 ernment that it cannot admit the ado])tion of such 
 measures nr such a warning of d.niger to operate 
 as in any degree an .■ibbre\-iation of the rights of 
 American shijimasters or of American citizens 
 bound on lawful errands as passengers on merchant 
 ships of belligerent nationalilw and that it must 
 holfi the Imperial German Go\ernment to ;i strict 
 accountability for an\- infringi'iiunt of tliosc rights, 
 intentional or inciiU-nt.il. It dm-s not understand 
 the Imperial Gerni.in < .ii\ernnunl to i|iiestioii those 
 rights. It assumes, on the cuntr.ir\-, that tlu- Im- 
 [icrial ' iovernnient accept, as oi course, the rule 
 that the lives of no)i-combat,ints. whether fhev he 
 of neutr.il citizenship or citizens of one of the na- 
 tions at war, cannot lawfully or riglitfulh- be put 
 in jeopaidy by the capture or destruction rT an un- 
 armed merchantman, and recognize also, ,-is ;dl 
 other n.ations do. the obligation to take the usual 
 
10 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 precaution of visit and search to ascertain whether 
 a suspected merchantman is in fact of beUigerent 
 nationahty or is in fact carrying contraband of 
 war under a neutral flag. 
 
 The Government of tiie United States, therefore, 
 desires to call the attention of the Imperial German 
 Government with the utmost earnestness to the fact 
 that the objection to their present method of attack 
 against the trade of their enemies lies in the prac- 
 tical impossibility of employing submarines in the 
 destruction of commerce without disregarding those 
 rules of fairness, reasun, justice, and humanity 
 which all modern ojjinion regards as imperative. 
 It is practically imjjossible for the officers of a sub- 
 marine to visit a merchantman at sea and examine 
 her papers and cargo. It is ])ractically impnssiljle 
 for them to make a prize of her ; and, if they can- 
 not put a ])rize crew on board of her, they cannot 
 sink her withnut leaving her crew and all on l)oaril 
 of her to the mercy of the sea in her small boats. 
 These facts it is understood the Im])erial (jerman 
 Government frankly admit. We are informed that 
 in the instances of which we have spoken time 
 enough for even tliat poor measure of safely was 
 not given, and in at least two nf the cases cited 
 not so much as a warning was received. Manifestly, 
 submarines cannot be used against merchantmen, 
 as the last few weeks have shown, without an in- 
 evitable violation of many sacred princi[iles of jus- 
 tice and humanity. 
 
 American citizens act within their indisputable 
 rights in taking their ships and in traveling wher- 
 ever their legitimate business calls them upon the 
 high seas, and exercise those rights in what should 
 be the well-justified confidence that their lives will 
 not be endangered by acts done in clear violation 
 of universally acknowledged international obliga- 
 tions, and certainly in the confidence that their own 
 Government will sustain them in the exercise of 
 their rights. 
 
 There was recently published in tin- newsjiapers 
 of the United States, I regret tn inform the Im- 
 jierial German Government, a formal warning, ])m-- 
 porting to come from the Imperial ("lerman lun- 
 bassv at Washington, addressed to the people of the 
 United States, and stating, in effect, that any citi- 
 zen of the United States who exercised his right 
 of free travel upon the seas would do so at liis jieril 
 if his journev should take him within the zone of 
 waters within which the Imj)erial (German Navy 
 was using submarines against the commerce of 
 Great Britain and France, notwithstanding the re- 
 S]iectful but very earnest i^rotc^t of this Government, 
 the Government of the I'nited l^tates. T do not 
 refer to this for the puri)Ose of calling the atten- 
 tion of the Imi)erial German Government at this 
 
 time to the surprising irregularity of a communica- 
 tion from the Imperial German Embassy at \\''ash- 
 ington addressed to the people of the United States 
 through the newspapers, but only for the [lurpose of 
 pointing out that no warning that an unlawful and 
 inhumane act will be committed can possibly be 
 accepted as an excuse or palliation for that act 
 or as an abatement of the responsibility for its com- 
 mission. 
 
 Long acquainted as this Government has been with 
 the character of the Imperial German Government, 
 and with the high princii)les of equity by which 
 they have in the past been actuated ami guided, the 
 Government of the United States cannot believe 
 that the commanders of the vessels wliich com- 
 mitted these acts of lawlessness did so except uniler 
 a misapprehension of the orders issued bv the Im- 
 jjerial (jerman naval authorities. It takes it for 
 granted that, at least within the practical possibili- 
 ties of every such case, the commanders even of 
 submarines were expected to do nothing that would 
 involve the lives of noncombatants or the safety of 
 neutral ships, even at the cost of failing of their 
 object of' capture or destruction. It confidently ex- 
 jjects, therefore, that the Imperial German Gov- 
 ernment will disavow the acts of which the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States complains ; that they 
 will make reparation so far as reparation is pos- 
 sible for injuries which are without measure, and 
 that they will take immediate steps to ])revent the 
 recurrence of anytliing so obviously subversive of 
 the principles of warfare for which the Imjierial 
 German Govermnent have in the past so wisely 
 and so firmly contended. 
 
 The Government and people of the United States 
 look to the Ini[)erial German Government for just, 
 ])rompl, and enlightened action in this vital matter 
 with the .greater confidence, because the United 
 States and Germany are bound together not only 
 by special ties of friendship, but also by the explicit 
 stipulations of the Treaty of 1828, between the 
 United States and the Kingdom of Prussia. 
 
 Expressions of regret and offers of reparation 
 in case of the destruction of neutral ships sunk by 
 mistake, while they may satisfy international obli- 
 gations, if no loss of life results, cannot justify or 
 excuse a |)ractice the natural and necessary effect of 
 which is to subject neutral nations and neutral per- 
 sons to new and immeasurable risks. 
 
 The Imperial German Government will not ex- 
 ])ect the ( 'lovernment of the L'nited .'-States to omit 
 any word or any act necessary to the |)erformance 
 of its sacred duty of maintaining the rights of the 
 United States and its citizens and of safeguarding 
 their free exercise and enjovnient. 
 
 BRY.AN. 
 
GERMANY'S REPLY TO THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 First Note of the German Government in Answer to President Wilson's 
 Protest on the Sinking of the Lusiatania 
 
 The German Minister for Forei^^n Affairs to the Anieriean Ambassador at Berlin: 
 
 Berlin. Mav 28, 1915. 
 flags bv the British l.iovernnient in connection with 
 
 The undersigned has the honor to make 
 the following- reply to the note of His 
 Excellency, Mr. James W. Gerard. Ambas- 
 sador of the United States of 
 America, dated the fifteenth in- 
 stant, on the subject of the im- 
 pairment of many American interests 
 by the German submarine war. 
 
 The Imperial Government has .sub- 
 jected the statements of the Govern- 
 ment of the United States to a care- 
 ful examination and has the lively 
 wish on its jiart also to contril:)Ute in 
 a convincing and friendly manner to 
 clear up any misunderstandings which 
 may have entered into the relations 
 of the two Govern- 
 ments through the 
 events mentioned 
 by the American 
 Government. 
 
 W i t h regard 
 firstly to the cases 
 of the .\merican 
 steamers Gushing 
 and Gulflight, the 
 American Embassy 
 has already been , 
 
 informed that it is 
 far from the Ger- 
 man Government to have any intention of order- 
 ing attacks by sulimarines or flyers on neutral ves- 
 sels in the zone which have not been guilty of any 
 hostile act ; on the contrary the most exi)licit in- 
 structions have been repeatedlv given the (^crman 
 armed forces to avoid attacking such vessels. If 
 neutral vessels have come to grief through the 
 ( iermrm submarine war during the past few months 
 In mistake, it is a question of isolated and excep- 
 lidiKil ca-cs which are traceable to the misuse of 
 
 carelessness or suspicious actions on the part of the 
 captains of the vessels. In all cases where a neutral 
 vessel through no fault of its own has 
 come to grief through tlie German 
 submarine or flyers according to the 
 fact> as a>certained by the German 
 Go\ernment, this Government has ex- 
 pressed its regret at the unfortunate 
 occurrence and promised indemnifica- 
 tion where the facts justified it. The 
 German Government will treat the 
 cases of the American steamers Gush- 
 ing and Gulflight according to the 
 same principles. An in\estigation of 
 these cases is in progress. Its results 
 will be communi- 
 cated to the Em- 
 liassy shorth'. The 
 investigation might, 
 if thought desir- 
 able, be supple- 
 m e n t e d by an 
 International Com- 
 mission of Inquiry, 
 pursuant to Title 
 Three of The 
 Hague Convention 
 of C^ctober 18. 
 1907. for the pa- 
 cific settlement of international disputes. 
 
 In the case of the sinking of the English steamer 
 Falaba. the commander of the ("ierman submarine 
 had the intention of allowing passengers and crew 
 ample opportunity to save themselves. 
 
 It was not until the captain disregarded the 
 order to lay to and took to flight, sending up rock- 
 et signals for help, that the German commander 
 ordered the crew and passengers by signals and 
 megaphone t'^ leave the ship within 10 mimites. 
 
 i\s(i\, from Underwood ^s: L'nderwood 
 
 EMPEROR WILLIAM OF GERMANY 
 
12 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 As a matter of fact he allowed them 23 minutes 
 and did not fire the torpedo until suspicious steam- 
 ers were hurrying to the aid of the Falaba. 
 
 With regard to the loss of life when the British 
 passenger steamer Lusitania was sunk, the German 
 Government has already expressed its deep regret 
 to the neutral Governments concerned that nationals 
 of those coimtries lost their lives on that occasion. 
 The Imperial Government must state for the rest 
 the impression that certain important facts most 
 directly connected with the sinking of the Lusitania 
 may have escaped the attention of the Government 
 of the United States. It therefore considers it 
 necessary in the interest of the dear and full under- 
 standing aimed at by either Government primarily 
 to convince itself that the reports of the facts which 
 are before the two Governments are complete and 
 in agreement. 
 
 The Government of the United States proceeds 
 on the assumption that the Lusitania is to be con- 
 sidered as an ordinary unarmed merchant vessel. 
 The Imperial Government begs in this connection to 
 point out that the Lusitania was one of the largest 
 and fastest English commerce steamers, constructed 
 with Government funds as auxiliary cruisers, and 
 is expressly included in the navy list published by 
 British Admiralty. It is moreover known to the 
 Imperial Government from reliable information fur- 
 nished by its officials and neutral jiassengers that 
 for some time practically all the more valuable Eng- 
 lish merchant vessels have been provided with guns, 
 ammunition and other weajions, and reinforced 
 with a crew specially practiced in manning guns. 
 According to reports at hand here, the Lusitania 
 when she left .New York undoubtedly had guns on 
 board which were mounted under decks and 
 masked. 
 
 The Inif)erial Government furthermore has the- 
 honor to direct the particular attention of the 
 American Government to the fact that the British 
 Admiralty by a secret instruction of February of 
 this vear advised the British merchant marine not 
 only to seek protection behind neutral flags and 
 markings, but even when so disguised to attack 
 German submarines by ramming them. High re- 
 wards have been offered by the British Govern- 
 ment as a special incentive for the destruction of 
 the submarines by merchant vessels, and such re- 
 wards have already been paid out. In view of 
 these facts, which are satisfactorily known to it, 
 the Imperial Government is unable to consider Eng- 
 lish merchant vessels any longer as "undefended 
 territorv" in the zone of maritime war designated 
 bv the Admiralty Staff' of the Imperial German 
 Xavv, the German commanders are consequently 
 
 no longer in a position to observe the rules of cap- 
 ture otherwise usual and with which they invari- 
 ably complied before this. Lastly, the Imperial 
 Government must specially point out that on her 
 last trip the Lusitania, as on earlier occasions, had 
 Canadian troops and munitions on board, including 
 no less than 5,400 cases of ammunition destined for 
 the destruction of brave German soldiers who are 
 fulfilling with self-sacrifice and devotion their duty 
 in the service of the Fatherland. The German 
 Government believes that it acts in just self-defense 
 when it seeks to protect the lives of its soldiers by 
 destroying ammunition destined for the enemy with 
 the means of war at its command. The English 
 steamship company must have been aware of the 
 dangers to which passengers on board the Lusitania 
 were exposed under the circumstances. In taking 
 them on board in spite of this the company quite 
 deliberately tried to use the lives of American citi- 
 zens as protection for the ammunition carried, and 
 violated the clear provisions of American laws 
 which expressly prohibit, and provide punishment 
 for, the carrying of passengers on shijis which have 
 explosives on board. The company thereby wan- 
 tonly caused the death of so many passengers. Ac- 
 cording to the e.xpress report of the submarine 
 commander concerned, which is further confirmed 
 by all other reports, there can be no doubt that the 
 rapid sinking of the Lusitania was primarily due 
 to the explosion of the cargo of ammunition 
 caused by the torpedo. Otherwise, in all human 
 probability, the passengers of the Lusitania would 
 have been saved. 
 
 The Imperial Government holds the facts recited 
 above to be of sufficient importance to recommend 
 them to a careful examination by the American 
 Government. The Imperial Government begs to 
 reserve a final statement of its position with regard 
 to the demands made in connection with the sink- 
 ing of the Lusitania until a reply is received from 
 the .American Government, and believes that it 
 should recall here that it took note with satisfaction 
 of the proposals of good offices submitted by the 
 American Government in Berlin and T,ondon with 
 a view of paving the way for a modus vivendi for 
 the conduct of maritime war between Germany and 
 fireat Britain. The Imperial Government ftirnished 
 at that time ample evidence of its good will by its 
 willingness to consider these proposals. The real- 
 ization of these proposals failed, as is known, on 
 account of their rejection by the Government of 
 Great Britain. 
 
 The undersigned requests His Excellency, the 
 Ambassador, to bring the above to the knowledge 
 of the American Government and avails himself of 
 the (ip]«]rtunity to renew, etc. VON JAGOW. 
 
PRESIDENT WILSON'S SECOND NOTE TO GERMANY. 
 
 The Secretary of State ad interim to the American Ambassador at Berlin. 
 
 American' Ambassador, Eerlin: 
 
 You are instructed to deliver textually the fol- 
 lowing note to the Minister of Foreign Affairs : 
 
 In compliance with Your Excellency's request I 
 did not fail to transmit to my government im- 
 mediately upon their receipt your note of ]\Iay 28 in 
 reply to my note of May 15 and your supplement- 
 arv note of June 1, setting forth the conclusions 
 so far as reached by the Imperial German Gov- 
 ernment concerning the attacks on the American 
 steamers Gushing and Gulflight. I am now 
 instructed by my government to communicate the 
 following in reply : 
 
 The Government of the United States notes with 
 gratification the full recognition by the Imperial 
 German Government, in discussing the cases of the 
 Gushing and the Gultlight, of the principle of the 
 freedom of all parts of the open sea to neutral 
 ships and the frank willingness of the Imperial 
 German Government to acknowledge and meet its 
 liability where the fact of attack upon neutral ships 
 "which have not been guilty of any hostile act" 
 by German aircraft or vessels of war is satisfac- 
 torily established, and the Government of the United 
 States will in due course lay before the Imperial 
 German Government, as it requests, full informa- 
 tion concerning the attack on the steamer Gushing. 
 
 With regard to the sinking of the Steamer Falaba 
 bv which an American citizen lost his life, the 
 Government of the United States is surprised to 
 find the Imperial German Government contending 
 that an eiTort on the part of a merchantman to es- 
 cape capture and secure assistance alters the obli- 
 gation of the officer seeking to make the capture in 
 respect of the safety of the lives of those on board 
 the merchantman, although the vessel has ceased 
 her attempt to escape when torpedoed. These are 
 not new circumstances. They have been in the 
 minds of statesmen and of international jurists 
 throughout the development of naval warfare, and 
 the Government of the L'nited State? docs not un- 
 derstand that they have ever been held to alter 
 the principles of humanity upon which it has in- 
 
 DEPARTAIENT OF STATE, 
 Washington, D. G., June 9, 1915. 
 
 sisted. Nothing but actual forcible resistance or 
 continued eiTorts to escape by flight when ordered 
 to stop for the purpose of visit on the part of the 
 merchantman has ever been held to forfeit the 
 lives of her passengers or crew. The Government 
 of the United States, however, does not under- 
 stand that the Imjierial Cierman Government is 
 seeking in this case to relieve itself of liability, but 
 only intends to set forth the circumstances which 
 led the commander of the submarine to allow him- 
 self to be hurried into the course which he took. 
 
 Your Excellency's note, in discussing the loss of 
 -American lives resulting from the sinking of the 
 steamship Lusitania, adverts at some length to 
 certain information which the Imperial German 
 Government has received with regard to the char- 
 acter and outfit of that vessel, and Your Excellency 
 expresses the fear that this information may not 
 have been brought to the attention of the United 
 States. It is stated that the Lusitania was un- 
 doubtedly equipped with masked guns, supplied 
 with trained gunners and special ammunition, trans- 
 porting troops from Ganada, carrying a cargo not 
 permitted under the laws of the United States to 
 a vessel also carrying passengers, and serving, in 
 virtual effect, as an auxiliary to the naval forces of 
 Great Britain. Fortunately, these are matters con- 
 cerning which the Government of ihe United States 
 is in a position to give the Imperial German Gov- 
 ernment official information. Of the facts alleged 
 in Your Excellency's note, if true, the Government 
 of the United States would have been bound to 
 take official cognizance in performing its recognized 
 duty as a neutral power and in enforcing its n;i- 
 tional laws. It was its duty to see to it that the 
 Lusitania was not armed for offensive action ; that 
 she was not serving as a transport; that she did 
 not carry a cargo prohibited by the statutes of the 
 I'nited States, and th;it, if in fact she was a naval 
 vessel of Great Britain, she sliould not receive 
 clearance as a merchantman ; and it performed that 
 duty and enforced its statutes with scrupulous vig- 
 
14 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 ilance through its regularly constituted ofifiicials. It 
 is able, therefore, to assure the Imperial German 
 Government that it has Ijeen misinformed. If the 
 Imperial Gemian Government should deem itself 
 to be in possession of convincing evidence that the 
 officials of the Government of the United States 
 did not perform these duties with thoroughness the 
 Government of the United States sincerely hopes 
 that it will submit that evidence for consideration. 
 
 Whatever may be the contentions of the Imperial 
 German Government regarding the carriage of 
 contraband of war on board the Lusitania or re- 
 garding the e-\pIosion of that material by the tor- 
 pedo, it need only be said that in the view of this 
 Government these contentions are irrelevant to the 
 question of the legality of the methods used by 
 the German naval authorities in sinking the vessel. 
 
 But the sinking of passenger ships involves prin- 
 ciples of humanity which throw into the background 
 anv special circumstances of detail that may be 
 thought to affect the cases, principles which lift it. 
 as the Imperial German Government will no doubt 
 be quick to recognize and acknowledge, out of the 
 class of ordinary subjects of diplomatic discussion 
 or of international controversy. Whatever be the 
 other facts regarding the Lusitania, the principal 
 fact is that a great steamer, primarily and chiefly 
 a conveyance for passengers, and carrying more 
 than a thousand souls who had no part or lot in 
 the conduct of the war, was torpedoed and sunk 
 without so much as a challenge or a warning, and 
 that men, women and children were sent to their 
 death in circumstances unparalleled in modern war- 
 fare. The fact that more than one hundred Ameri- 
 can citizens were among those who perished made 
 it the duty of the Government of the United States 
 to speak of these things and once more, with solemn 
 emphasis, to call the attention of the Imperial Ger- 
 man Government to the grave responsibility which 
 the Government of the United States conceives 
 that it has incurred in this tragic occurrence, and 
 to the indisputable principle upon which that re- 
 sponsibility rests. The Government of the United 
 States is contending for something much greater 
 than mere rights of property or privileges of com- 
 merce. It is contending for nothing less high and 
 sacred than the rights of humanity, which every 
 government honors itself in resi)ecting and which 
 no government is justified in resigning on behalf of 
 those under its care and authority. Only her actual 
 resistance to capture or refusal to stop when ordered 
 to do so for the purpose of visit could have afforded 
 the commander of the submarine any justification 
 for so much as putting the lives of those on board 
 the ship in jeopardy. This principle the Govern- 
 ment of the United States understands the e.xplicit 
 instructions issued on .August 3, 1914, In" the Im- 
 
 perial German Admiralty to its commanders at sea 
 to have recognized and embodied, as do the naval 
 codes of all other nations, and upon it every trav- 
 eller and seaman had a right to depend. It is upon 
 this principle of humanity as well as upon the law 
 founded upon this principle that the United States 
 must stand. 
 
 The Government of the United States is happy 
 to observe that Your Excellency's note closes with 
 the intimation that the Imperial German Govern- 
 ment is willing, now as before, to accept the good 
 offices of the United States in an attempt to come 
 to an understanding with the Government of Great 
 Britain by which the character and conditions of 
 war upon the sea may be changed. The Govern- 
 ment of the United States would consider it a priv- 
 ilege thus to serve its friends and the world. It 
 stands ready at any time to convey to either Gov- 
 ernment any intimation or suggestion the other may 
 l)e willing to have it convey, and cordially invites 
 the Imperial German Government to make use of 
 its services in this way at its convenience. The 
 whole world is concerned in anything that may 
 luring about even a partial accommodation of in- 
 terests or in any way mitigate the terrors of the 
 l)resent distressing conflict. 
 
 1 n the meantime, whatever arrangement may hap- 
 pily l)e made between the parties to the war, and 
 whatever may in the opinion of the Imperial Ger- 
 man Government have been the provocation or the 
 circumstantial justification for the past acts of its 
 commanders at sea, the Government of the United 
 States confidently looks to see the justice and hu- 
 manity of the Government of Germany vindicated 
 in all cases where Americans have been wronged or 
 their rights as neutrals invaded. 
 
 The Government of the United States therefore 
 very earnestly and very solemnly renews the rep- 
 resentations of its note transinitted to the Imperial 
 < ierman Government on the 15th of May, and relies 
 in these representations upon the principles of 
 humanity, the universally recognized understand- 
 ings of international law, and the ancient friend- 
 ship of the German nation. 
 
 The Government of the United States cannot 
 .'idniit that the proclamation of a war zone from 
 which neutral ships have been warned to keep away 
 may be made to operate as in any degree an ab- 
 breviation of the rights either of American ship- 
 masters or of .American citizens bound on lawful 
 errands as passengers on merchant ships of bel- 
 ligerent nationality. It does not understand the 
 Imperial German Government to question those 
 rights. It understands it, also, to accept as estab- 
 lished beyond question the principle that the lives 
 of non-combatants cannot law full v or rightfully 
 be put in jeopardy by the capture or destruction of 
 
GERMAN NOTE ON THE GULFLIGHT ATTACK. 
 
 15 
 
 an unresisting merchantman, and to recognize the 
 obHgation to take sufficient precaution to ascertain 
 whether a suspected merchantman is of fact of 
 belhgerent nationahty or is of fact carrying con- 
 traband of war under a neutral flag. The Govern- 
 ment of the United States deems it reasonable to 
 exjiect that the Imperial German Government will 
 
 adopt the measures necessary to put these principles 
 into practice in respect of the safeguarding of 
 American li\es and American ships, and asks for 
 assurances that this will be done. 
 
 RODERT LAXSING, 
 Sccn't(ir\ of State ad interim. 
 
 GERMAN NOTE ON THE GULFLIGHT ATTACK. 
 
 The German Minister for Foreign Affairs to the 
 Referring to the note of May 2S. the undersigned 
 has the honor to inform his Excellency, the .Amer- 
 ican .\mbassador of the I'nited States of .America, 
 Mr. James W. ("lerard. tliat the examination under- 
 taken on the part of the (German ( lo\ernnicnl c(in- 
 cerning the .American steamers Gultiight and L null- 
 ing has led to the following conclusions : 
 
 In regard to the attack on the steamer ijulllight. 
 the commander of a (jerman submarine saw on the 
 afternoon of Alay 1, in the \iciniiy of the Scilly 
 Islands, a large merchant steamer coming in his di- 
 rection which was accompanied by two smaller 
 vessels. These latter took such position in rela- 
 tion to the steamer that they formed a regulation 
 safeguard against submarines: moreover, one of 
 them hail a wireless ajiparatus. which is not usual 
 with small vessels. From this it evidently was a 
 case of English convoy vessels. .Since s\ich \ es- 
 sels are frequentlv armed, the submarine co.ild not 
 ajjiiroach the steamer on the surface of the w.iter 
 without running the danger of destruction. It was, 
 on the other hand, to be assumed that the steamer 
 was of considerable value to the I'.ritish Go\-ern- 
 ment, since it was so guarded. The commander 
 could see no neutral markings on it of any kind — 
 that is, distinctive marks painted on the freeboard 
 recognizable at a distance, such as are now usual 
 on neutral ships in the English zone of naval war- 
 fare. In consequence he arrived at the conclusion 
 froin all the circumstances that he had to deal with 
 an English steamer, submerged, and attacked. 
 
 The torpedo came in the immediate neighborhood 
 of one of the convoy ships, which at once ra])idly 
 approached the point of firing : that the submarine 
 was forced to go to a great depth to avoid being 
 rammed. The conclusion of the Cf)niniander thai 
 an English convoy shi[i was concerned was in this 
 wa\- confirmed. That the attacked <te;imer car- 
 ried the .American flag w;is lir-t obser\ed at the 
 ninnieiit of firing the <hoi. The fact that the steam- 
 ship was pursuing ;i cmirNC which led neither to 
 nor from .America wa< a further reason whv it 
 
 llKKLiN, June 1, 191. s. 
 American Ambassador at Berlin: 
 
 did not occur to the commander of the submarine 
 that he was dealing with an .American steamship. 
 
 L'pon scrutiny of the time and place of the oc- 
 currence described, the German Government has 
 become convinced that the attacked steamship was 
 actually the .American steamship Gulflight. There 
 can be no doubt, according to the attendant cir- 
 cumstances, that the attack is to be attributed to an 
 unfortunate accident, and not to the fault of the 
 commander. The ( ierman < iovernment expresses 
 its regrets to the i^iovernment uf the United States 
 concerning this incident, and declares itself ready 
 to furnish full recompense for the damage thereby 
 sustained by .American citizens. It is left to the 
 discretion of the American Government to present 
 a statement of this damage, or, if doubt may arise 
 over individual points, to designate an expert who 
 would have to determine, together with a German 
 expert, the amount of damage. 
 
 It has not \et been possible by means of an in- 
 quiry to clear up fullv the case of the .American 
 ship Cushing. (^(fficial reports available report only 
 one merchant shi|i attacked liy a ijerman flying 
 machine in the vicinitv of Xordhind Lightship. The 
 German aviator was forced to consider the vessel as 
 hostile because it carried no flag, and, further, be- 
 cause of no recognizable neutral markings. The 
 attack of four bombs was, of course, not aimed at 
 anv -American ship. 
 
 However, that the ship attacked was the Ameri- 
 can steamer Cushing is [)Ossible, considering the 
 time and place of the occurrence. Nevertheless, the 
 German Government accordinu;l\- rei|uests of the 
 .American GovernmeiU that it cumnninicate to the 
 rierman Government the mati-rial which w;is sub- 
 mitted for iudgtnent, in order that, wiili this as a 
 basis, a further position can lie taken in the m.atter. 
 
 The undersigneil leave- it to the Ambassador to 
 bring the foregoing to the immediaii' aliention of 
 hi- (iovernment, and takes tliis opjiortunity to re- 
 new to him the assurance of his most distinguished 
 con-ideration. \'( )X I.\ri(')W. 
 
EXCHANGE OF NOTES WITH GREAT BRITAIN 
 
 British Order in Council and Military Area — American Notes on Seizure of 
 
 the Wilhelmina and Other Ships and the Misuse of the American 
 
 Flag, With British Notes in Reply 
 
 BRITISH ORDER IN COUNCIL. 
 
 British Order in Council. Amjust 20, 
 1914. Directing the Adoption and 
 Enforcement During the Present 
 Hostilities of the Convention Known 
 as the Declaration of London, tSul)- 
 ject to Additions and Modifications: 
 At the Court at Buckingham Palace, 
 the 20th day of August, 1914. Pres- 
 ent, The King's Most Excellent 
 Majesty in Council. 
 Whereas during the present hostil- 
 ities the naval forces of His Majesty 
 will cooperate with the French and 
 Russian naval forces; and 
 
 Whereas it is desirable that the 
 naval operations of the allied forces 
 so far as they affect neutral ships and 
 commerce should be conducted on 
 similar principles; and 
 
 Whereas the Governments of Prance 
 and Russia have informed His Majes- 
 ty's tlovernment that during the pres- 
 ent hostilities it is their intention to 
 act in accordance with the provisions 
 of the Convention known as the Dec- 
 laration of London, signed on the 26th 
 day of February, l!i09, so far as may 
 be practicable. 
 
 Now, therefore. His Majesty, by and 
 with the advice of His Privy Council, 
 is pleased to order, .and it is hereby 
 ordered, that during the present hos- 
 tilities the Convention known as the 
 Declaration of London .sh.all, subject 
 to the following additions and modi- 
 fications, be adopted and put in force 
 by His Majesty's Covernment as if 
 the same had been r.atifled by His 
 Majesty. The additions and modifica- 
 tions are as follows: 
 
 1. The lists of absolute and condi- 
 tional contraband contained in the 
 Proclamation dated Ausust 4. 1914, 
 shall be substituted for the lists con- 
 tained in Articles 22 and 24 of the 
 said Declaration. 
 
 2. A neutral vessel which suc- 
 ceeded in carrying contraband to the 
 enemy with false papers may be de- 
 tained for having carried such con- 
 traband if slie is encountered before 
 she has completed her return voyage. 
 
 3. The destination referred to in 
 Article 33 may be inferred from any 
 sufficient evidence, and fin addition 
 to the presumption laid down in Ar- 
 ticle 34) shall be presumed to exist if 
 the goods are consigned to or for an 
 agent of the enemy State or to or for 
 a merchant or other person under the 
 control of the authorities of the en- 
 emy St.ate. 
 
 4. The existence of a blockade shall 
 be presumed to be known (a) to all 
 ships which sailed from or touched 
 at an enemy port a sufficient tiine af- 
 ter the notification of the block.ade to 
 the local authorities to have enabled 
 the enemy Government to make 
 known the existence of the block.ade; 
 (b) to all ships which .sailed from or 
 touched at a British or allied port 
 after the publication of the declara- 
 tion of blockade. 
 
 5. Notwithstanding the provisions 
 of Article 35 of the said Declaration, 
 conditional contraband, if shown to 
 have the destination referred to in 
 Article 33, is liable to capture, to 
 whatever port the vessel is bound and 
 at whatever port the cargo is to be 
 discharged. 
 
 6. The General Report of the 
 Drafting Committee on the said Dec- 
 laration presented to the Naval Con- 
 ference and adopted by the confer- 
 ence at the eleventh plenary meeting 
 on February 2.^. 1909, shall be con- 
 sidered by all Prize Courts as an au- 
 thoritative statement of the meaning 
 and intention of the said Declaration, 
 and such courts shall construe and 
 interpret the provisions of the said 
 Declaration by- the light of the com- 
 mentary given therein. 
 
 And the Lords Commissioners of 
 His Majesty's Treasury, the Lords 
 Commissioners of the Admiralty, and 
 each of His Majesty's Principal Sec- 
 retaries of -State, the President of the 
 Probate, Divorce. and Admiralty 
 Division of the High Court of Justice, 
 all other judges of His Majesty's 
 Prize Courts, and all .governors, of- 
 ficers, and authorities whom it may 
 concern are to give the necessary di- 
 rections herein as to them may re- 
 spectively appertain. 
 
 ALMERIC FITZROT. 
 
 Note. — The above w,as repealed by 
 the Order in Council of October 20, 
 
 1914. 
 
 BRITAIN'S "MILITARY AREA." 
 
 London. Xovember 17. 1914. — • 
 Premier Asquith stated in the House 
 of Commons today that the British 
 Government h.ad decided to declare 
 the whole of the North Se,a to be in 
 the military area. .MI subjects of the 
 enemy found on neutral ves.sels. the 
 Prime Minister also .said, would be 
 liable to detention as prisoners of 
 war. Referring to mines, the Premier 
 said the Germans h,ad resorted to in- 
 discriminate mine laying in the North 
 Sea outside of territorial limits and 
 along trade routes, without regard to 
 peaceful shipping and without warn- 
 ing, consequently the terms of The 
 Hague convention of 1907 have been 
 violated. After a number of neutral 
 fishing and merchant vessels, together 
 with many lives had been destroyed 
 by these German mines. Mr. .\squith 
 said the Government had been forced 
 to adopt counter ineasures to cope 
 with this German policy of mine lay- 
 ing combined with submarine activ- 
 ities. 
 
 "A minefield was therefore laid 
 acro.ss the southern portion of the 
 North Sea," said Premier Asquith. "in 
 such a way as to guard the api)ro,aches 
 to the English Channel. Due public 
 warning was given, in accordance 
 with the Hague conventions. In the 
 last week of October the Germans 
 
 succeeded in laying a mine field oft 
 the north coast of Ireland, on the 
 main trade route, from America to 
 Liverpool, via the North of Ireland. 
 More peaceful merchant ships were 
 blown up and more lives were lost. 
 But for the warnings given by British 
 cruisers, other British and neutral 
 merchant and passenger steainers 
 would have been destroyed. 
 
 "These mines could not have been 
 laid by any German ship of war or 
 by any vessel flying the German flag. 
 They could only have been laid by 
 some merchant vessel under a neutral 
 flag which must have come along the 
 trade route as if for the purposes of 
 peaceful commerce. Such a ship, 
 while profiting to the full by the im- 
 munity enjoyed by neutral merchant 
 ships, wantonly and recklessly en- 
 dangered the lives of all who travel 
 on the sea. regardless of whether they 
 were friend or foe, civilian or military 
 in character. 
 
 "The menace to peaceful shipping 
 presented by these wholly illegal 
 methods of waging war, is so great 
 that the government has been com- 
 pelled to adopt the only possible 
 means of protection, namely to de- 
 clare the whole North Sea a military 
 area and to restrict all shipping cross- 
 ing it to a narrow passage along 
 which the strictest supervision can 
 be exercised. Access to the coasts of 
 Great Britain and neutral countries 
 has thus been made as .safe as it is 
 in the power of the British navy to 
 make it. and although this h,as been 
 done at the price of certain incon- 
 veniences and delay to shipping 
 through its inability to follow its ac- 
 customed routes, the price cannot in 
 the circumstances of the case be con- 
 sidered a high one. 
 
 "His Majesty's Government is fully 
 aware of the anxiety prevailing in the 
 United States and other nevitr,al coun- 
 tries on these subjects and it trusts 
 that its policy will he fully under- 
 stood. It is confident that public opin- 
 ion in neutral countries will appre- 
 ciate its earnest desire that there 
 should be no interference with neu- 
 tral trade, provided the vital interests 
 of Great Britain, which are at stake 
 in the present conflict, are adequately 
 maintained. Any interference by the 
 British Navy is directed not to in- 
 crease British trade or to diminish the 
 trade of any neutral foreign country, 
 but solely to prevent goods from 
 reaching the enemy, which would in- 
 crease his power in the war against 
 the British and the allied forces." 
 
 AMERICAN NOTE ON SEIZURES. 
 
 Secretary Bryan to Ambassador Page: 
 
 Washington, December 26, 1914. 
 The present condition of American 
 foreign trade resulting from the fre- 
 quent seizures and detentions of 
 .■\merican cargoes destined to neutral 
 European ports has Itecome so seri- 
 
EXCHANGE OF NOTES WITH GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 17 
 
 ous as to require a candid statement 
 of the views of this Government in 
 order that the British Government 
 may he fully informed as to the at- 
 titude of the United States toward 
 the policy which has been pursued by 
 the British authorities during the 
 present war. You will, therefore, 
 communicate the following to His 
 JNIaJesty's Principal Secretary of State 
 for Foreign Affairs, but in doing so 
 you will assure him that it is done 
 in the most friendly spirit and in the 
 Ijelief that frankness will better serve 
 the continuance of cordial relations 
 Ijetween the two countries than si- 
 lence, which may be misconstrued 
 into acquiescence in a course of con- 
 duct which this Government can not 
 liut consider to be an infringement 
 ujion the rights of American citizens. 
 Tlie Government of the United 
 States has viewed with growing con- 
 cern the large number of vessels 
 laden with American goods destined 
 to neutral ports in Europe, which 
 have been seized on the high seas, 
 taken into British ports and detained 
 sometimes for weeks Ijy the British 
 authorities. During the early days of 
 the war this Government assumed 
 that the policy adopted by the British 
 Government was due to the unex- 
 pected outbreak of hostilities and the 
 necessity of immediate action to pre- 
 vent contraband from reaching the 
 enemy. For this reason it was not 
 disposed to judge this policy harshly 
 or protest it vigorously, although it 
 was manifestly very injurious to 
 American trade with the neutral 
 countries of Europe. This Govern- 
 ment, relying confidently upon the 
 high regard which Great Britain has 
 so often exhibited in the past for the 
 rights of other nations, confidently 
 awaited amendment of a course of 
 action which denied to neutral com- 
 merce the freedom to which it was 
 entitled by the law of nations. 
 
 Should Protect Neutral Ships. 
 
 This expectation seemed to be ren- 
 dered the more assured by the state- 
 ment of the Foreign Office early in 
 November that the British Govern- 
 ment were satisfied with guarantees 
 offered by the Norwegian. Swedish 
 and Danish Governments as to nonex- 
 portation of contraband .goods when 
 consigned to named persons in the 
 territories of those Governments, and 
 that orders had been given to the 
 British fleet and customs authorities 
 to restrict interference with neutral 
 vessels carrying such cargoes so con- 
 signed to verification of ship's papers 
 and cargoes. It is. therefore, a mat- 
 ter of deep regret that, though nearly 
 five months have passed since the war 
 began, the British Government have 
 not materially changed their policv 
 and do not treat less rigorously ships 
 and cargoes passing between neutral 
 ports in the peaceful pursuit of law- 
 ful commerce. which belligerents 
 should protect rather than interrupt. 
 The greater freedom from detention 
 and seizure which was confidently ex- 
 pected to result from consigning 
 shipments to definite consignees, 
 rather than "to order," is still 
 awaited. 
 
 It is needless to point out to His 
 Majesty's Government, usually the 
 champion of the freedom of the sea*; 
 and the rights of trade, th.it peace, 
 not war, is the normnl relation be- 
 tween nations ami that the commerce 
 between countries wtiich art' not Tiel- 
 ligerents should not be interfered 
 with by those at war unless such in- 
 terference is manif<'stl,\- an imperative 
 necessity to protect Mieir national 
 
 safety and then only to the extent 
 that it is a necessity. It is witli no 
 lack of appreciation of the momen- 
 tous nature of the present struggle, 
 in which Great Britain is engaged, 
 and with no selfish desire to gain 
 undue commercial advantage that 
 this Government is reluctantly forced 
 to the conclusion that the present 
 policy of His Majesty's Government 
 toward neutral ships and cargoes ex- 
 ceeds the manifest necessity of a bel- 
 ligerent and constitutes restrictions 
 upon the rights of American citizens 
 on the high seas which are not jus- 
 tified by the rules of international 
 law or "required under the principle 
 of self preservation. The Government 
 of the United States does not intend 
 at this time to discuss the propriety 
 of including certain articles in the 
 lists of absolute and conditional con- 
 traband, which have been proclaimed 
 by His Majesty. Open to objection as 
 some of these seem to this Govern- 
 ment, the chief ground of present 
 complaint is the treatment of cargoes 
 of both classes of articles when bound 
 to neutral ports. 
 
 American Exporters Perplexed. 
 
 Articles listed as absolute contra- 
 hand, shipped from the United States 
 and consigned to neutral countries, 
 h.ave been seized and detained on the 
 ground that the countries to which 
 they were destined have not prohib- 
 ited the exportation of such articles. 
 Unwarranted as such detentions are, 
 in the opinion of this Government, 
 American exporters are further per- 
 |)lexed by the apparent indecision of 
 the British authorities in applying 
 their own rules to neutral cargoes. 
 For example, a shipment of copper 
 from this country to a specified con- 
 signee in Sweden was detained be- 
 cause, as was stated by Great Britain. 
 Sweden had placed no emliargo on 
 copper. On the other hand. Italy not 
 only prohibited the export of copper, 
 liut. as this Government is informed, 
 put in force a decree that shipments 
 to Italian consignees or "to order." 
 which arrive in ports of Italy can not 
 be exported or tran.sshipped. The 
 only exception Italy makes is of cop- 
 per' which passes through that coun- 
 try in transit to another country. In 
 snite of these decrees, however, the 
 British Foreign Office has thvis far de- 
 clined to affirm that copper shipments 
 consigned to Italy will not be molested 
 on the high seas. Seizures are so 
 numerous and delays so prolonged 
 that exporters are afraid to send their 
 copper to Italy, steamship lines de- 
 cline to accept it, and insurers refuse 
 to issue policies upon it. In a word, 
 a legitimate trade is being greatly im- 
 paired through uncertainty as to the 
 treatment which it may expect at the 
 hands of the British authorities. 
 
 We feel that we are abundantly jus- 
 tified in asking for information as to 
 the manner in which the British Gov- 
 ernment proriose to carry out the pol- 
 icy which they have adopted, in or- 
 der that we may determim- the steps 
 necessary to protect our citizens, en- 
 gaged in foreign trade, in their rights 
 and from the serio\is los.ses to which 
 they are li.-ible through ignorance of 
 the hazards to which their cargoes 
 are exposed. 
 
 In the case of conditional contra- 
 band the policy of Great Britain ap- 
 pears to this Government to be equal- 
 ly unjustified by tlie established rules 
 of internation.al coiuluct. As eviili'nce 
 of this, attention is directed to the 
 fact that a number of the American 
 cargoes which have been seized con- 
 sist of foodstuffs and other articles 
 
 of common use in all countries which 
 are admittedly relative contraband. 
 In spite of the presumption of inno- 
 cent use liecause destined to neutral 
 territory, the British authorities made 
 these seizures and detentions without, 
 so far as we are informed, being in 
 possession of f.acts wliich warranted 
 a reasonable belief that the shipments 
 had in reality a belligerent destina- 
 tion, as that term is used in interna- 
 tional law. Mere suspicion is not evi- 
 dence and doubts should be resolved 
 in favor of neutral commerce, not 
 against it. The effect upon trade in 
 these .articles between neutral nations 
 resulting from interrupted voyages 
 and detained cargoes is not entirely 
 cured by reimbursement of the own- 
 ers for the damages, which they have 
 suffered, after investigation has failed 
 to establish an enemy destination. 
 The injury is to American commerce 
 with neutral countries as a whole 
 through the hazard of the enterprise 
 and the repeated diversion of goods 
 from established markets. 
 
 Lord Salisbury Cited. 
 
 It also appears that cargoes of this 
 character have been seized by the 
 British authorities because of a belief 
 that, though not originally so intended 
 liy the shippers, they will ultimately 
 reach the territory of the enemies of 
 Great Britain. Tet this belief is fre- 
 quently reduced to a mere fear in 
 view of the embargoes which have 
 been decreed by the neutral countries, 
 to which they are destined, on the 
 articles composing the cargoes. That 
 a consignment "to order" of articles 
 listed as conditional contraliand and 
 shipped to a neutral port raises a le- 
 gal presumption of enemy destination 
 appears to be directly contrary to the 
 doctrines previously held by Great 
 Britain and thus stated by Lord Salis- 
 bury during the South African War: 
 Foodstuffs, though having a hos- 
 tile destination, can be considered 
 as contraband of war only if they 
 are for the enemy forces, it is not 
 s\ifflcient that they are capable of 
 lieing so used, it must be shown 
 that this was in fact their destina- 
 tion at the time of their seizure. 
 
 With this statement as to condi- 
 tional contraband the views of this 
 Government are in entire accord, and 
 upon this historic doctrine, consis- 
 tently maintained liy Great Britain 
 when a belligerent as well as a neu- 
 tral. American shippers were entitled 
 to relv. 
 
 The Government of the Ignited 
 States readily admits the full right of 
 a belligerent to visit and search on 
 the high seas the vessels of Amer- 
 ican citizens or other neutral vessels 
 carrying American goods and to de- 
 tain them when there is sufficient evi- 
 dence to justify a lielief that contra- 
 band articles are in their cargoes; but 
 His Majesty's Government, judging 
 by their own experience in the past, 
 niust realize that this Government 
 can not without protest permit Amer- 
 ican ships or American cargoes to lie 
 taken into British ports and Miere de- 
 tained for the purpose of searching 
 generally for evidence of contraband, 
 or upon presum]>tions created by spe- 
 cial municiiKil enactments which are 
 clearly at variance with international 
 law and practice. 
 
 This Government believes. and 
 e.arnestly hopes His M.ajesty's Govern- 
 ment will come to the same belief, 
 that a course of conduct more in con- 
 f.n-mity with the rules of interna- 
 tional usage, which Great Britain has 
 stronglv s.anctioned for many years. 
 
18 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 will in the end better serve the in- 
 terests of belligerents as well as those 
 of neutrals. 
 
 Situation Critical for Trade. 
 
 Not only is the situation a critical 
 one to the commercial interests of 
 the United States, but many of the 
 great industries of this country are 
 suffering because their products are 
 denied long-established markets in 
 European countries, which, though 
 neutral, are contiguous to the nations 
 at war. Producers and exporters, 
 steamship and insurance companies 
 are pressing, and not without reason, 
 for relief from the menace to trans- 
 atlantic trade which is gradually but 
 surely destroying their business and 
 threatening them with financial disas- 
 ter. 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States, still relying upon the deep 
 sense of justice of the British Nation, 
 which has been so often manifested 
 in the intercourse between the two 
 countries during so many years of 
 uninterrupted friendship, expresses 
 confidently the hope that His Majes- 
 ty's Government will realize the ob- 
 stacles and difficulties which their 
 present policy has placed in the way 
 of commerce between the United 
 States and the neutral countries of 
 Europe, and will instruct its officials 
 to refrain from all unnecessary inter- 
 ference with the freedom of trade be- 
 tween nations which are sufferers, 
 though not participants, in the pres- 
 ent conflict: and will in their treat- 
 ment of neutral ships and cargoes 
 conform more closely to those rules 
 governing the maritime relations be- 
 tween belligerents and neutrals, 
 which have received the sanction of 
 the civilized world, and which Great 
 Britain has, in other wars, so strong- 
 ly and successfully advocated. 
 
 In conclusion it should be impressed 
 upon His :Majesty's Governinent that 
 the present condition of American 
 trade with the neutral European 
 countries is such that, if it does not 
 improve, it may arouse a feeling con- 
 trary to that which has so long ex- 
 isted between the American and Brit- 
 ish peoples. Already it is becoming 
 more and more the subject of public 
 criticism and complaint. There is an 
 Increasing belief, dnulitle.ss not en- 
 tirely unjustified, that the present 
 British policy toward American trade 
 is responsible for the depression in 
 certain industries which depend upon 
 European markets. The attention of 
 the British Government is called to 
 this possible result of their present 
 policy to show how widespread the 
 effect is upon the industrial life of 
 the Ignited States and to emphasize 
 the importance of removing the cause 
 of complaint. 
 
 BRTAX. 
 
 GREYS PRELIMINARY REPLY. 
 
 BritinJt .^eerctanj of S^tate for Foreign 
 Affairs to the American Ambassador : 
 
 Foreign Office. .January 7, 1915. 
 Tour Excellency: I have the honor 
 to acknowledge receipt of vour note 
 of the 2Sth of December. 
 
 It is being carefully examined and 
 the rioints raised in it are receiving 
 consideration, as the result of which 
 a reply shall be addressed to Tour 
 Excellency, dealing in detail with the 
 issues raised and the points to which 
 the United States Government have 
 drawn attention. This consideration 
 and the preparation of the reply will 
 necessarily require some time, and I 
 
 therefore desire to send without fur- 
 ther delay some preliminary observa- 
 tions which will, I trust, help to clear 
 the ground and remove some miscon- 
 ceptions that seem to exist. Let me 
 say at once that we entirely recog- 
 nize the most friendly spirit referred 
 to by Tour Excellency, and that we 
 desire to reply in the same spirit and 
 in the belief that, as Tour Excellency 
 states, frankness will best serve the 
 continuance of cordial relations be- 
 tween the two countries. 
 
 United States have been denied long- 
 established markets in European 
 countries which, though neutral, are 
 contiguous to the seat of war. Such 
 a result is far from being the inten- 
 tion of His Majesty's Government, and 
 they would exceedingly regret that it 
 should be due to their action, I have 
 been unable to obtain complete or 
 conclusive figures showing what the 
 state of trade with these neutral coun- 
 tries has been recently, and I can 
 therefore only ask that some further 
 
 WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 
 Former Secretary of State 
 
 His Majesty's Government cordially 
 concur in the principle enunciated by 
 the Government of the United States 
 that a belligerent, in dealing with 
 trade between neutrals, should not in- 
 terfere unless such interference is 
 necessary to protect the belligerent's 
 national safety, and then only to the 
 extent to which this is necessary. We 
 shall endeavor to keep our action 
 within the limits of this principle on 
 the understanding that it admits otir 
 ri.ght to interfere when such inter- 
 ference is. not with "bona fide" trade 
 between the United States and an- 
 other neutral country, but with trade 
 in contraband destined for the en- 
 emy's country, and we are ready, 
 whenever our action may uninten- 
 tionally exceed this principle to make 
 redress. 
 
 "U'e think that much misconception 
 exists as to the extent to which we 
 have, in practice, interfered with 
 trade. Tour Excellency's note seems 
 to hold His IMajesty's Government re- 
 sponsible for the present condition of 
 trade with neutral countries, and it 
 is stated th.at, through the action of 
 His Majesty's Government, the prod- 
 ucts of the great industries of the 
 
 consideration should be given to the 
 question whether United States trade 
 with these neutral countries has been 
 so seriously affected. The only figures 
 .as to the total volume of trade that 
 I have seen are those for the exports 
 from New Tork, for the month of No- 
 vember, 1914, and they are as fol- 
 lows, compared with the month of 
 November, 1913: 
 
 Figures on American Exports. 
 
 Exports from New Tork for No- 
 vember. 1913 [and] November, 1914, 
 respectively; 
 
 $.5,';S.0OO 
 
 377. ono 
 
 477.000 
 2.071.000 
 4.389.000 
 that there may have been 
 in cotton exports, as to 
 which New Tork figures would be no 
 guide, but His Majesty's Government 
 have been most careful not to inter- 
 fere with cotton, and its place on the 
 free list has been scrupulously main- 
 tained. We do not wish to lay too 
 much stress upon incomplete statis- 
 tics: the figures above are not put 
 
 Denmark . 
 
 Sweden 
 
 Norwav 
 
 Italy 
 
 Holland . . 
 It is true 
 a falling off 
 
 $7,101,000 
 2.858.000 
 2.318,000 
 4,781,000 
 3,960,000 
 
EXCHANGE OF NOTES WITH GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 19 
 
 forward as conclusive; and we are 
 prepared to examine any furtlier evi- 
 dence witli regard to tlte state of trade 
 with tliese neutral countries, which 
 may point to a different conclusion 
 or show that it is the action of His 
 Majesty's Government in particular, 
 and not. the existence of a state of 
 war and consequent diminution of 
 purchasing power and shrinkage of 
 trade, which is responsible for ad- 
 verse effects upon trade with the neu- 
 tral countries. That the existence of 
 a state of war on such a scale has 
 had a very adverse effect upon cer- 
 tain great industries, such as cotton, 
 is obvious; but it is submitted that 
 this is due to the general cause of 
 diminished purchasing power of such 
 countries as France, Germany, and 
 the United Kingdom, rather than to 
 interference with trade with neutral 
 countries. In the matter of cotton, it 
 may be recalled that the British Gov- 
 ernment gave special assistance 
 through the Liverpool Cotton Ex- 
 change to the renewal of transactions 
 in the cotton trade of not only the 
 United Kingdom but of many neutral 
 countries. 
 
 Tour Excellency's note refers in 
 particular to the detention of copper. 
 The figures taken from official returns 
 for the export of copper from the 
 United States for Italy for the months 
 during which the war has been in 
 progress up to the end of the first 
 three weeks of December are as fol- 
 lows; Nineteen thirteen: Fifteen mil- 
 lion two hundred two thousand 
 pounds. Nineteen fourteen; Thirty- 
 six million two hundred eighty-five 
 thousand pounds. Norway, Sweden, 
 Denmark and Switzerland are not 
 shown separately for the whole per- 
 iod in the United States returns, but 
 are included in the heading "Other 
 Europe." (that is. Europe other than 
 tlte United Kingdom. Russia, France. 
 Belgium, Austria, Germany, Holland 
 and Italy). The corresponding figures 
 under this heading are as follows; 
 Nineteen thirteen; Seven million two 
 hundred seventy-one thousand pounds. 
 Nineteen fourteen; Thirty-five mil- 
 lion three hundred forty-seven thou- 
 sand pounds. With such figures the 
 presumption is very strong that the 
 bulk of copper consigned to these 
 countries has recently been intended, 
 not for their own u.se. but for that of 
 a belligerent who cannot import it di- 
 rect. It is therefore an imperative 
 necessity for the safety of this coun- 
 try whiie it is at war tli.at His Majes- 
 ty's Government should do all in their 
 power to stop such part of this im- 
 port of copper as is not genuinely des- 
 tined for neutral countries. 
 
 Copper Destined for Germany. 
 
 Your Excellency does not quote any- 
 particular shipment of copper to 
 Sweden which has been detained. 
 There are. however, four consign- 
 ments to Sweden at the present time 
 of copper and aluminium which, 
 though definitely consigned to Swe- 
 den, are. according to positive evi- 
 dence in the possession of His M.ijes- 
 ty's Government, definitely destined 
 for Germany. 
 
 I cannot believe that, with such 
 figures before them and in such cases 
 as those ju.st mentioned, the Govern- 
 ment of the United St.ates would ques- 
 tion the propriety of the action of 
 His Majesty's Government in taking 
 suspected cargoes to a prize court. 
 and we are convinced that it c.innot 
 be in accord with the wish either of 
 the Government or of the people of 
 the United States to strain the inter- 
 national code in favor of private in- 
 
 terests so as to prevent Great Britain 
 from taking such legitimate means 
 for this purpose as are in her power. 
 
 With regard to the seizure of food- 
 stuffs to which Your Excellency re- 
 fers. His Majesty's Government are 
 prepared to admit that foodstuffs 
 should not be detained and put into 
 a prize court without presumption 
 that they are intended for the armed 
 forces of the enemy or the enemy 
 government. We believe that this 
 rule has been adhered to in practice 
 hitherto, luit. if the United States 
 Government have instances to the 
 contrary, we are prepared to exam- 
 ine them, and it is our present inten- 
 tion to adhere to the rule though we 
 cannot give an unlimited and uncon- 
 ditional undertaking in view of the 
 departure by those against whom we 
 are fighting from hitherto accepted 
 rules of civilization and humanity and 
 the uncertainty as to the extent to 
 which such rules m.ay be violated by 
 them in future. 
 
 From the fourth of August last to 
 the third of January the number of 
 steamships proceeding from the 
 United States for Holland. Denmark, 
 Norway, Sweden and Italy has been 
 seven hundred and seventy-three. Of 
 these there are forty-five which have 
 had consignments or cargoes placed 
 in the prize court while of the ships 
 themselves only eight have been 
 placed in the prize court and one of 
 these has since been released. It is, 
 however, essential under modern con- 
 ditions th.at, where there is real 
 ground for suspecting the presence 
 of contr.ab.and, the vessels should be 
 brought into port for examination; in 
 no other way can the right of search 
 lie exercised, and but for this prac- 
 tice it would have to be completely 
 abandoned. Itiformation was received 
 by us that special instructions had 
 been given to ship rubber from the 
 United States under another designa- 
 tion to escape notice, and such cases 
 have occurred in several instances. 
 Only by search in a port can such 
 cases, when suspected, be discovered 
 and proved. The necessity for exami- 
 nation in a port may also be illus- 
 trated by a hypothetical instance, 
 connected with cotton, which has not 
 yet occurred. Cotton is not specific- 
 ally mentioned in Your Excellency's 
 note, but I have seen public state- 
 ments made in the United States that 
 the attitude of His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment with regard to cotton has been 
 ambiguous, and thereby responsible 
 for depression in the cotton trade. 
 There has never been any foundation 
 for this allegation. His Majesty's 
 Government have never put cotton on 
 the list of contraband; they have 
 throughout the war kept it on the 
 free list; and, on every occasion when 
 questioned on the point, they have 
 stated their intention of adhering to 
 this practice. But information has 
 reached us that, precisely because we 
 have declared our intention of not in- 
 terfering with cotton, ships carrying 
 cotton will be speci.ally selected to 
 carry concealed contraband; and we 
 have lieen warned that copper will be 
 concealed in b,ales of cotton. What- 
 ever suspicions we have entertained, 
 we have not so far made these a 
 grotind for detaining any ship carry- 
 ing cotton; but, should we have in- 
 formation giving us real reason to be- 
 lieve in the case of ,a p.articul.ar ship 
 that llie bales of cotton concealed 
 copper or other contr.aband, the only 
 w,a\' to prove our case would be to 
 examine an<i weigh the bales; a pro- 
 cess that coiild be carried out only by 
 bringing the vessel into a port. In 
 
 such a case, or if examination justi- 
 fied the action of His Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment, the case shall lie brought be- 
 f<_tre a prize court and dealt with in 
 the ordinary way. 
 
 Prize Court Decisions Favorable. 
 
 That the decisions of British prize 
 courts hitherto have not been unfav- 
 oralde to neutrals is evidenced by the 
 decision in the Miramichi case. This 
 case, which was decided against the 
 Crown, laid down that the American 
 shipper was to be paid even when he 
 had sold a cargo c, i. f. and when the 
 risk of loss after the cargo had been 
 shipped did not apply to him at all. 
 
 It has further been represented to 
 His Majesty's Government, though 
 this subject is not dealt with in Your 
 Excellency's note, that our embargoes 
 on the export of some articles, more 
 esiiecially rubber, have interfered 
 with commercial interests in the 
 United States. It is. of course, dif- 
 ficult for His Majesty's Government 
 to permit the export of rubber from 
 British Dominions to the United 
 States at a time when rublier is es- 
 sentia! to belligerent countries for 
 carrying on the war, and when a new 
 trade in exporting rubber from the 
 United States in suspiciously large 
 quantities to neutral countries has 
 actuallv sprung up since the war. It 
 would be impossible to permit the ex- 
 port of rubber from Great Britain 
 unless the right of His Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment were admitted to submit to 
 <a prize court cargoes of rubber ex- 
 ported from the United States, which 
 they believed to be destined for an 
 enemy country, and reasonable lati- 
 tude of action for this purpose were 
 conceded. But His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment have now provisionally come to 
 an arrangement with the rubber ex- 
 porters in Great Britain, which will 
 permit of licenses being given under 
 proper guarantees for the export of 
 ruVdier to the United States. 
 
 We are confronted with the grow- 
 ing danger that neutral countries con- 
 tiguotis to the eneiny will become on 
 a scale hitherto unprecedented a base 
 of supplies for the armed forces of 
 our enemies and for niateri.als for 
 manufacturing armament. The trade 
 figures of imports show how strong 
 this tendency is, but we have no com- 
 Idaint to make of the attitude of the 
 Governments of those countries, 
 which so far as we are aware have 
 not departed from proper rules of 
 neutrality. We endeavor in the in- 
 terest of our own national safet>- to 
 prevent this danger by intercepting 
 goods really destined for the enemy, 
 without interfering with tIio.se which 
 are "bona fide" neutral. Since the 
 outbreak of the war, the government 
 of the United States have changed 
 their previous pr.actice and have pro- 
 hildted the publication of manifests 
 till thirty days after the departure of 
 vessels from the T'nited States ports. 
 We had no "locus standi" for com- 
 plaining of this change, and did not 
 complain. But the effect of it must 
 be to increase the difficulty of ascer- 
 taining the presence of contraband, 
 and to render necess.ary in the inter- 
 ests of our national safety the ex- 
 amin.ation and detention of more 
 ships than would liave been the case 
 if the former practice had continued. 
 
 UeTidiug n more detailed reply. I 
 would crmclude by s.aying that His 
 M.ajesty's Government do not desire 
 to contest the general principles of 
 law. on which they understand the 
 note of the United States to be based, 
 and desire to restrict their .action sole- 
 Iv to interferences with contraband 
 
20 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 destined for the enemy. His Majes- 
 ty's Government are prepared, when- 
 ever a cargo coming from tlie United 
 States is detained, to explain the case 
 on which such detention has talien 
 place, and would gladly enter into any 
 arrangement by which mistakes can 
 be avoided and reparation secured 
 promptly when any injury to the neu- 
 tral owners of a ship or cargo has 
 been improperly caused, for they are 
 most desirous in the interest both of 
 the United States and of other neu- 
 tral countries that British action 
 should not interfere with the normal 
 importation and use by the neutral 
 countries of goods from the United 
 States. I have the honor to be, with 
 the highest consideration. Your Ex- 
 cellency's most obedient humble ser- 
 vant, (Signed) E. GREY. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY BRITISH NOTE. 
 
 British Secretary of State for Foreign 
 Affairs to the American Amliassa- 
 (lor: 
 
 Foreign Office. February 10, 1915, 
 Your Excellency: Your Excellency 
 has already received the preliminary 
 answer, which I handed to you on the 
 7th January, in reply to your note of 
 the 2 8th December on the subject of 
 the seizures and detentions of Amer- 
 ican cargoes destined tor neutral 
 European ports. Since that date I 
 have had further opportunity of ex- 
 amining into the trade stati-stics of 
 the United States as embodied in the 
 Customs returns, in order to see 
 whether the belligerent action of 
 Great Britain has been in any way 
 the cause of the tr.ade depression 
 which your Excellency describes as 
 e.xisting in the United States, and also 
 whether the seizures of vessels or 
 cargoes which have been made by the 
 British Na\->' have inflicted any loss on 
 American owners for which our ex- 1 
 isting machinery provides no means 
 of redress. In setting i)Ut the results 
 of my investigation I think it well to 
 take the opportunity of giving a gen- 
 eral review of the inethods employed 
 by His Majesty's Government to in- 
 tercept contraband trade with the 
 enemy, of their consistency with the 
 admitted right of a belligerent to in- 
 tercept such trade, and also of the 
 extent to which they have en- 
 deavoured to meet the representations 
 and complaints from time to time ad- 
 dre.^ised to them on liehalf of the 
 United States Government. 
 
 Toward the close of yovir note of 
 the 2 8th December your Excellency 
 describes the situ.ation produced by 
 the action of Gre;it Britain as a piti- 
 ful ftne to the commercial interests of 
 the United .States, and .said that many 
 of the great industries of the country 
 were suffering because their products 
 were denied long-established markets 
 in neutral Ruropenn countries con- 
 tiguous to the nations .at war. It is 
 unfortunately true that in these days, 
 when trade and finance are cosmo- 
 politan, any war — particularly a war 
 of any magnitude — must result in a 
 grievous dislocation of commerce in- 
 cluding that of the nations which take 
 no part in the war. Yojir Excellency 
 will realise that in this tremendous 
 struggle, for the outbreak of which 
 Great Britain is in no way responsible, 
 it is impossible for the trade of any 
 country to escape all injurv and loss, 
 but for such His Maiesty's Govern- 
 ment are not to blame. 
 
 T do not understand the paragraph 
 which T have quoted from your Ex- 
 cellenc\''s Uf^ite .as referring to these 
 indirect consequences of the state of 
 
 war, but to the more proximate and 
 direct effect of our belligerent action 
 in dealing with neutral ships and car- 
 goes on the high seas. .Such action 
 has been limited to vessels on their 
 way to eneiny ports or ports in neu- 
 /tral countries adjacent to the theatre 
 of war, Vjecause it is only through 
 such ports that the enemy introduces 
 the supplies which he requires for 
 carrying on the war. In my earlier 
 note I set out the number of ships 
 which had sailed from the United 
 States for Holland, Denmark, Norway, 
 .'Sweden, and Italy, and I there stated 
 that only 8 of the 773 had been placed 
 in the Prize Court, and that only 45 
 had been temporarily detained to en- 
 al)le particular consignments of cargo 
 to be discharged for the purpose of 
 Prize Court proceedings. To measure 
 the effect of such naval action it is 
 necessary to take into consideration 
 the general statistics of the export 
 trade of the United States during the 
 months preceding the outbreak of 
 war and those since the outbreak. 
 
 War's Effect on American Trade. 
 
 Taking the figures in millions of 
 dollars, the exports of merchandise' 
 from the United States for the seven 
 months of January to July 1914 in- 
 clusive, were 1,201, as compared with 
 1,327 in the corresponding months of 
 1913, a drop of 126 millions of dol- 
 lars. For the months of August. Sep- 
 tember, October, and November, that 
 is to say, for the four months of the 
 war preceding the delivery of your 
 E.xcellency's note, the figures of the 
 exports of merchandise were (again 
 in millions of dollars) 667 as com- 
 l>ared with 923 in the corresponding 
 months of 1913, a drop of 256 mil- 
 lions of dollars. If. however, the sin- 
 gle article of cotton be eliminated 
 from the comparison, the figures show 
 a very different result. Thus the ex- 
 ports of all articles of merchandise 
 other than cotton from the United 
 States during the first seven months 
 of 1914 were 966 millions of dollars 
 as against 1.127 millions in 1913, a 
 drop of 161 millions of doll.ars, or 
 14% per cent. On the other hand, 
 the exports of the same articles dur- 
 ing the months August to November 
 amounted to 60S millions of dollars 
 as compared with 630 millions in 
 1913. a drop of only 22 millions, or 
 less than 4 per cent. 
 
 It is therefore clear that, if cotton 
 be e.xcluded, the effect of the war has 
 been not to increase but practically to 
 arrest the decline of American exports 
 which was in prcgress earlier in the 
 vear. In fact, any decrease in Amer- 
 ican exports which is attributalde to 
 the war is essentially due to cotton. 
 Cottf>n is an article which cannot pos- 
 sibly have been affected bv the exer- 
 cise of our belligerent rights, for, as 
 your Excellency is aware, it has not 
 been declared by His Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment tri be contraband of war, and 
 the rules under "n'hich we .are at pres- 
 ent conducting our belligerent opera- 
 tions give us no power in the absence 
 of ,a blockade to seize or interfere 
 with it when on its wav to a bellig- 
 erent country in neutral ships. Con- 
 setiuently no cotton has been touched. 
 
 Into the causes of the decrease in 
 the exports of cotton I do not feel 
 that there is any need for me to en- 
 ter. l»ecause. wiiatever may have been 
 the cause, it is not to be found in the 
 exerci.se of the belligerent rights of 
 visit, search, and capture, or in our 
 general right when at war to inter- 
 cept the contrab.and trade of our en- 
 emy. Imports of cotton to the United 
 
 Kingdom fell as heavily as those to 
 other countries. No place felt the 
 outbreak of war more acutely than 
 the cotton districts of Lancashire, 
 where for a time an immense number 
 of spindles were idle. Though this 
 Condition has now to a large extent 
 passed away, the consumption of the 
 raw material in Great Britain was 
 temporarily much diminished. The 
 same is no doubt true of France. The 
 general result is to show convincingly 
 that the naval operations of Great 
 Britain are not the cause of any dim- 
 inution in the volume of American 
 exports, and that if the commerce of 
 the United States is in the unfavour- 
 able condition which your E.xcellency 
 describes, the cause ought in fairness 
 to be sought elsewhere than in the 
 activities of His Majesty's naval 
 forces. I may add that the circular 
 issued by the Department of Com- 
 merce at Washington on the 23rd Jan- 
 uary, admits a marked improvement 
 in the foreign trade of the United 
 States, which we have noted with 
 great satisfaction. The first para- 
 graph of the circular is worth quot- 
 ing verbatim: — 
 
 A marked improvement in our 
 foreign trade is indicated by the 
 latest reports issued by the De- 
 partment of Commerce through its 
 Bureau of Foreign and Domestic 
 Commerce, sales of foodstuffs and 
 certain lines of manufactures hav- 
 ing been unusually large in Novem- 
 ber, the latest period for which 
 'detailed information is at hand. In 
 that month exports aggregated 
 206.000.000 dollars, or double the 
 total for August last, when, by rea- 
 son of the outbreak of war, our for- 
 eign trade fell to the lowest level 
 reached in many years. In Decem- 
 ber there was further improvement, 
 the month's exports being vaUied 
 at 246,000.000 dollars, compared 
 with 233,000,000 in December. 1913, 
 and within 4,000,000 of the high 
 record established in December, 
 1912. 
 
 Export Figures Month by Month. 
 
 A lietter view of the situation is ob- 
 tained by looking at the figures month 
 by month. The exports of merchan- 
 dise for the last five months have 
 been (in millions of dollars): — 
 
 August 110 
 
 .September 156 
 
 October 194 
 
 November 205 
 
 December 246 
 
 The outbreak of war produced in 
 the United States, as it did in all 
 neutral countries, an acute but tem- 
 porary disturbance of trade. Since 
 that time there seems to have been a 
 steady recovery, for to-day the ex- 
 ports from the United States stand at 
 a higher figure than on the same date 
 last year. Before passing away from 
 the statistics of trade, and in order 
 to demonstrate still more clearly if 
 necessary that the naval operations of 
 Great Britain and her Allies have had 
 no detrimental effect on the volume 
 of trade between the United States 
 and neutral countries, it is w-orth 
 while to analyse the figures of the 
 exports to Europe since the outbreak 
 of hostilities. For this purpose the 
 European countries ought to be 
 grouped under three heads: Great 
 Britain .and those fighting \vith her, 
 neutral countries, and enemy coun- 
 tries. It is. however, impossible for 
 me to group the countries in this way 
 satisfactorily, as the fitrures relating 
 to the export trade of the United 
 States with each country have not yet 
 
EXCHANGE OF NOTES WITH GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 21 
 
 been published. In the preliminary 
 statement of the export trade of the 
 United States with foreign countries 
 only principal countries are shown, 
 and" various countries which are tab- 
 ulated separately in the more detailed 
 monthly stimmary of commerce and 
 finance are omitted. Those omitted 
 include not only the Scandinavian 
 countries, the exports to which are of 
 peculiar importance in dealing with 
 this question, but also Austria. 
 
 So far as it is possible to distribute 
 the figures under the headings which 
 I have indicated above (all the figures 
 being given in thousands of dollars) 
 the results are as follows: Total ex- 
 ports to Europe from the 1st August 
 to the 30th Xovemlier, 413.9!15. as 
 against 5<i7.34;; in 1913. Of these. 
 Great Britain and her allies took 288.- 
 312.as against 316.805 in 1913. Ger- 
 many and Belgium took 1,881, as 
 against 177,136 in 1913; whereas neu- 
 tral countries ( among which Austria- 
 Hungary is unavoidably included) 
 took 123.802, as against 103,401 in 
 1913. 
 
 Answer to the General Complaint. 
 
 The general complaint in your E.x- 
 cellency's note was that the action 
 of Great Britain was affecting ad- 
 versely the trade of the United States 
 with neutral countries. The naval 
 operations of Great Britain certainly 
 do not interfere with commerce from 
 the United States on its way to the 
 United Kingdom and the allied coun- 
 tries, and yet the exports to Great 
 Britain and her Allies during those 
 four months diminished to the extent 
 of over 28.000.000 dollars, whereas 
 those to neutral countries and .\us- 
 tria increased by over 20,000.000 dol- 
 lars. The inference may fairly bo 
 drawn from these figures, all of which 
 are taken from the official returns 
 published by the United States Gov- 
 ernment, that not only has the trade 
 of the United .States with the neutral 
 countries in Europe been maintained 
 as compared with previous years, but 
 also that a sulistantial part of this 
 trade was, in fact, trade intended for 
 the enemy countries going through 
 neutral ports by routes to which it 
 was previously unaccustomed. 
 
 One of the many inconveniences to 
 which this great war is exposing the 
 commerce of all neutral countries is 
 undoubtedly the serious shortage in 
 shipping available for ocean trans- 
 port, and the conseriuential result of 
 excessive freights. It cannot fairly be 
 said that this shortage is caused by 
 Great Britain's interference with neu- 
 tral ships. At the present time there 
 are only seven neutral vessels await- 
 ing ad.1udication in the Prize Courts 
 in this country, and three in those in 
 the British dominions. As your Ex- 
 cellency is aware. I have alreadv in- 
 structed our Amba.s.sador at Washing- 
 ton to remind the parties who are in- 
 terested in these vessels that it is 
 open to them to applv (o the Court 
 for the release of these ships on b.ail, 
 and if an api)lir.Ttion of this sort is 
 made by them it is not likelv to be 
 opposed by the Crown. There is 
 therefore no reason wh\' such an ap- 
 plication should not he favourably 
 entertained by the Court, and. if ac- 
 ceded to. all these vessels will again 
 he available for the carriage of com- 
 merce. Only one neutral vessel is 
 now detainer! in this country in ad- 
 dition to those awaiting adjudication 
 in the Prize Court. 
 
 Everv effort has been made in cases 
 in which it has been found neces.sary 
 to institute proceedings against por- 
 tions of the cargo to secure the speedy 
 
 discharge of the cargo and the re- 
 lease of the ship, so as to enable it to 
 resume work. Great Britain is suf- 
 fering from the shortage of shipping 
 and the rise in freights as acutely 
 <as, if not more than, other nations 
 and His Mii.iesty's Government have 
 taken every step that they could con- 
 sistently with their belligerent inter- 
 ests to increase the tonnage available 
 for the transport of sea-borne com- 
 merce. The enemy ships w'hich have 
 been condemned in the Prize Courts 
 in this couMlry are l;)ein.g sold as 
 rapidly as iiossilde in ordei- tb:it they 
 may beconie a\ail;ible fur use; and 
 
 SIR EDWARD GREY 
 
 British Secretary of State for 
 
 Foreign Affairs 
 
 those which have been condemned in 
 the Prize Courts oversea are being 
 brmight to this country in order that 
 they may be disposed of here, and 
 again placed in active employment. 
 
 British Trying to Increase Shipping. 
 
 The difficulties have been accen- 
 tuated by the unforseen conseiiuences 
 of the convention which was signed at 
 The Hague in 1907 relative to the 
 status of enemy merchant vessels at 
 the (uitbreak of war. This conven- 
 tion was a well-intentioned effort to 
 diminish the losses which war must 
 imj'*'^e upon innocent persons, and 
 provided that enemy merchant ships 
 seized by a belligerent in whose ports 
 they lay at the outoreak of war should 
 not be condemned, but should merely 
 be detained for the period of the war. 
 unless they were liVierated in the d.ays 
 of grace. We could come to no ar- 
 rangement with the Germ.an Govern- 
 ment for the reriprii'-.-il grant of d.-iys 
 of grace, and the German merchant 
 vessels lying in British ports when 
 the war broke out have therefore 
 l»een sentenced to detentinn in lieu of 
 condemnation. The normal result 
 would have been still further to re- 
 duce the vf)lume of shippin.g avail- 
 able for the commerce of the world. 
 To ease the situation, however. His 
 Ma.iesty's Government are resorting 
 to the power of requisitioning wl'ich 
 i.s given by the convention, so that 
 
 these ships may again be placed in 
 active service. 
 
 Your Excellency will see therefore 
 that His Majesty's Government are 
 doing all in their power to increase 
 the volume of shipping available. I 
 hope it will be realised that the de- 
 tention of neutral ships by His Majes- 
 ty's Government with a view to the 
 capture of contraband trade on its 
 way to the enemy has not contributed 
 nearly so much to the shortage of 
 shijiiiin.g as has the destruction of 
 neutral vessels by submarine mines 
 indiscriminately laid tiy the enemy on 
 the high seas, many miles from the 
 coast, in the track of merchant ves- 
 sels. Up till now twenty-five neutral 
 vessels have been reported as de- 
 stroyed by mines on the high seas; 
 ([uite apart from all questions of the 
 breach of treaties and the destruction 
 of life, there is far more rea -ion for 
 protest on the score of belligerent in- 
 terference with innocent neutral trade 
 through the mines scattered by the 
 enemy than through the British exer- 
 cise of the right of seizing contraband. 
 I trust that what 1 have said above 
 will be sufficient to convince your 
 E.xcellency's Government that the 
 complaints that the naval policy of 
 Great Britain has interfered with the 
 shipments of Amerii'an products to 
 long-established markets in neutral 
 European countries is founded on a 
 misconcei)tion. 
 
 In justice to the peoples of both 
 counti-ies, I feel that this opportunity 
 should be taken to explain the lines 
 on which His Majesty's Government 
 have been actin.g hitherto, so as to 
 show that the line they have fid- 
 lowed is in no way inconsistent with 
 the genera! fundamental princirile of 
 international law, and to indicate the 
 care with which they have en- 
 deavoured to meet the representa- 
 tions which have been made by the 
 United St.ates Govtrnment from time 
 to time during the war on these ques- 
 tions. No one in these days will dis- 
 pute the general proposition that a 
 t>elligerent is entitled to capture con- 
 traband goods on their way to the 
 enemy; that right has now become 
 consecrated by long u.sage and general 
 acquiescence. Though the right is 
 ancient, the means of exercising it 
 alter and develop with the changes 
 in the methods and machinery of 
 commerce. A century ago the dif- 
 ficulties of land transport rendered 
 it impracticable for the belli.gerent to 
 obtain supplies of sea-borne goods 
 through a. neighbouring neutral coun- 
 try. Consequently the lielligerent ac- 
 tions of his oi ponents neithiu' re- 
 ouired nor justified any interference 
 with shipments on their way to a neu- 
 tral port. This principle was recog- 
 nised and acted on in the decisions in 
 whicli Lord Stowell laid down the 
 lines on which cafitures of such goods 
 should be dealt with. 
 
 New Conditions Alter Methods. 
 
 The advent of steam p<nver lias ren- 
 dered it as easy for a belligerent to 
 supply himself through the ports of 
 .a neutral contiguous country as 
 througli his own. and h;is therefore 
 reiulered it impossible for his op- 
 Iionent to refrain from interfering 
 with ctunnierce intetided for the en- 
 emy merely because it is on its way 
 to a neutral port. Xo better instance 
 of the necessity of countering new- 
 devices for despatching contraband 
 goods to an enemy by new methods 
 of aptdying the fundamental principle 
 of the right to capture such contra- 
 ban<l can lie given than 'he steps 
 which the Governtnent of the United 
 
22 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 states found it necessary to take dur- 
 ing the American Civil War. It was 
 at that time that the doctrine of con- 
 tinuous voyage was nrst applied to 
 the capture of contraband, tliat is to 
 say, it was then for tlie first time that 
 a belligerent found himself obliged 
 to capture contraband goods on their 
 way to the enemy, even though at the 
 time of capture they were en route 
 for a neutral port from which they 
 were intended subsequently to con- 
 tinue their journey. The policy then 
 followed by the United States Gov- 
 ernment was not inconsistent with the 
 general principles already sanctioned 
 by international law. and met with no 
 protest from Hi.s Majesty's Govern- 
 ment, though it was upon British car- 
 goes and upon British ships that the 
 losses and the inconvenience due to 
 this new development of the applica- 
 tion of the old rule of international 
 law principally fell. The criticisms 
 which have been directed against the 
 steps then taken by the United States 
 came, and come, from those who saw 
 In the methods employed in Xapo- 
 leonic times for the prevention of 
 contraband a limitation upon the right 
 itself, and failed to see that in Napo- 
 leonic times goods on their way to a 
 neutral port were immune from cap- 
 ture, not because the immediate des- 
 tination conferred a privilege, but be- 
 cause capture under such circum- 
 stances was unnecessary. 
 
 "Innocent" and Suspected Trade. 
 
 The facilities which the introduc- 
 tion of steamers and railways have 
 given to a belligerent to introduce 
 contraband goods through neutral 
 ports have imposed ujion liis opponent 
 the additional ditliculty. when en- 
 deavouring to intercept such trade, 
 of distinguishing between the goods 
 which are really destined for the cfini- 
 merce of that neutr.il country and the 
 goods which are on their way to the 
 enemy. It is one of the many dif- 
 ficulties with which the United .States 
 Government found themselves con- 
 fronted in the days of the Civil War. 
 and 1 cannot do better than quote 
 the words which IMr. Reward, who 
 was then Secretary of State, used in 
 the course of the diplomatic discus- 
 sion arising mit of the c.-jpture of 
 some goods on their way to Mafa- 
 moros which were believed to be for 
 the insurgents: 
 
 Xeutrals engaged in honest trade 
 with Matanioros must expect to ex- 
 Iierience inconvenience from the 
 existing blockade of Brownsville 
 and the adjacent coast of Tex.as. 
 XVhile this Government unfeignedly 
 regrets this inconvenience, it c.aii 
 not relinquish any of its belligerent 
 rights to f.avour eontrab.md trade 
 with insurgent territory. By insist- 
 ing upon those rights, however, it is 
 .sure that that necessity for their 
 exercise at all, which must be de- 
 plored by every friendly commer- 
 cial Power, will the more speedily 
 be termin.ated. 
 
 The opportunities now enjoyed by 
 a belligerent for obtaining supplies 
 through neutral ports are far greater 
 than they were fifty years ago. and 
 the geographical conditions of the 
 present struggle lend additional as- 
 sistance to the enemv in enrrving out 
 such importation. We are faced with 
 the problem of intercepting such sup- 
 plies when arranged with all the ad- 
 vantages th.Tt flow from elaborate or- 
 gani.s.Ttion and unstinted expenditure. 
 If our lielligerent riirhts avp to be 
 mainl.Tined. it is of the first iinpor- 
 tance for us to distinLniish between 
 what is really bona fide trade in- 
 
 tended for the neutral country con- 
 cerned and the trade intended for 
 the enemy country. Every effort is 
 made by organisers of this trade to 
 conceal the true destination, and if 
 the innocent neutral trade is to be 
 distinguished from the enemy trade 
 it is essential that His Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment should be entitled to make, 
 and should make, careful enquiry 
 with regard to the destination of par- 
 ticular shipments of goods even at the 
 risk of some slight delay to the par- 
 ties interested. If such enquiries 
 were not made, either the exercise of 
 our belligerent rights would have to 
 be abandoned, tending to the pro- 
 longation of this war and the increase 
 of the loss and suffering which it is 
 entailing upon the whole world, or 
 else it would be necessary to indulge 
 in indiscriminate captures of neutral 
 goods and their detention throughout 
 all the period of the resulting Prize 
 Court proceedings. Under the system 
 niiw adopted it has been found pos- 
 sible to release without delay, and 
 consequently without appreciable loss 
 to the parties interested, all the goods 
 of which the destination is shown as 
 the result of the enquiries to be in- 
 nocent. 
 
 New Departure in Practice. 
 
 It may well be that the system of 
 making such enquiries is to a cer- 
 tain extent a new introduction, in 
 that it has been practised to a far 
 greater extent than in previous wars; 
 but if it is correctly described as a 
 new departure, it is a departure 
 which is wholly to the advantage of 
 neutrals, and which has been made 
 for the purpose of relieving them so 
 far as possible from loss and incon- 
 venience. There was a passage in a 
 note which the State Department ad- 
 dressed to the British Ambassador at 
 Washington on the 7th Xovemlier to 
 u'hich I think it may be well to refer: 
 In the opinion of this Govern- 
 ment, the belligerent right of visit 
 and search requires that the search 
 should be made on the high seas at 
 the time of the visit, and that the 
 conclusion of the search should rest 
 upon the evidence found on the ship 
 under investigation, .and not upon 
 circumstances ascertained from ex- 
 ternal sources. 
 
 The principle here enunciated ap- 
 pears to me to be inconsistent with 
 the practice in these matters of the 
 United States Government, as w-ell as 
 of the British Government. It cer- 
 tainly was not the rule upon which 
 the United States Government acted 
 either during the Civil War or during 
 the Spanish-American War. nor h.as 
 it ever been the practice of the Brit- 
 ish Government, nor so far as I atri 
 aware, of any other gov^ernment 
 which has had to carry on a great 
 naval war: as a principle I think it 
 is impossible in modern times. The 
 necessity for giving the lielligerent 
 captor full liberty to establish by all 
 the evidence .at his disposal the enemy 
 destination with which the goods were 
 shipped was recognised in all the 
 leading decisions in the Prize Courts 
 of the United States during the Civil 
 ■War. Xo clearer instance could be 
 given than the reporter's statement of 
 the case of the Bermuda f3 Wallace. 
 .->14): 
 
 The final destination of the cargo 
 in this particular voy.age was left 
 so skilfullv open • • • that it 
 w.as not ouite easy to prove, with 
 that cert.Tinty which American 
 <'ourts i-e<iuir<*. the ititention. which 
 it seemed olniti must have really 
 existed. Thus to prove it required 
 
 that truth should be collated from 
 a variety of sources, darkened and 
 disguised; from others opened as 
 the cause advanced, and by acci- 
 dent only; from coincidences unde- 
 signed, and facts that were circum- 
 stantial. Collocations and compar- 
 isons, in short, brought largely their 
 collective force in aid of evidence 
 that was more direct. 
 It is not impossible that the course 
 of the present struggle will show the 
 necessity for belligerent action to be 
 taken in various ways which may at 
 first sight be regarded as a departure 
 from old practice. In my note of the 
 7th January, I dealt at some length 
 with the question of the necessity of 
 taking vessels into port for the pur- 
 poses of carrying out an effective 
 search. Where search was necessary; 
 to that subject I feel that I need not 
 again recur. The growth in the size 
 of steamships necessitates in many 
 cases that the vessel should go into 
 calm water, in order that even the 
 right of visit, as apart from the right 
 of search, should be exercised. In 
 modern times a steamer is capable of 
 pursuing her voyage irrespective of 
 the conditions of the weather. Many 
 of the neutral merchantmen which 
 our naval officers are called upon to 
 visit at sea are encountered by our 
 cruisers in places and under condi- 
 tions which render the launching of 
 a boat impossible. The conditions 
 during winter in the North Atlantic 
 frequently render it impracticable for 
 days together for a naval officer to 
 lioard a vessel on her way to Scandi- 
 navian countries. If a belligerent is 
 to be denied the right of taking a 
 neutral merchantman, met with under 
 such conditions, into calm water in 
 lu-der that the visiting officer may go 
 aboard, the right of visit and of 
 search would become a nullity. 
 
 The present conflict is not the first 
 in which this necessity has arisen: 
 as long ago as the Civil War the 
 T'nited States found it neces.sary to 
 take ve.ssels to United States ports in 
 order to determine whether the cir- 
 eumstances justified their detention. 
 The .same need arose during the Rus- 
 so-,Tapanese War and also during the 
 second Balkan War, when it some- 
 times happened that British vessels 
 were m.ade to deviate from their 
 course .and follow the cruisers to some 
 spot where the right of visit and of 
 search could be more conveniently 
 carried out. In both cases this exer- 
 cise of belligerent rights, although 
 ouestioned at first by His Majesty's 
 Government, was ultimately acqui- 
 esced in. 
 
 Neutrals Must Suffer in War. 
 
 No Power in these days can afford 
 during ,a. .gre.at war to forego the ex- 
 erci.se of the right of visit and search. 
 Vessels which are apparently harm- 
 less merchantmen can be used for 
 carrying and laying mines, and even 
 fitted to discharge torpedoes. Sup- 
 plies for submarines can without dif- 
 ficulty be concealed under other cargo. 
 The only protection against these risks 
 is to visit and search thoroughly every 
 vessel apjiearing in the zone of opera- 
 tions, and if the circ^umstances are 
 such as to render it impossible to 
 carry it out at the spot where the 
 vessel was met with, the only prac- 
 ticable course is to take the ship to 
 some nu>re convenient locality for the 
 puri)ose. T<t do so is luit to be looked 
 uiion a-; n new belligerent right, but 
 as an adapt.ation of the existing rl.ght 
 to the modern conditions of com- 
 merce. Like all belligerent rights it 
 must lie exercised with due regard for 
 
EXCHANGE OF NOTES WITH GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 23 
 
 neutral interests, and it would be un- 
 reasonable to expect a neutral vessel 
 to make long deviations from her 
 course for this purpose. It is for this 
 reason that we have done all we can 
 to encourage neutral merchantmen on 
 their way to ports contiguous to the 
 enemy country to visit soine British 
 port lying on their line of route in or- 
 der that the necessary examination of 
 the ship's papers, and. if required of 
 the cargo, can be made under condi- 
 tions of convenience to the ship her- 
 self. The alternative would be to 
 keep a vessel which the naval offlcers 
 desired to board waiting, it might be 
 for days together, until the weather 
 conditions enabled the visit to be car- 
 ried out at sea. 
 
 No war has yet been waged in 
 which neutral individuals have not 
 occasionally suffered from unjustified 
 belligerent action; no neutral nation 
 has experienced this fact more fre- 
 quently in the past than Great Britain. 
 The only method by which it is pos- 
 sible to harmonise belligerent action 
 with the rights of neutrals is for the 
 belligerent nation to provide some 
 adequate machinery by which in any 
 such case the facts can be investigated 
 and appropriate redress can be ob- 
 tained by the neutral individual. In 
 this country such machinery is pro- 
 vided by the powers which are given 
 to the Prize Court to deal not only 
 with captures, but also with claims for 
 compensation. Order V. Rule 2. of 
 the British Prize Court Rules provides 
 that where a ship has been captured 
 as prize, but has been subsequently 
 released by the captors, or has by loss, 
 destruction, or otherwise ceased to be 
 detained by them, without proceed- 
 ings for condemnation having been 
 taken, any person interested in the 
 ship fwhich by r)rder I, Rule 2. in- 
 cludes goods) wishing to make a 
 claim for costs ,ind damages in re- 
 spect thereof, shall issue a writ as 
 provided by Order II. A writ so is- 
 sued will initi.ate n proceeding, which 
 will follow its ordinary course in the 
 Prize Court. 
 
 Discrimination and Moderation Shown. 
 
 This rule gives the Prize Court am- 
 ple jurisdiction to deal with any 
 claim for compensation by a neutral 
 arising from the interference with a 
 ship or goods by our naval forces. 
 The best evidence that can be given 
 of the discrimination and the modera- 
 tion with which our naval officers 
 have carried out their duties is to 
 be found in the fact that up to this 
 time no proceedings for the recovery 
 of compensation have been initiated 
 under the rule which I have quoted 
 It is the common experience of every 
 w.ay that neutrals whose attempts to 
 engage in suspicious trading are frtis- 
 trated by a belligerent are wont to 
 have recourse to their Government to 
 urge that diplomatic remonstrances 
 should be made on their behalf, and 
 that redress should be obtained for 
 them in this way. When an effective 
 mode of redress is open to them in 
 the courts of a civiliscrl country by 
 which they ran obtain .'idequ.ate sat 
 isfaction for a,ny invasion of their 
 rights which is contrary to the law 
 of nations, the only course which is 
 consistent with sound jirinciple is th.at 
 they should be referred to that mode 
 of redress, and th.it no diplom.atic ac 
 tion should be taken until their legal 
 remedies have bfvm exhausted, and 
 they are in a, position to show prima 
 f.ncio denial of justice. 
 
 The course adopted by His Majes 
 ty's Government during the American 
 Civil W.ar w.as in strict accordance 
 with this principle. In spite of re 
 
 monstrances from many quarters, 
 they placed full reliance on the Amer- 
 ican Prize Courts to grant redress to 
 the parties interested in cases of al- 
 leged wrongful capture by American 
 ships of war. and put forward no 
 claims until the opportunities for re- 
 dress in those C(.)urts had been ex- 
 hausted. The same course was 
 adopted in the Spanish-American 
 War, when all British subjects who 
 compl.ained of captures or detentions 
 of their ships were referred to the 
 Prize Courts for relief. Before leav- 
 ing the subject may I remind your 
 Excellency of the fact th.at at your 
 request you are now supplied im- 
 mediately by this Departinent with 
 particulars of every ship under Amer- 
 ican colours which is detained, and of 
 every shipment of cargo in which an 
 American citizen appears to be the 
 party interested. Not only is the fact 
 of detention notified to your Excel- 
 lency, but so far as is practicable the 
 grounds upon which the vessel or 
 cargo has been detained are also com- 
 municated to you: a concession which 
 enables any United States citizen to 
 take steps at once to protect his in- 
 terests. 
 
 To Expedite Prize Court Action. 
 
 His Majesty's Government have also 
 done all that lies in their power to 
 ensure rapid action when ships are 
 reported in British ports. They real- 
 ise that the ship and cargo-owners 
 may reasonably expect an immediate 
 decision to be taken as to whether the 
 ship may be allowed to proceed, and 
 whether her cargo or any part of it 
 must be discharged and put into the 
 Prize Court. Realising that the or- 
 dinary methods of inter-Departmental 
 corespondence might cause delays 
 which could be obviated by another 
 method of procedure, they established 
 several months ago a special Com- 
 mittee, on which all the Departments 
 concerned are represented. This 
 Committee sits daily, and is provided 
 with a special clerical staff. As soon 
 as a ship reaches port full particulars 
 are telegraphed to London, and the 
 case is dealt with at the next meeting 
 of the Committee, immediate steps Vic- 
 ing taken to carry out the action de- 
 cided upon. By the adoption of this 
 procedure it has been found possilile 
 to reduce to a minimum the delays 
 to which neutral shipping is exposed 
 by the exercise of belligerent rights, 
 and liy the necessity, imposed by mod- 
 ern conditions, of examining with care 
 the destination of contraband articles. 
 
 Particular attention is directed in 
 your E.xcellency's note to the policy 
 we .are pursuing with regard to con- 
 ditional contraband, especially food- 
 stuffs, and it is there stated that a 
 number of American cargoes have 
 been seized without, so far as yotir 
 Excellency's Government are in- 
 formed, our being in possession of 
 facts which warr.inted a reason.a.ble 
 belief th.at the shipments hnd in real- 
 ity a belligerent destination, and in 
 spite of the presumption of innocent 
 use due to their being destined to 
 neutr.al territory. The note does not 
 specify any pnrticular seizvires as 
 those which formed the basis of this 
 compl.aint, and T am therefore not 
 aware whether the passage refers to 
 cargoes which were det.ained before 
 or since the Order in Cotmcil r>f the 
 2nth October was issued. 
 
 Your Excellency will no doubt re- 
 meinber that soon after the oulbre.ak 
 of war nn Order of His Maiesly in 
 Council w.as issued tinder which no 
 distinction was drawn in the appli- 
 cation of the doctrine of continuous 
 voy.age between absolute contr.nband 
 
 and conditional contraband, and 
 which also imposed upon the neutral 
 owner of contrab.and somewhat dras- 
 tic conditions as to the burden of 
 proof of the guilt or innocence of the 
 shipment. The principle that the 
 burden of proof should always be im- 
 posed upon the captor has usually 
 lieen admited as a theory. In prac- 
 tice, however, it has almost always 
 been otherwise, and any student of 
 the Prize Court decisions of the past 
 or even of modern wars will find that 
 goods seldom escape condemnation 
 unless their owner was in a position 
 to prove that their destination was in- 
 nocent. An attempt was made some 
 few years ago, in the unratified Decla- 
 ration of London, to formulate some 
 ilefinite rules upon this subject, but; 
 time alone can show whether the 
 rules there laid down will stand the 
 test of modern warfare. 
 
 The rules which His Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment published in the Order in 
 Council of the 20th August, 1914, 
 were criticised by the United States 
 Government as contrary to the gen- 
 erally recognised principles of inter- 
 national law, .and as inflicting un- 
 neces.sar.v hardship upon neutral com- 
 merce, and your Excellency will re- 
 member the prolonged discussions 
 which took place between us through- 
 out the month of October with a view 
 to finding some new formulse which 
 should enable us to restrict supplies 
 to the enemy forces, and to prevent 
 the supply to the enemy of materials 
 essential for the making of munitions 
 of w.ar, while inflicting the minimum 
 of injviry and interference with neu- 
 tral commerce. It was with this ob- 
 ject that the Order in Council of the- 
 2lith October was issued, under the 
 pripvisions of which a far greater 
 measure of immunity is conferred 
 upon neutral commerce. In that Or- 
 der the principle of non-interference 
 with conditional contraband on ita 
 way to a neutral port is in large 
 measure admitted: only in three cases 
 is the right to seize maintained, and 
 in all those cases the opportunity is 
 given to the claimant of the goods to 
 establish their innocence. 
 
 Names of Receivers Not Given. 
 
 Two of those cases are where the 
 ship's papers afford no information .as 
 to the person for whom the .goods are 
 intended. It is only reasonable that 
 a belligerent shotild be entitled to re- 
 gard as suspicious cases where the 
 shiripers of the goods do not choose 
 to discbise the name of the individual 
 who is to receive them. The third 
 case is that of .goods addressed to a 
 persfin in the en.Miiy territory. In the 
 peciili.nr circumstances of the present 
 struggle, where the forces of the en- 
 emy comprise so Large .a proportion 
 of the population, .and wluu-e there is 
 so little evidence of shipnuuits on pri- 
 v.ate as distinguished from Govern- 
 ment account, it is most reasonable 
 that the burden of proof should rest 
 upon the claimant. 
 
 The most difficult questions In con- 
 nection with coTidit icinal contraband 
 arise with reference to the .shipment 
 of food-stuffs. Xo coutitry has m.ain- 
 tained more sto\itlv than Gre.at 
 Britain in modern times the principle 
 that a belligerent should abstain from 
 interference with the food-stuffs in- 
 tended for the civil iiopulation. The 
 circumstances of the present struggle 
 are causing His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment some anxiety .as to whether the 
 existing rules with regard to condi- 
 tional rontr.aband. fr.aineil as they 
 were with the object of pr''>tecting so 
 far as possible the supplies which 
 were "^tended fi'r thi' civil population, 
 are effective for the purpose, or suit- 
 
24 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 able to the conditions present. The 
 principle which I have indicated 
 above is one which His Majesty's 
 Government have constantly had to 
 uphold against the opposition of con- 
 tinental Powers. In the absence of 
 some certainty that ihe rule would be 
 respected by both parties to this con- 
 flict, we feel great doubt whether it 
 should be regarded as an established 
 principle of international law. 
 
 Bismarck's Idea of Contraband. 
 
 Your Excellency will, no doubt, re- 
 member that in 18S5, at the time 
 when His Majesty's Government were 
 discussing with the French Govern- 
 ment this question of the right to de- 
 clare food-stuffs not intended for the 
 military forces to be contraband, and 
 when public attention had been drawn 
 to the matter, the Kiel Chamber of 
 Commerce applied to the German 
 Government for a statement of the 
 latter's views on the subject. Prince 
 Bismarck's answer was as follows: 
 
 In answer to their representation 
 of the 1st instant. I reply to the 
 Chamber of Commerce that any dis- 
 advantage our commercial and 
 carrying interests may suffer by the 
 treatment of rice as contraband of 
 war does not justify our opposing 
 a measure which it has been 
 thought fit to take in carrying on 
 a foreign war. Every war is a 
 calamity, which entails evil conse- 
 quences not only on the combatants, 
 but also on neutrals. These evils 
 may easily be increased by the in- 
 terference of a neutral Power with 
 the way in which a third carries on 
 the war, to the disadvantage of the 
 subjects of the interfering Power, 
 and by this means (ierman com- 
 merce might lie weighted with f.ar 
 heavier losses than a transitory pro- 
 hibition of the rice trade in Chinese 
 waters. The measure in question 
 has for its object the shortening of 
 the war by increasing the difflculties 
 of the enemy, and is a justifiable 
 step in war if impartially enforced 
 against all neutral ships. 
 
 His Majesty's Government are dis- 
 posed to think that the same view is 
 still maintained by the German Gov- 
 ernment. Another circumstance 
 which is now coming to light is that 
 an elaborate machinery h.as been or- 
 ganised bv the enemy for the supply 
 of food-stuffs for the use of the Ger- 
 man army from overseas. Under 
 the.se circumstances it would be ab- 
 surd to give any definite pledge that 
 in cases where the supplies can lie 
 proved to be for the use of the enemy 
 forces they should be given complete 
 immunity by the simple expedient of 
 despatching them to ;in agent in a 
 neutral port. The reason for drawing 
 a distinction between food-stuffs in 
 tended for the civil population and 
 those for the armed forces or enemy 
 Government disappears when the dis 
 tinction between the civil population 
 and the armed forces itself disap- 
 pears. 
 
 In any country in which there ex 
 ists such a tremen<b>us organisation 
 for war as now olitnins in Germany 
 there is no clear division between 
 those whom the Government is re- 
 sponsilde for feeding and those whom 
 it is not. Experience shows that the 
 power to requisition will be used to 
 the fullest extent in order to make 
 sure that the wants of the military 
 are siipplied, and however much goods 
 mav be imported for civil use it is 
 by "the military that they will be con- 
 sumed if military exigencies require 
 it, especially now that the German 
 
 Government have taken control of all 
 the food-stuffs in the country. I do 
 not wish to overburden this note with 
 statistics, but in proof of my state- 
 ment as to the unprecedented extent 
 to which supplies are reaching neutral 
 ports, I should like to instance the 
 figures of the exports of certain meat 
 products to Denmark during the 
 months of September and October. 
 Denmark is a country which in nor- 
 mal times imports a certain quantity 
 of such products, but exports still 
 more. In 1913, during the above two 
 months, the United States exports of 
 lard to Denmark were nil, as com- 
 pared with 22,652,598 lb. in the same 
 two months of 1914. The correspond- 
 ing figures with regard to bacon were: 
 1H13, nil; 1914, 1,022,195 lb.; canned 
 beef, 1913, nil; 1914, 151,200 lb.; 
 pickled and cured beef, 1913, 42,901 
 lb.; 1914, 156.143 lb.; pickled pork, 
 
 1913, nil; 1914, 812,872 lb. 
 
 In the same two months the United 
 States exported to Denmark 280.176 
 gallons of mineral lubricating oil in 
 1914 as compared with 179,252 in 
 1913; to Norway, 335,468 gallons in 
 
 1914, as against 151,179 gallons in 
 1913; to Sweden, 896,193 gallons in 
 1914, as against 385,476 gallons in 
 1913. I have already mentioned the 
 framing of the Order in Council of the 
 29th October, and the transmission to 
 your Excellency of particulars of ships 
 and cargoes seized as instances of the 
 efforts which we have made fnrough- 
 out the course of this war to ineet all 
 reasonable complaints made on behalf 
 of American citizens, and in my note 
 of the 7th January I alluded to the 
 decision of our Prize Court in the 
 case of the "Miramichi," as evidencing 
 the liberal principles adopted towards 
 neutral commerce. 
 
 Committee to Release Cargoes. 
 
 I should also like to refer to the 
 steps which we took at the beginning 
 of the war to ensure the speedy re- 
 lease of cargo claimed by neutrals on 
 lioard enemy ships which were cap- 
 tured or detained at the outbreak of 
 war. Under our Prize Court rules 
 release of such goods can be obtained 
 without the necessity of entering a 
 claim in the Prize Court if the docu- 
 ments of title are produced to the of- 
 ficer representing His Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment, and the title to the goods is 
 established to his satisfaction. It was 
 shortly found, however, that this pro- 
 cedure did not provide for the case 
 where the available evidence was so 
 scanty that the officer representing 
 the Crown was not justified in con- 
 senting to a release. In order, there- 
 fore, to ameliorate the situation we 
 established a special Committee, with 
 full powers to authorise the release 
 of goods without insisting on full evi- 
 dence of title being produced. This 
 Committee dealt with the utmost ex 
 pedition with a large number of 
 claims. In the great majority of 
 cases the goods claimed were released 
 at once. In addition to the cases dealt 
 with by this Committee a very large 
 ■amount of cargo was released at once 
 by the Procurator-General on produc 
 tion of documents. Claimants there- 
 fore obtained their goods without the 
 necessity of applying to the Prize 
 Court and of incurring the expense 
 involved in retaining lawyers, and 
 without the risk, which was in some 
 cases a considerable one, of the goods 
 being eventually held to be enemy 
 property and condemned. We have 
 reason to know that our action in this 
 matter was hii;hly appreciated by 
 nuiny American citizens. 
 
 Another instance of the efforts 
 
 which His Majesty's Government have 
 made to deal as leniently as possible 
 with neutral interests may be found 
 in the policy which we have followed 
 with regard to the transfer to a neu- 
 tral flag of enemy ships belonging to 
 companies which were incorporated 
 in the enemy country, but all of whose 
 shareholders were neutral. The rules 
 applied by the British and by the 
 American Prize Courts have always 
 treated the flag as conclusive in 
 favour of the captors in spite of neu- 
 tral proprietary interests (see the 
 case of the "Pedro," 175 U. S.. 354). 
 In several cases, however, we have 
 consented to waive our belligerent 
 right to treat as enemy vessels ships 
 belonging to companies incorporated 
 in Germany which were subsidiary to 
 and owned by American corporations. 
 The only condition which we have im- 
 posed is that these vessels should take 
 no further part in trade with the en- 
 emy country. 
 
 Leniency Toward Neutrals. 
 
 I have given these indications of the 
 policy which we have followed, be- 
 cause I cannot help .feeling that if 
 the facts were more fully known as 
 to the efforts which we have made to 
 avoid inflicting any avoidable injury 
 on neutral interests, many of the com- 
 plaints which have been received by 
 the Administration in Washington, 
 and which led to the protest which 
 your E.xcellency handed to me on the 
 2 9th December would never have been 
 made. My hope is that when the 
 facts which I have set out above are 
 realised, and when it is seen that our 
 naval operations have not diminished 
 American trade with neutral coun- 
 tries, and that the lines on which we 
 have acted are consistent with the 
 fundamental principles of interna- 
 tional law, it will be apparent to the 
 Government and people of the United 
 States that His Majesty's Government 
 have hitherto endeavoured to exercise 
 their belligerent rights with every 
 possible consideration for the interests 
 of neutrals. It will still be our en- 
 deavour to avoid injury and loss to 
 neutrals, but the announcement by 
 the German Government of their in- 
 tention to sink merchant vessels and 
 their cargoes without verification of 
 their nationality or character, and 
 without making any provision for the 
 s.afety of non-combatant crews or 
 giving them a chance of saving their 
 lives, has made it necessary for His 
 Majesty's Government to consider 
 what measures they should adopt to 
 protect their interests. It is impos- 
 sible for one belligerent to depart 
 from rules and precedents and for 
 the other to reinain bound by them. 
 I h.ave the honour, etc., etc.. 
 
 (Signed) E. GREY. 
 
 AMERICAN NOTE ON THE FLAG. 
 
 Secretary of State to the American 
 Ambassador at London.- 
 
 Washington, February 10, 1915. 
 American Ambassador, London: 
 The Department has been advised of 
 the Declaration of the Germ.an Ad- 
 miralty on February fourth, indicat- 
 ing that the British Government had 
 on January thirty-first explicitly au- 
 thorized the use of neutral flags on 
 British merchant vessels presumably 
 for the purpose of avoiding recogni- 
 tion by German naval forces. The 
 Department's attention has also been 
 directed to reports in the press that 
 the captain of the Lu.-^itania. acting 
 upon orders or information received 
 
EXCHANGE OF NOTES. 
 
 25 
 
 from the British authorities, raised 
 the American flag as his vessel ap- 
 proached the British coasts, in order 
 to escape anticipated attacks by Ger- 
 man submarines. To-day's press re- 
 ports also contain an alleged official 
 statement of the Foreign Office de- 
 fending the use of the flag of a neu- 
 tral country by a belligerent vessel 
 In order to escape capture or attack 
 by an enemy. 
 
 Assuming that the foregoing reports 
 ire true the Government of the United 
 States, reserving for future considera- 
 tion the legality and propriety of the 
 deceptive use of the flag of a neutral 
 power in any case for the purpose of 
 Avoiding capture, desires very re- 
 spectfully to point out to His Britan- 
 nic Majesty's Government the serious 
 consequences which may result to 
 American vessels and American citi- 
 Eens if this practice is continued. The 
 occasional use of the flag of a neu- 
 tral or an enemy under the stress of 
 immediate pursuit and to deceive an 
 approaching enemy, which appears by 
 the press reports to be represented as 
 the precedent and justification used 
 to support this action, seems to this 
 Government a very different thing 
 from an explicit sanction by a bellig- 
 erent government for its merchant 
 ships generally to fly the flag of a 
 neutral power within certain portions 
 of the high seas which are presumed 
 to be frequented with hostile war- 
 ships. The formal declaration of such 
 a policy of general misuse of a neu- 
 tral's flag jeopardizes the vessels of 
 the neutral visiting those waters in 
 a peculiar degree by raising the pre- 
 sumption that they are of belligerent 
 nationality regardless of the flag 
 which they may carry. 
 
 Menace to American Lives and Ships. 
 
 In view of the announced purpose 
 of the German Admiralty to engage 
 in active naval operations in certain 
 delimited sea areas adjacent to the 
 coasts of Great Britain and Ireland 
 the Government of the United States 
 would view with anxious solicitude 
 any general use of the flag of the 
 United States by British vessels 
 traversing those waters. A policy 
 such as the one which His Majesty's 
 Government is said to intend to adopt 
 would, if the declnration of the Ger- 
 man Admiralty is put in force, it 
 seems clear, afford no protection to 
 British vessels, while it would be a 
 serious and constant menace to the 
 lives and vessels of American citi 
 zens. The Government of the United 
 States, therefore, trusts that His 
 Majesty's Government will do all in 
 their power to restrain vessels of 
 British nationality from the deceptive 
 use of the flag of the United States 
 in the sea area defined in the Ger- 
 man declaration, since such practice 
 would greatly endanger the vessels of 
 a friendly power navigating those 
 waters and would even seem to im- 
 pose upon the Government of Great 
 Britain a measure of responsibility for 
 the loss of American lives and vessels 
 in case of an attack by a German 
 naval force. 
 
 Please present a note to Sir Edward 
 Grey in the sense of the foregoing 
 and impress him with the grave con- 
 cern which this Government feels in 
 the circumstances in regard to the 
 safety of American vessels and lives 
 in the war zone declared by the Ger- 
 man Admiralty. You mny add that 
 this Government is mriking earnest 
 representations to the German Gov- 
 ernment in regard to the danger to 
 American vessels and citizens if the 
 
 declaration of the German Admiralty 
 is put into effect. 
 
 BRYAN. 
 
 BRITISH REPLY ON USE OF FLAG. 
 
 American Ambassador at London to 
 the iSecretary of State: 
 
 London, February 19. 1913. 
 
 Your 11U6. lUth. Sir Edward Grey 
 has just handed me the following 
 memorandum since your telegram to 
 him was given to the press in Wash- 
 ington. I consented to his proposal 
 to give this memorandum out for pub- 
 lication in Saturday morning news- 
 papers: 
 
 "The memorandum communicated 
 on the 11th February calls attention 
 in courteous and friendly terms to the 
 action of the captain of the British 
 S. S. Lusitania in raising the flag of 
 the United States of America when 
 approaching British waters and says 
 that the Government of the United 
 States feel a certain anxiety in con- 
 sidering the possibility of any general 
 use of the flag of the United States by 
 British vessels traversing those waters 
 since the effect of such a policy might 
 be to bring about a menace to the 
 lives and vessels of United States citi- 
 zens. 
 
 "It was understood that the Ger- 
 man Government had announced their 
 intention of sinking British merchant 
 ve.ssels at sight by torpedoes without 
 giving any opportunity of making any 
 provision for saving the lives of non- 
 combatant crews and passengers. It 
 was in consequence of this threat that 
 the Lusitania raised the United States 
 flag on her inward voyage and on her 
 subsequent outward voyage. A re- 
 quest was made by the United States 
 passengers who were embarking on 
 board her that the United States flag 
 should be hoisted presumably to en- 
 sure their safety. Meanwliile the 
 memorandum from Your Excellency 
 had lieen received. His Majesty's 
 Government did not give any advice 
 to the company as to how to meet 
 this request and it is understood that 
 the Lusitania left Liverpool under the 
 British flag. 
 
 British Allow Use of Their Flag. 
 
 "It seems unnecessary to say more 
 as regards the Lusitania in particular 
 in regard to the use of foreign flags 
 by merchant vessels. The British 
 Merchant Shipping Act makes it clear 
 that the use of the British flag Iiy for- 
 eign merchant vessels is permitted in 
 time of war for the purpose of escap- 
 ing capture. It is believed that in the 
 case of some other nations there is 
 a similar recognition of the same 
 practice with regard to their flags and 
 that none have forbidden it. It would 
 therefore be unreasonable to expect 
 His Majesty's government to pass leg- 
 islation forliidding the use of foreign 
 flags by British merchant vessel.s to 
 avoid capture by the enemy. Now 
 that the German Government have 
 announced their intention to sink mer- 
 chant vessels at sight with their non- 
 comb.atant crews, cargoes and papers, 
 a jiroceeding hitherto reg,arded by the 
 opinion of the world not as war, but 
 as piracy, it is felt that the United 
 Stales Government could not f.airly 
 ask the British Government to order 
 British merchant vessels to forego the 
 me.ans — always hitherto permitted — • 
 of escaping not only capture but the 
 much worse f.ate of sinking and de- 
 struction. Great Britain has alw.ays 
 when ne\itral accorded to the vessels 
 i>f other states .at war. liberty to use 
 the British flag as a means of protec- 
 
 tion against capture and instances are 
 on record when United States ve.ssels 
 availed themselves of this facility dur- 
 ing the American Civil War. It would 
 be contrary to fair expectation if now 
 Vihen the conditions are reversed the 
 United States and neutral nations 
 were to grudge to British ships liberty 
 to take similar action. The British 
 Government have no intention of ad- 
 vising their merchant shipping to use 
 foreign flags as general practice or to 
 resort to them otherwise than for 
 escaping capture or destruction. 
 
 "The obligation upon a belligerent 
 warship to ascertain definitely for 
 itself the nationality and character of 
 a mercltant vessel before capturing it 
 and 'A Fortiori' before sinking and de- 
 stroying it has been universally recog- 
 nized. If that obligation is fulfilled, 
 hoisting a neutral flag on board a 
 British vessel can not possibly en- 
 danger neutral shipping and the Brit- 
 ish Government hold that if loss to 
 neutrals is caused by disregard of 
 this obligation it is upon the enemy 
 vessel disregarding it and upon the 
 government .giving orders that it 
 should be disregarded that the sole 
 responsibility for injury to neutrals 
 ought to rest." 
 
 AMERICAN AMBASS.\DOR. 
 
 NOTE ON THE WILHELMINA. 
 
 Secretary of State to the American 
 Ambassador at London,- 
 
 Washington, February 15, 1915. 
 
 The Department notes that you 
 have been informed by the British 
 Government that the cargo of the 
 American steamer Wilhelmina has 
 been sent to prize court but is not yet 
 unloaded. The Government of the 
 United States, of cour.se. has no inten- 
 tion of interfering with the proper 
 course of judicial procedure in the 
 British prize courts, but deems it 
 proper to bring to the attention of 
 the British Government information 
 which has been received in relation to 
 the character and destination of the 
 cargo and to point out certain con- 
 siderations prompting the supposition 
 that the seizure may not be justified. 
 This Government is informed that the 
 W. L. Green Commission Company, 
 an American corporation organized in 
 ISfll. which in the past has made 
 extensive shipments of goods to Ger- 
 many, is the sole owner of the cargo 
 which consists entirely of foodstuffs 
 consigned to the W. L. Green Com- 
 mission Company, Hamburg, and that 
 the Company's manager, now in 
 Europe, has instructions to sell the 
 cargo solely to the civilian population 
 of Hamburg. A copy of the ship's 
 m.anifest has been submitted to this 
 Government, accompanied by a sworn 
 statement from the Company's man- 
 ft.ger in which he represents that he 
 was instructed to proceed to Germany 
 to dispose of the cargo to private pur- 
 chasers in that country, and not to 
 .any belligerent government nor armed 
 forces of such government, nor to .any 
 agent of a belligerent government or 
 of its armed forces. 
 
 According to well-est.ablished prac- 
 tice among nations, admitted, as this 
 Government understands by the Gov- 
 ernment of Great Brit.ain. the .articles 
 of which the Wilhelmina's cargo is 
 said to consist, are sultject to seizm-e 
 as contraband only in case they are 
 destined for the use of a belligerent 
 government or its .armed foi-ces. The 
 Government of the United States un- 
 derstands that the British autliorities 
 consider the seizure of the cargo jus- 
 
26 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 tified on the ground that a recent or- 
 der of the Federal Council of Ger- 
 many, promulgated after the vessel 
 sailed, required the delivery of im- 
 ported articles to the German Gov- 
 ernment. The owners of the cargo 
 have represented to this Government 
 that such a position is untenable. 
 They point out that, by a provision 
 of the order in question as originally 
 announced, the regulations in relation 
 to the seizure of food products are 
 made inapplicable to such products 
 imported after January thirty-one, 
 nineteen fifteen. They further repre- 
 sent that the only articles shipped on 
 the Wilhelmina which are embraced 
 within the terms of these regulations 
 are wheat and bran, which constitute 
 about fifteen per centum of the cargo 
 as compared with eighty-five per 
 centum consisting of meats, vegetables 
 and fruits. The owners also assert 
 that the regulations contemplate the 
 disposition of foodstuffs to individuals 
 through municipalities; that munici 
 palities are not agents of the Govern 
 ment, and that the purpose of the reg 
 ulations is to conserve the supply of 
 food products and to prevent specula- 
 tion and inflation of prices to non- 
 combatants. 
 
 German Seizures of Foodstuffs. 
 
 The German Government has ad- 
 dressed a formal communication to 
 the Government of the United States 
 in relation to the effect of the decree 
 Issued by the German Federal Council, 
 and this Government deems it per 
 tinent to call to the attention of the 
 British Government a material por- 
 tion of this communication, which is 
 as follows: 
 
 1. The Federal Council's decision 
 concerning the seizure of food prod- 
 ucts, which England alleges to be 
 the cause of food products shipped 
 to Germany being treated as con 
 traband. bears exclusively on wheat, 
 rye. both unmixed and mixed with 
 
 other products, and also, wheat, rye, 
 oats and barley flour. 
 
 2. The Federal Council makes an 
 express exception in section forty- 
 five of the order. Section forty-five 
 provides as follows: The stipula- 
 tions of this regulation do not ap- 
 ply to grain or fiour imported from 
 abroad after January thirty-one. 
 
 3. Conjunctively with that saving 
 clause the Federal Council's order 
 contains a provision under which 
 imported cereals and flours would 
 be sold exclusively to the munici- 
 palities or certain specially desig- 
 nated organizations by the im- 
 porters. Although that provision 
 had for its object simply to throw 
 imported grain and flours into such 
 channels as supply the private con- 
 sumption of civilians and, in con- 
 sequence of that provision, the In- 
 tent and purpose of the Federal 
 Council's order which was to pro- 
 tect the civilian population from 
 speculators and engrossers were 
 fully met, it was nevertheless re- 
 scinded so as to leave no room for 
 doubt. 
 
 Suggests American Supervision. 
 
 4. My Government is amenable to 
 any proposition looking to control 
 by a special American organization 
 under the supervision of the Amer- 
 ican Consular officers and. if neces- 
 sary, w-ill itself make a proposition 
 in that direction. 
 
 5. The German Government fur- 
 ther calls attention to the fact that 
 municipalities do not form part of 
 or belong to the Government but 
 are self administrative bodies, 
 which are elected by the inhabitants 
 of the Commune in accordance with 
 fixed rules and therefore exclusively 
 represent the private part of the 
 population and act as it directs. Al- 
 though those principles are gener 
 ally known and obtain in the United 
 States as well as in England itself 
 
 the German Government desired to 
 point out the fact so as to avoid any 
 further unnecessary delay. 
 
 6. Hence it is absolutely assured 
 that imported food products will be 
 consumed by the civilian population 
 in Germany exclusively. 
 It will be observed that it is stated 
 in this communication, which appears 
 to confirm the contentions of the 
 cargo owners, that a part of the order 
 of the German Federal Council relat- 
 ing to imported food products has 
 now been rescinded. This Govern- 
 ment has received another communi- 
 cation from the German Government 
 giving formal assurance to the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States that all 
 goods imported into Germany from 
 the United States directly or indi- 
 rectly, which belong to the class of 
 relative contraband, such as food- 
 stuffs, will not be used by the German 
 army or navy or by Government au- 
 thorities, but will be left to the free 
 consumption of the German civilian 
 population, excluding all Government 
 purveyors. If the British authorities 
 have not in their possession evidence, 
 other than that presented to this Gov- 
 ernment as to the character and des- 
 tination of the cargo of the Wil- 
 helmina, sufficient to warrant the 
 seizure of this cargo, the Government 
 of the United States hopes that the 
 British Government will release the 
 vessel together with her cargo and al- 
 low her to proceed to her port of des- 
 tination. Please communicate with 
 the British Government in the sense 
 of the foregoing. 
 
 BRYAN. 
 
 MEMORANDUM ON WILHELMINA. 
 
 American Ambussador at London to 
 the Secretary of State: 
 
 London. February 19, 1915. 
 Sir Edward Grey has just handed 
 me the following memorandum. 
 Since your telegram to him was given 
 
 '^fS,— : ■ ■■-««"«-"■■ -ri,.^ -' ' 
 
 AMERICAN STEAMER WILHELMINA SEIZED BY GREAT BRITAIN 
 
EXCHANGE OF NOTES WITH GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 27 
 
 to the press in Washington I con- 
 sented to his proposal to give this 
 memorandum out for publication in 
 Saturday morning's newspapers: 
 
 "Memorandum. The communica- 
 tion made by the United States Am- 
 bassador in his note to Sir Edward 
 Grey of the sixteenth instant has been 
 carefully considered and the follow- 
 ing observations are offered in re- 
 ply:— 
 
 '"2. At the time when His Majes- 
 ty's Government gave directions for 
 the seizure of the cargo of the steam- 
 ship Wilhelmina as contraband they 
 had before them the text of the de- 
 cree made l>y the German Federal 
 Council on the twenty-fifth January, 
 under Article forty-five of which all 
 grain and Hour imported into Ger- 
 many after the thirty-first January 
 was declared deliverable only to cer- 
 tain organizations under direct gov- 
 erninent control or to municipal au- 
 thorities. The vessel was bound for 
 Hamburg, one of the free cities of the 
 German Em]iire. the government of 
 which is vested in the municipality. 
 This was one of the reasons actuating 
 His Majesty's Government in deciding 
 to bring the cargo of the Wilhelmina 
 before the prize court. 
 
 "3. Information has only now 
 reached them that by a subsequent 
 decree, dated the sixth February, the 
 above provision in Article forty-five 
 of the previous decree was repealed, 
 it would appear for the express pur- 
 pose of rendering difficult the antici- 
 pated proceedings against the Wil- 
 helmina. The repeal was not known 
 to His Majesty's Government at the 
 time of detention of the cargo, or, in- 
 deed, until now. 
 
 "4. How far the ostensible excep- 
 tion of imported supplies from the 
 general Government monopoly of all 
 grain and flour set up by the German 
 Government may affect the question 
 of the contraband nature of the ship- 
 ment seized is a matter which will 
 most suitably be investigated by the 
 prize court. 
 
 ".5. It is, however, necessary to state 
 that the German decree is not the 
 only ground on which the submission 
 of the cargo of the Wilhelmina to a 
 prize court is justified. The German 
 Government have in public announce- 
 ments claimed to treat practically 
 every town or port on the English 
 east coast as a fortified place .and base 
 of operations. On the strength of this 
 contention they have subjected to 
 bombardment the open towns of Yar- 
 mouth, Scarborough, and Whitby, 
 .among others. On the same ground, 
 .a number of neutral vessels sailing 
 for English ports on the east coast 
 with cargoes of goods on the German 
 list of conditional contraband have 
 been seized by Germ.an crtiisers and 
 brought before the German prize 
 court. Again, the Dutch vessel Maria, 
 h.aving .sailed from California with a 
 cargo of grain consigned to Dublin 
 and Belfast, was sunk in September 
 last by the German cruiser Karlsruhe. 
 
 This could only liave licen justified if. 
 among other things, the cargo could 
 have been proved to lie destined for 
 the British Government or armed 
 forces and if a presumfjtion to this 
 effect had been established owing to 
 Dublin or Belfast being considered 
 a fortified place or a liase for the 
 armed forces. 
 
 ''Cannot Have It Both Ways." 
 
 "6, The German Government can 
 not have it both ways. If they con- 
 sider themselves justified in destroy- 
 ing by bombardment the lives and 
 property of peaceful civil inhabitants 
 of English open towns and watering 
 ilaces, and in seizing and sinking ships 
 and cargoes of conditional contraband 
 on the way thither, on the ground 
 that they were consigned to a fortified 
 place or base, 'a fortiori' His Majesty's 
 Government must be at liberty to 
 treat Hamburg, which is in part pro- 
 tected by the fortifications at the 
 mouth of the EU.ie. as .a fortified 
 town, and a base of operations and 
 supply for the purposes of Article 
 thirty-four of the Declaration of Lon- 
 don. If the owners cpf the cargo of 
 the Wilhelmina desire to question the 
 validity in international law of the ac- 
 tion taken by order of His Majesty's 
 Government they will have every op- 
 portunity of establishing their case 
 in due course before the prize court, 
 and His Majesty's Government would, 
 in this connection, recall the attention 
 of the United States Government to 
 the considerations put forward in Sir 
 Edward Grey's note to Mr. Page of 
 the tenth instant as to the propriety 
 of awaiting the resiilt of prize court 
 proceedings before diplomatic action 
 is initiated. It will be remembered 
 that they have from the outset given 
 a definite assurance that the owners 
 of the Wilhelmina. as well as the 
 owners of her cargo, if found to be 
 contraband would be equitably in- 
 demnified. 
 
 "7. There is one further ob.serva- 
 tion to which His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment think it right, and appropriate 
 in the present connection, to give ex- 
 pression. They have not. so far. de- 
 clared foodstuffs to be absolute con- 
 traband. They have not interfered 
 with any neutral vessels on account 
 of their carrying foodstuffs, except on 
 the basis of such foodstuffs being 
 liable to capture if destined for the 
 enemy forces or governments. In so 
 acting, they have been guided by the 
 general princijile, of late universally 
 upheld by civilized nations, and ob- 
 served in practice, that the civil popu- 
 lations of countries at war are not to 
 be exposed to the treatment rightly 
 reserved for combatants. This dis- 
 tinction has to all intents and pur- 
 poses been swept away by the novel 
 doctrines proclaimed and acted upon 
 by the German Government. 
 
 "8. It is iinnecessary here to dwell 
 upon the treatment that has been 
 meted out to the civil population of 
 Belgium, and those p,arts of France 
 
 which are in German occupation. 
 When Germany, long liefore any mines 
 had been laid by British authorities, 
 proceeded to sow mines upon the high 
 seas, and, by this means, sunk a con- 
 siderable numlier not only of British 
 but also of neutral merchantmen with 
 their unoffending crews, it was, so His 
 Majesty's Government held, open to 
 them to take retaliatory measures, 
 even if such measures were of a kind 
 to involve pressure of the civil popu- 
 lation — not indeed of neutral states — 
 but of their enemies. They refrained 
 from doing so. 
 
 Foodstuffs Absolute Contraband. 
 
 ";•. When, subsequently, English 
 towns and defenseless British subjects, 
 including women and children, were 
 deliberately and .systematically fired 
 upon and killed by ships flying the 
 flag of the Imperial German Xavy, 
 when quiet country towns and villages, 
 void of defenses, and possessing no 
 military or naval importance, were 
 bomliarded by German airships. Hi.s- 
 Majesty's Government still abstained 
 from drawing the logical consequences 
 from this form of attack on defense- 
 less citizens. Further steps in the 
 same direction are now announced, 
 and in fact have alreadv been taken, 
 by Germany. British merchant ves- 
 sels have been torpedoed at sight 
 without any attempt being made to 
 give warning to the crew, or any op- 
 portunity being given to save "their 
 lives, a torpedo has been fired against 
 a British hospital ship in daylight, and 
 similar treatment is threatened to all 
 British merchant vessels in future as 
 well as to any neutral ships that may 
 happen to be found in the neighbor- 
 hood of the British Isles. 
 
 "10. Faced with this situation. His 
 Majesty's Government consider it 
 would be altogether unreasonable that 
 Great Britain and her allies should he 
 expected to remain indefinitely bound, 
 to their grave detriment, by rules and 
 principles of which they recognize the 
 justice if impartially observed as be- 
 tween belligerents, but which are at 
 the present moment openly set at de- 
 fiance by their enemy. 
 
 "11. If, therefore. His Majestv's 
 Government should hereafter feel 
 constrained to declare foodstuffs ab- 
 solute contraband, or to take other 
 measures for interfering with German 
 ti-ade, by way of reprisals, they con- 
 fidently expect that such action will 
 not be challenged on the part of neu- 
 tral states by appeals to laws and us- 
 ages of war whose validity rests on 
 their forming an integral part of that 
 system of international doctrine which 
 as a whole their enemy frankly boasts 
 the liberty and intention to disregard, 
 so long as such neutral states can not 
 compel the German Government to 
 abandon methods of warfare which 
 have not in recent history been re- 
 garded as having the sanction of 
 either law or humanity." 
 
 AMEPaCAN AMBASSADOR. 
 
GERMAN WAR ZONE AND AMERICAN PROTEST 
 
 Decree and Memorandum Explaining War Zone — American Note of 
 
 Protest and the German Reply 
 
 GERMANY'S WAR ZONE DECREE. 
 
 The following is the official text of 
 the German war zone decree, issued on 
 February 4, 1915: 
 
 PROCLAMATION*. 
 
 1. The waters surrounding Great 
 Britain and Ireland including tlie 
 ■whole English Channel are hereby de- 
 clai'ed to be war zone. On and after 
 the 18th of February, mi5. every en- 
 emy merchant ship found in the said 
 war zone will be destroyed without its 
 being ahvays possible to avert the dan- 
 gers threatening the crews and passen- 
 gers on that account. 
 
 2. Even neutral ships are exposed 
 to danger in the war zone, as in view 
 of the misuse of neutral flags ordered 
 on January 31 by the British Govern- 
 ment and of the accidents of naval 
 war. it cannot always be avoided to 
 strike even neutral ships in attacks 
 that are directed at enemy ships. 
 
 3. Northward navigation around 
 the Shetland Islands, in the eastern 
 waters of the North Sea and in a strip 
 of not less than thirty miles width 
 along the Netherlands coast is in no 
 danger. YOK POHL. 
 Chief of the Admiral Staff of the Navy. 
 
 Berlin, February 4, 1915. 
 
 GERMAN MEMORIAL. 
 
 (Official Translation.) 
 Memorial of the Imperial Govern- 
 ment respecting retaliatortj measures 
 rendered necessary by the means em- 
 ployed by England contrary to inter- 
 national law in intercepting neutral 
 maritime trade ivith GernuDiy: 
 
 Since the cominencement of the 
 present war Great Britain's conduct of 
 commercial warfare against Germany 
 has been a mockery of all the prin- 
 ciples of the law of nations. \Vhile 
 the British Government have by sev- 
 eral orders declared that their naval 
 forces should be guided by the stipu- 
 lations of the Declaration of London, 
 they have in reality repudiated this 
 Declaration in the most essential 
 points, notwithstanding the fact that 
 their own delegates at the Maritime 
 Conference of London acknowledged 
 its acts as forming part of e.visting in- 
 ternational law. The British Govern- 
 ment have placed a number of articles 
 on the contraband list which are not at 
 all, or only very indirectly capable of 
 use in warfare, and conseijuently can 
 not be treated as contralmnd either 
 under the Declaration of London or 
 under the generally acknowledged 
 rules of international law. In addition, 
 they have in fact obliterated the dis- 
 tinction between absolute and condi- 
 tional contraband by confiscating all 
 articles of conditional contraband des- 
 tined for Germany, whatever may be 
 the port where these articles are to be 
 unloaded, and without regard to 
 whether they are destined for uses of 
 war or peace. They have not even 
 hesitated to violate the Declaration of 
 Paris, since their naval forces have 
 captured on neutral ships German 
 property which was not contraband ipf 
 war. Furthermore, they have gone 
 further than their uw-n orders I'espect- 
 
 ing the Declaration of London and 
 caused numerous German subjects ca- 
 pable of bearing arms to be taken 
 from neutral ships and made prisoners 
 of war. Finally, they have declared 
 the North Sea in its whole extent to 
 be the seat of war, thereby rendering 
 dithcult and extremely dangerous, if 
 not impossible, all navigation on the 
 high seas between Scotland and Nor- 
 way, so that they have in a way estab- 
 lished a blockade of neutral coasts and 
 ports, which is contrary to the ele- 
 mentary principles of generally accept- 
 ed international law. Clearly all these 
 measures are part of a plan to strike 
 not only the German military opera- 
 tions but also the economic system of 
 Germany, and in the end to deliver the 
 whole German people to reduction by 
 famine, by intercepting legitimate neu- 
 tral commerce by methods contrary to 
 international law. 
 
 Neutrals Have Acquiesced. 
 
 The neutral powers have in the 
 main acquiesced in the measures of 
 the British Government; in particular 
 they have not been successful in secur- 
 ing the release by the British Govern- 
 iTient of the German subjects and 
 German merchandise illegally taken 
 from their vessels. To a certain ex- 
 tent they have even contributed to- 
 ward the execution of the measures 
 adopted by England in defiance of 
 the principle of the freedom of the 
 seas by prohilaiting the export and 
 transit of goods destined for peace- 
 able purposes in Germany, thus evi- 
 dently yielding to pressure by Eng- 
 land, The German Government have 
 in vain called the attention of the 
 neutral powers to the fact that Ger- 
 many must seriously question whether 
 it can any longer adhere to the stipu- 
 lations of the declaration of London, 
 hitherto strictly observed by it, in 
 case England continues to adhere to 
 its practice, and the neutral powers 
 persist in looking with indulgence 
 upon all these violations of neutrality 
 to the detriment of Germany. Great 
 Britain invokes the vital interests of 
 the British Empire which are at stake 
 in justification of its violations of the 
 law of nations, and the neutral pow- 
 ers appear to be satisfied with theoret- 
 ical protests, thus actiaally admitting 
 the vital interests of a belligerent as a 
 sufficient excuse for methods of wag- 
 ing war of whatever description. 
 
 The time has come for Germany 
 also to invoke such vital interests. It 
 therefore finds itself under the neces- 
 sity, to its regret, of t.aking military 
 measures against England in retalia- 
 tion of the practice followed by Eng- 
 land, Just as England declared the 
 whole North Sea between Scotland 
 and Norway to be comprised within 
 the seat of war, so does Germany now 
 declare the waters surrounding Great 
 Britain and Ireland, including the 
 whole English Channel, to be com- 
 prised within the seat of war, and will 
 prevent by all the military means at 
 its disposal all navigation by the ene- 
 my in those waters. To this end it 
 will endeavor to destroy, after Feb- 
 ruary 18 next, any merchant vessels 
 of the enemy which present them- 
 
 selves at the seat of war above indi- 
 cated, although it may not always be 
 possible to avert the dangers which 
 may menace persons and merchandise. 
 Neutral powers are accordingly fore- 
 
 irned not to continue to entrust 
 their crews, passengers, or merchan- 
 dise to such vessels. Their attention 
 is furthermore called to the fact that 
 it is of urgency to recommend to their 
 own vessels to steer clear of these 
 waters. It is true that the German 
 navy has received instructions to ab- 
 stain from all violence against neutral 
 vessels recognizable as such; but in 
 view of the hazards of war, and of the 
 misuse of the neutral flag ordered by 
 the British Government, it will not al- 
 ways be possible to prevent a neutral 
 vessel from becoming the victim of 
 an attack intended to be directed 
 against a vessel of the enemy. It is 
 expressly declared that navigation in 
 the waters north of the Shetland Is- 
 lands is outside the danger zone, as 
 well as navigation in the eastern part 
 of the North Sea and in a zone thirty 
 marine miles wide along the Dutch 
 coast. 
 
 The German Government announces 
 this nieasure at a time permitting 
 enemy and neutral ships to make the 
 necessary arrangements to reach the 
 ports situated at the seat of war. They 
 hope that the neutral powers will ac- 
 cord consideration to the vital inter- 
 ests of Germany equally with those of 
 England, and will on their part assist 
 in keeping their subjects and their 
 goods far from the seat of war; the 
 more so since they likewise have a 
 great interest in seeing the termina- 
 tion at an early day of the war now 
 ravaging. 
 
 Berlin. February 4, 1915. 
 
 NOTE TO GERMANY ON WAR ZONE 
 
 Secretary of State to the American 
 
 Ambassador at Berlin: 
 "Washington, February 10, 1915, 
 
 American Ambassador. Berlin: 
 Please address a note immediately to 
 the Imperial German Government to 
 the following effect; The Govern- 
 ment of the United States, having had 
 its attention directed to the procla- 
 mation of the German Admiralty is- 
 sued on the fourtli of February, that 
 the waters surrounding Great Britain 
 and Ireland, including the whole of 
 the Englisli Channel, are to be consid- 
 ered as comprised within the seat of 
 war; that all enemy merchant vessels 
 found in those waters after the 
 eighteenth instant will be destroyed, 
 although it may not always be pos- 
 sible to save crews and passengers; 
 and that neutral vessels expose them- 
 selves to danger within this zone of 
 war because, in view of the misuse of 
 neutral flags said to have been or- 
 dered by the British Government on 
 the thirty-first of .January and of the 
 contingencies of maritime warfare, it 
 may not be possible always to exempt 
 neutral vessels from att.acks itUended 
 to strike enemy ships, feels it to be 
 its duty to call the attention of the 
 Imperial German Government, with 
 sincere respect and the most friendly 
 sentiments but very candidly and 
 
GERMAN WAR ZONE AND AMERICAN PROTEST 
 
 29 
 
 earnestly, to the very serious pos- 
 sil)ilities of the course of action ap- 
 parently contemplated under that 
 proclamation. 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States views those possibilities with 
 such grave concern that it feels it to 
 be its privilege, and indeed its duty 
 in the circumstances, to request the 
 Imperial Gerinan Government to con- 
 sider before action is taken the criti- 
 cal situation in respect of the rela- 
 tions between this country and Ger- 
 many which might arise were the 
 German naval forces, in carrying out 
 the policy foreshadowed in the Ad- 
 miralty's proclamation, to destroy 
 any merchant vessel of the United 
 States or cause the death of Amer- 
 ican citizens. It is of cour.se not 
 necessary to remind the German Gov- 
 
 ernment that the sole right of a bel- 
 ligerent in dealing with neutral ves- 
 sels on the high seas is limited to 
 visit and search, unless a blockade is 
 proclaimed and effectively maintained, 
 which this Government does not un- 
 derstand to be proposed in this case. 
 To declare or exercise a right to at- 
 tack and destroy any vessel entering 
 a prescribed area of the high .seas 
 without first certainly determining its 
 iTelligerent nationality and the con- 
 traband character of its cargo wotild 
 be an act so unpreredented in nav.al 
 warfare that this Government is re- 
 luctant to believe that the Imperial 
 Governinent of Germany in this case 
 contemijlates it as possible. The sus- 
 piciijn that enemy ships are using 
 neutral flags imporperly can create no 
 just presumption that all ships 
 
 traversing a prescribed area are sub- 
 ject to the .same suspicion. It is to 
 determine exactly such iiuestions that 
 this Government umlerst.ands the 
 rigiit of visit and search to have been 
 recognized. 
 
 United States Not Open to Criticism. 
 
 This Giivernment has carefully 
 ni.ited the explanatory statement is- 
 sued by the Imperial German Govern- 
 ment at the same time with the proc- 
 lamation of the Germ.an Admiralty, 
 .and takes this occasion to remind the 
 Imperial German Government very 
 respectfully that the Government ot 
 the United States is open to none of 
 the criticisms for unneutral action to 
 wltich the German Government be- 
 lieve the governments of certain of 
 other neutral nations have laid them- 
 
 AREA DECLARED A WAR ZONE BY GERMANY 
 
 Shaded portion of the Map shove's the German \X at Zone. Crosses indicate locations of sinking of the 
 
 Lusitania, the torpedoing of the Gulflight and the attack upon the Cushing. The American 
 
 S. S. Nebraskan was torpedoed or mined. May 25, at a point a little southwest 
 
 of where Lusitania sank. 
 
30 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 selves open; that the Government of 
 the United States has not consented 
 to or acquiesced in any measures 
 whicli may have been taken by the 
 other belligerent nations in the pres- 
 ent war which operate to restrain 
 neutral trade, but has, on the con- 
 trary, taken in all such matters a po- 
 sition which warrants it in holding 
 those governments responsible in the 
 proper way for any untoward effects 
 upon American shipping which the 
 accepted principles of international 
 law do not justify; and that it, there- 
 fore, regards itself as free in the pres- 
 ent instance to take with a clear con- 
 science and upon accepted principles 
 the position indicated in this note. 
 
 If the commanders of German ves- 
 sels of war should act upon the pre- 
 sumption that the flag of the United 
 States was not being used m good 
 faith and should destroy on the high 
 seas an American vessel or the lives 
 of American citizens, it would be dif- 
 ficult for the Government of the 
 United States to view the act in any 
 other light than as an indefensible 
 violation of neutral rights which it 
 would be very hard indeed to recon- 
 cile with the friendly relations now 
 so happily subsisting between the two 
 governments. If such a deplorable 
 situation should arise, the Imperial 
 German Government can readily ap- 
 preciate that the Government of the 
 United States would be constrained to 
 hold the Imperial German Govern- 
 ment to a strict accountability for 
 such acts of their naval authorities 
 and to take any steps it might be 
 necessarv to take to safeguard Amer- 
 ican lives and property and to secure 
 to American citizens the full enjoy- 
 ment of their acknowledged rights on 
 the high seas. ^r ■* j 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States, in view of these considerations, 
 which it urges with the greatest re- 
 spect and with the sincere purpose ot 
 making sure that no misunderstand- 
 ing mav arise and no circumstance 
 occur that might even cloud the in- 
 tercourse of the two governments, ex- 
 pre.<;ses the confident hope and ex- 
 pectation that the Imperial German 
 Government can and will give as- 
 surance that American citizens and 
 their vessels will not be molested by 
 the naval forces of Germany other- 
 wise than bv visit and search, though 
 their vessel's may be traversing the 
 sea area delimited in the proclama- 
 tion of the German Admiralty. It is 
 added for the information of the Im- 
 perial Government that representa- 
 tions have been made to His Britan- 
 nic Majesty's Government in respect 
 to the unwarranted use of the Amer- 
 ican flag for the protection of British 
 ships. 
 
 BRYAN. 
 
 GERMAN REPLY TO OUR NOTE. 
 
 Germnn Minister for Foreign Affairs 
 In the American Ambassador at 
 Berlin ,• 
 
 Berlin, February IG, 1915, 
 In reference to the note of the 
 twelfth instant. Foreign Office number 
 twonty-two sixty, relative to the Ger- 
 man measures respecting the theater 
 of war in the waters surrounding Eng- 
 land, the undersigned has the honor 
 to reply to His Excellency the Am- 
 bassador of the United States. James 
 W. Gerard, as follows: The Imperial 
 German Government have examined 
 the communication of the Govern- 
 ment of the United States in the same 
 spirit of good will and friendship 
 
 which seems to have prompted this 
 communication. The Imperial Ger- 
 man Government are in entire accord 
 with the Government of the United 
 States that it is in the highest degree 
 desirable for all parties to avoid the 
 misunderstanding which might arise 
 from the measures announced by the 
 (.'rerman Admiralty and to avert the 
 intrusion of events calculated to in- 
 terrupt the most friendly relations 
 which have so happily existed between 
 the two Governments up to this time. 
 On this assurance the German Gov- 
 ernment believe that they may de- 
 pend on full understanding on the 
 part of the United States, all the more 
 because the action announced by the 
 German Admiralty, as was dwelt upon 
 at length in the note of the fourth 
 instant, is in no wise directed against 
 
 GOTTLIEB VON JAGOW 
 German Secretary for Foreign Affairs 
 
 the legitimate trade and navigation of 
 neutral states, but merely represents 
 an act of self-defense which Ger- 
 many's vital interests force her to 
 take against England's method of 
 conducting maritime war in defiance 
 of international law, which no pro- 
 test on the part of neutrals has availed 
 III liring into accordance with the 
 legal status generally recognized be- 
 fore the outbreak of hostilities. In 
 order to exclude all possible doubt on 
 this cardinal point the German Gov- 
 ernment beg to set forth once more 
 the actual situation. 
 
 Up to now Germany has scrupu- 
 lously observed the existing provisions 
 of international law relative to mari- 
 time war. In particular she assented 
 without delay to the proposal made 
 by the American Government directly 
 after the war iieg.Tn to ratify Declara- 
 tion of London and einbodied the con- 
 tents thereof without change in her 
 prize law, even without formally bind- 
 ing herself in this direction. The 
 German Government have adhered to 
 these provisions, even where they con- 
 flicted with military interests. Our 
 Government at the same time have 
 permitted the supply of food by Den- 
 mark to England until the present, 
 although they could well have pre- 
 vented this traffic by means of their 
 naval forces. In direct opposition to 
 
 this, England has not shrunk from 
 grave violations of international law 
 wherever she could thereby cripple 
 Germany's peaceable trade with neu- 
 tral countries. It will not be neces- 
 sary for the German Government to 
 go into great detail on this point, 
 especially since the American note to 
 the British Government dated Decem- 
 lier twenty-eighth, nineteen fourteen, 
 nhich has been brought to their 
 knowledge, has dealt with this point 
 very aptly if not very exhaustively on 
 the ground of the experiences of 
 months. 
 
 Purpose Starvation of Germany. 
 
 It is conceded that the intention of 
 ,*11 these aggressions is to cut off Ger- 
 many from all supplies and thereby 
 to deliver up to death by famine a 
 peaceful civilian population, a pro- 
 cedure contrary to law of war and 
 every dictate of humanity. The neu- 
 trals have not been able to prevent 
 this interception of different kinds of 
 trade with Germany contrary to in- 
 ternational law. It is true that the 
 .-.merican Government have protested 
 again.st England's procedure, and 
 Germany is glad to acknowledge this, 
 lull in spite of this protest and the 
 urotests of the other neutral govern- 
 ments England has not allowed her- 
 self to be dissuaded from the course 
 originally adopted. Thus the Amer- 
 ican ship Wilhelmina was recently 
 liruught into port by England al- 
 though her cargo was destined solely 
 fur the civil population of Gerinany 
 and was to be used only for this pur- 
 pose according to an express decla- 
 ration of the German Government. 
 
 In this way the following has been 
 created: Germany is to all intents and 
 VHirposes cut off from oversea supplies 
 with the toleration, tacit or protest- 
 ing, of the neutrals regardless of 
 whether it is a question of goods 
 which are absolute contraband or 
 only conditional contraband or not 
 contraband at all, following the law 
 generally recognized before the out- 
 break of the war. On the other hand 
 England with the indulgence of neu- 
 tral Governments is not only being 
 provided with such goods as are not 
 contraband or merely conditional con- 
 tr.iband. namely, foodstuffs, raw ma- 
 terial, et cetera, although these are 
 treated by England when Germany is 
 in question as absolute contraband, 
 but also with goods which have been 
 regularly and unquestionably ac- 
 knowledged to be absolute contra- 
 band. The German Government be- 
 lieve that they are obliged to point 
 out very particularly and with the 
 greatest emphasis, that a trade in 
 arms exists between American manu- 
 facturers and Germany's enemies 
 which is estimated at many hundred 
 million marks. 
 
 The German Government have 
 given due recognition to the fact that 
 as a matter of form the exercise of 
 rights and the toleration of wrong on 
 the part of neutrals is limited by their 
 pleasure alone and involves no for- 
 mal breach of neutrality. The Ger- 
 man Government have not in conse- 
 quence made any charge of formal 
 breach of neutrality. The German 
 Government can not. however, do 
 otherwise, especially in the interest 
 of absolute clearness in the relations 
 between the two countries, than to 
 emphasize that they, in common with 
 the public opinion in Germany, feel 
 themselves placed at a great disad- 
 vantage through the fact that the neu- 
 tral powers have hitherto achieved no 
 success or only an unmeaning success 
 in their assertion of the right to trade 
 
GERMAN WAR ZONE AND AMERICAN PROTEST. 
 
 31 
 
 with Germany, acknowledged to be 
 legitimate by international law, 
 whereas they make unlimited use of 
 their right to tolerate trade in con- 
 traband with England and our other 
 enemies. Conceded that it is the for- 
 mal right of neutrals not to protect 
 their legitimate trade with Germany 
 and even to allow themselves know- 
 ingly and willingly to be induced by 
 England to restrict such trade, it is 
 on the other hand not less their good 
 right, although unfortunately not ex- 
 ercised, to stop trade In contraband, 
 especially the trade in arms, with 
 Germany's enemies. 
 
 Germany to Take Up the Gauntlet. 
 
 In view of this situation the Ger- 
 man Government see themselves coin- 
 pelled after six months of patience 
 and watchful waiting to meet Eng- 
 land's murderous method of conduct- 
 ing maritime war with drastic coun- 
 ter measures. If England invokes the 
 powers of famine as an ally in its 
 struggle against Germany w-ith the in- 
 tention of leaving a civilized people 
 the alternative of perishing in misery 
 or submitting to the yoke of En.g- 
 land's political and commercial will, 
 the German Government are to-day 
 determined to take up the gauntlet 
 and to appeal to the same grim ally. 
 They rely on the neutrals who have 
 hitherto tacitly or under protest sub- 
 mitted to the consequences detrimen- 
 tal to themselves of England's war of 
 famine to display not less tolerance 
 toward Gerinany, even if the German 
 measures constitute new forms of 
 maritime war, as has hitherto been 
 the case with the English measures. 
 
 In addition to this, the German 
 Government are deterinined to sup- 
 press with all the means at their 
 disposal the supply of war material 
 to England and her allies and assume 
 at the same time that it is a matter 
 of course that the neutral Govern- 
 ments which have hitherto under- 
 taken no action against the trade in 
 arms with Germany's enemies do not 
 intend to oppose the forcible sup- 
 pression of this trade by Germany. 
 Proceeding from these points of view 
 the German Admiralty has declared 
 the zone prescriljed liy it the seat of 
 war' it will obstruct this area of 
 maritime war liy mines wherever pos- 
 sible and also endeavor to destroy the 
 merclL^nt vessels of the enemy in any 
 other way. It is very far indeed from 
 the intention of the German Govern- 
 ment acting in obedience to these 
 compelling circumstances ever to d*:-- 
 stroy neutral lives and neutral prop- 
 erty, but on the other hand they c.-an 
 not be blind to the fact that dan.cers 
 arise through the action to be car- 
 ried out against England which men- 
 ace without discrimin.Ttion all trade 
 within the area of maritime w,ir. 
 This applies as a matter of course to 
 war mines which place any ship ap- 
 proaching a mined area in danger 
 even if the limits of international law 
 are adhered to mos^ strictly. 
 
 The German Government believe 
 that they are all the more justified in 
 the hope that the neutral powers will 
 become reconciled with this, just as 
 they have with the serious injury 
 caused them thus far by England's 
 measures, because it is their will to 
 do everything in any w.ay r-ompntible 
 with the accomplishment of their pur- 
 pose for the protection of neutral 
 shipj)ing even within the ai-e.n of mai'i- 
 tinie war. They furnished the first 
 prriof of their gor)d will by announcirig 
 the measures intended liy theni ;it .a 
 time not less than two weeks before- 
 hand, in order to give neutral ship- 
 
 ping an opportunity to make the 
 necessary arrangements to avoid the 
 threatening danger. The .safest 
 
 method of doing this is to stay away 
 from the area ot^ maritime war. Neu- 
 tral ships entering the closed waters 
 in spite of this announcement, given 
 .so far in advance, and which seriously 
 impairs the accomplishment of the 
 military purpose against England, 
 bear their own responsibility for any 
 unfortunate accidents. The German 
 Government on their side expressly 
 decline all responsibility for such ac- 
 cidents and their omsequences. 
 
 Only Enemy Merchant Vessels 
 
 Endangered. 
 
 Furthermore, the Gern"ian Govern- 
 ment anu'iunced merely the destruc- 
 tion of enemy merchant vessels found 
 
 ALFRED RT.von TIRPITZ 
 Head of the German Admiralty 
 
 within tin- aria i>f maritime war. and 
 not the destruction of all merchant 
 vessels, as the American Government 
 apt-tear to h.ave erroneously under- 
 stood. This limitation wliich the Ger- 
 man Government have imposed upon 
 themselves impairs the military pur- 
 pose, especially since the presumption 
 will prevail, even in the ca.se of neu- 
 lr;il ships, that tney have contr.aband 
 on board, in view of the interpreta- 
 tion of the idea of contraband in 
 which the English Government have 
 indiilt;e(l as regards t>ernian>' and 
 which the CJernian Go\-ei-nment will 
 .•iccordingly niijdy against England. 
 
 Xnturally tile Imiierial Government 
 are not willing to waive the ri^'ht to 
 establish the presence of contrnband 
 in the cargoes of neutral shiiis and. in 
 cases reiiuiriim it. to take an>' action 
 necessar.v on the grounds est-ablished. 
 Finally the German Government are 
 
 prepared to accord, in conjunction 
 with the American Government, the 
 most earnest consideration to any 
 measure that might be calculated to 
 insure the safety of legitimate ship- 
 ping of neutrals within the seat of 
 war. They can not. however, over- 
 look the fact that all efforts in this 
 direction are considerably hampered 
 Ijv two circumstances: First, by the 
 misuse of the neutral flag by English 
 merchant vessels, which in the mean- 
 time has probably been established 
 lieyond a doulit by the .American Gov- 
 ernment likewise. Second, by the 
 above-mentioned trade in contraband, 
 especially war materials, by neutral 
 merchant vessels. In regard to the 
 latter point, the German Government 
 ventures to hope that the American 
 Government upon reconsideration will 
 see their way clear to a measure of 
 intervention in accordance with the 
 spirit of true neutrality. 
 
 As regards the first point, the secret 
 order of the British Admiralty has al- 
 ready been coinmunicated to the 
 American Government by Germany. 
 It recommends English merchant ves- 
 sels to use neutral flags and has in 
 the meantime been confirmed by a 
 statement of the British Foreign Of- 
 fice which refers to the municipal law 
 iif England and characterizes such 
 action as quite unobjectionable. The 
 Knglish merchant marine has fol- 
 lowed this counsel without delay, as 
 is probaldy known to the American 
 Government, from the cases of the 
 lAisitania and Laertes. Moreover, the 
 I'.ritish Government have armed Eng- 
 lish merchant vessels and instructed 
 them to resist by force the German 
 submarines. In these circumstances 
 it is very difficult for the Geriuan sub- 
 marines to recognize neutral merchant 
 ve.ssels as such, for even a search will 
 not be possible in the majority of 
 cn.ses. since the attacks to be antici- 
 pated in the case of a disguised Eng- 
 lish ship would expose the com- 
 manders conducting a search and the 
 boat itself to the danger of destruc- 
 tion. 
 
 The British Government would then 
 be in a position to render the German 
 measures illusory if their merchant 
 tuarine persists in the misuse of neu- 
 tral flags and neutral vessels are not 
 marked in some other manner admit- 
 ting of no possible doubt. Germany 
 must, in the exigency into which she 
 has unlawfully been forced, make her 
 measures effective at all events in or- 
 der thereby to compel her adversary 
 to conduct maritime warfare in ac- 
 cordance with international law and 
 thus to reestalilisl- the freedom of the 
 seas, which she has ever advocated 
 and for which she is fighting likewise 
 to-day. The German Government, 
 therefore, welcimies the fact that the 
 American Government have made rep- 
 resentations to the British Govern- 
 ment relative to the use of their fl.ag 
 contrary to law and give expression 
 to the expectation that this action will 
 cause Engl.-iiid to resjiect the .Ameri- 
 can flau in future. In this expectation 
 the commanders of the G.-rnmn sub- 
 marines h.ave been instnieteil. as was 
 already stated in the note of fourth 
 instant, 'o abstain from violence to 
 American mercdiant vessels when they 
 ar-e l-eCo:;tli/;ible as sueb. 
 
 Recommends American Convoys. 
 
 In order to meet in the s:if -st man- 
 ner .-ill the consequences of mistaking 
 an .Amei'icnn for :< hostile merchant 
 vessel the German f.overnment 
 reconimendi-d th.-it inbh.iugh this 
 woiilil not ripplv in the i-:^^f of danger 
 fr.un luMiesi the I'nit.'d Sl.-ites convoy 
 
32 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 their ships carrying peaceable cargoes 
 and traversing the English seat of 
 maritime war in order to make them 
 recognizable. In this connection the 
 German Government believe it should 
 be made a condition that only such 
 ships should be convoyed as carry no 
 merchandise which would have to be 
 considered as contraband according to 
 the interpretation applied by England 
 against Germany. The Germany Gov- 
 ernment are prepared to enter into 
 immediate negotiations with the 
 American Government relative to the 
 manner of convoy. They would, how- 
 ever, be particularly grateful if the 
 American Government would urgently 
 advise their merchant vessels to avoid 
 the English seat of maritime war, at 
 any rate until the flag question is set- 
 tled. 
 
 The German Government resign 
 
 themselves to the confident hope that 
 the American Government will recog- 
 nize the full ineaning of the severe 
 struggle which Germany is conducting 
 for her very existence and will gain 
 full understanding of the reasons 
 which prompt Germany and the aims 
 of the measures announced by her 
 from the above explanations and 
 promises. The German Government 
 repeat that in the scrupulous consid- 
 eration for neutrals hitherto practiced 
 by them they have determined upon 
 the measures planned only under the 
 strongest compulsion of national self- 
 preservation. Should the American 
 Government at the eleventh hour suc- 
 ceed in removing, by virtue of the 
 weight which they have the right and 
 ability to throw into the scales of the 
 fate of peoples, the reasons which 
 have made it the imperative duty of 
 
 the German Government to take the 
 action indicated, should the American 
 Government in particular find a way 
 to bring about the oljservation of the 
 Declaration of London on the part of 
 the Powers at war with Germany and 
 thereby to render possible for Ger- 
 many the legitimate supply of food- 
 stuffs and industrial raw materials, 
 the German Government would recog- 
 nize this as a service which could not 
 be too highly estimated in favor of 
 more humane conduct of war and 
 would gladly draw the necessary con- 
 clusions from the new situation thus 
 created. The undersigned requests 
 the Ambassador to bring the above to 
 the attention of the American Gov- 
 ernment and avails himself of the 
 opportunity to renew, et cetera. 
 
 "(Signed) VON JAGOW." 
 
 AMERICA SUGGESTS BLOCKADE MODIFICATIONS 
 
 This Government's Note to Belligerents Proposing a Basis of Agree- 
 ment to Relieve Neutral Shipping, and the Replies of 
 Germany and Great Britain 
 
 NOTE TO BELLIGERENTS. 
 
 Secretary tif Stale to the American 
 Ambaxsador at London. — Identic 
 messai/e sent to the American Am- 
 hassadur at Berlin on the same 
 date: 
 
 Washington, February 20, 1015. 
 
 You will please deliver to Sir Ed- 
 ward Grey the following identic note 
 which we are sending England and 
 Germany: 
 
 In view of the correspondence 
 which has passed between this Gov- 
 ernment and Great Britain and Ger- 
 many respectively, relative to the 
 Declaration of a war zone by the Ger- 
 man Admiralty and the use of neutral 
 flags by British merchant vessels, this 
 Government ventures to express the 
 hope that the two belligerent govern- 
 ments may, through reciprocal con- 
 cessions, find a basis for agreement 
 which will relieve neutral ships en- 
 gaged in peaceful commerce from the 
 great dangers which they will incur 
 in the high seas adjacent to the coasts 
 of the belligerents. 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States respectfully suggests that an 
 agreement in terms like the following 
 might be entered into. This sugges- 
 tion is not to be reg.arded as in any 
 sense a proposal made by this Gov- 
 ernment, for it of course fully recog- 
 nizes that it is not its privilege to 
 propose terms of agreement between 
 Great Britain and Germany, even 
 though the matter be one in which it 
 and the people of the United States 
 are directly and deeply interested. It 
 is merely venturing to take the liberty 
 which it hopes may be accorded a 
 sincere friend desirous of embarrass- 
 ing neither nation involved and of 
 serving, if it may, the common inter- 
 ests of humanity. The course out- 
 lined is offered in the hope that it may 
 
 \ 0* 
 
 WALTER H. PAGE 
 American Ambassador to Great Britain 
 
 draw forth the views and elicit the 
 suggestions of the British and German 
 Governments on a matter of capit.al 
 interest to the whole world. 
 
 Germany and Great Britain to 
 agree: 
 
 1. That neither will sow any float- 
 ing mines, whether upon the high 
 seas or in territorial waters; that 
 neither will plant on the high seas 
 
 anchored mines except within cannon 
 range of harbors for defensive pur- 
 poses only; and that all mines shall 
 bear the stamp of the Government 
 planting them and be so constructed 
 as to become harmless if separated 
 from their moorings. 
 
 '2. That neither will use submarines 
 to attack merchant vessels of any na- 
 tionality except to enforce the right 
 of visit and search. 
 
 3. That each will require their re- 
 spective merchant vessels nt)t to use 
 neutral flags for the purpose of dis- 
 guise or ruse de guerre. 
 
 Germany to agree: 
 
 That all importations of food or 
 foodstuffs from the United States 
 (and from such other neutral coun- 
 tries as may ask it) into Germany 
 shall be consigned to agencies to be 
 designated by the United States Gov- 
 ernment; that these American agen- 
 cies shall have entire charge and con- 
 trol without interference on the part 
 of the German Government, of the 
 receipt and distribution of such im- 
 portations, and shall distribute them 
 solely to retail dealers bearing licenses 
 , from the German Government en- 
 titling them to receive and furnish 
 such food and foodstuffs to non- 
 comliatants only; that any violation of 
 the terms of the retailers' licenses 
 shall work a forfeiture of their rights 
 til receive such food and foodstuffs 
 for this purpose; and th.at such food 
 ,and foodstuffs will not be requisi- 
 tioned by the German Government for 
 any purpose whatsoever or be di- 
 verted to the use of the armed forces 
 of Germany. 
 
 Great Britain to agree: 
 
 That food and foodstuffs will not be 
 placed upon the absolute contraband 
 list and that shipments of such com- 
 modities will not be interfered with or 
 detained by British authorities if con- 
 
AMERICA SUGGESTS BLOCKADE MODIFICATIONS. 
 
 33 
 
 signed to agencies designated hy the 
 United States Government in Germany 
 for the receipt and distribution of 
 such cargoes to licensed German re- 
 tailers for distribution solely to the 
 noncombatant population. 
 
 In submitting this proposed basis of 
 agreement this Government does not 
 wish to be understood as admitting or 
 denying any belligerent or neutral 
 riglit established by the principles of 
 International Law. but would consider 
 the agreement, if acceptable to the 
 interested powers, a modus Vivendi 
 based upon expediency rather than 
 legal right and as not binding upon 
 the United States either in its pres- 
 ent form or in a modified form until 
 accepted by this Government. 
 
 BRYAN. 
 
 GERMAN REPLY TO NOTE. 
 
 Amei'uuii. Aiiiliasf^addr ut Beiiui to 
 the Secretary of State: 
 
 Berlin. March 1, 1915. 
 
 Following is translation of the Ger- 
 man reply: 
 
 The undersigned has the honor to 
 inform His Excellencj'. Mr. James W. 
 Gerard. Ambassador of the United 
 States of America, in reply to the note 
 of the 22d instant that the Imperial 
 German Government have taken note 
 with great interest of the suggestion 
 of the American Government that cer- 
 tain principles for the conduct of 
 maritime war on the part of Germany 
 and England be agreed upon for the 
 protection of neutral shipping. They 
 see therein new evidence of the 
 friendly feelings of th ■ American Gov- 
 ernment toward the German Govern- 
 ment which are fully reciprocated hy 
 Germany. 
 
 It is in accordance with Germany's 
 wishes also to h.ave maritime war 
 conducted according to rules which 
 without discriminately restricting one 
 or the other of the belligerent powers 
 in the use of their means of warfare 
 are equally considerate of the inter- 
 ests of neutrals and the dictates of 
 humanity. Consequently it was inti- 
 mated in the German note of the 16th 
 instant that observation of the Decla- 
 ration of London on the part of Ger- 
 many's adversaries would create a 
 new situation from which the Ger- 
 man Government would gladly draw 
 the proper conclusions. Proceeding 
 from this view the German Govern- 
 ment have carefully examined the 
 suggestion of the American Govern- 
 ment and believe that they can ac- 
 tually see in it a suitable basis for 
 the practical solution of the questions 
 which have arisen. t 
 
 AVith regard to the various points, 
 of the American note they beg to i 
 make the following remarks: I 
 
 1. 'With regard to the sowing of 
 mines, the German Government would 
 be willing to agree as suggested not 
 to use floating mines and to have ' 
 anchored mines constructed as indi-[ 
 cated. Moreover, they agree to put j 
 the stamp of the Government on all 
 mines to be planted. On the other 
 hand, it does not appear to them to 
 be feasible for the belligprents wholly 
 to forego the use of anchored mines 
 for offensive purposes. \ 
 
 2. The German Government would 1 
 iindert.ake not to use their submarines 
 to attack mercantile of any flag ex- 
 cept when necessary to enforce the 
 right of visit and search. Should the 
 enemy nationality of the vessel or 
 the presence of contraband be ascer- 
 tained submarine would proceed in 
 
 accordance with the general rules of 
 International Law. 
 
 3. As provided in the American 
 note, this restriction of the use of 
 the submarines is contingent on the 
 fact that enemy mercantile abstain 
 from the use of the neutral flag and 
 other neutral distinctive marks. It 
 would appear to be a matter of course 
 that such mercantile also abstain 
 from arming themselves and from all 
 resistance by force since such pro- 
 cedure contr.ary to International Law- 
 would render impossible any action 
 of the sulimarines in accordance with 
 International Law. 
 
 4. The regulation of legitimate im- 
 portations of food into Germany sug- 
 gested by the American Government 
 appears eo be in general acceptable. 
 .Such regulation would, of course, be 
 confined to importations by sea but 
 
 neutral shipping and trade will not 
 have to suffer any more than is abso- 
 lutely necessary from the unavoid- 
 able effects of maritime war. These 
 effects could be still further reduced 
 if, as was pointed out in the German 
 note of the 16th instant, some way 
 could be found to exclude the ship- 
 ping of munitions of war from neutral 
 countries to belligerents on ships of 
 any nationality. The German Govern- 
 ment must, of course, reserve a def- 
 inite st.atement of their position until 
 such time as they may receive fur- 
 ther information from the American 
 Government enabling them to see 
 what obligations the British Govern- 
 ment are on their part willing to as- 
 sume. 
 
 The undersigned avails himself of 
 this occasion, etc. 
 
 (Signed) VOX JAGOW. 
 
 Dated Foreign Oftice. Berlin. 
 Fel>ruary 28, 1915. 
 
 GERARD. 
 
 *,\ppareiit 
 
 JAMES W. GERARD 
 American Ambassador to Germany 
 
 that would on the other hand include 
 indirect importations by way of neu- 
 tral ports. The German Government 
 would, therefore, be willing to make 
 the declarations of the nature pro- 
 vided in the American note so that 
 the use of the imported food and 
 foodstuffs solely by the noncombatant 
 populati<m w'ould be guaranteed. The 
 Imperial Government must, however, 
 in addition ( • * > ) "■ having the 
 importation of other raw material 
 used by the economic system of non- 
 combatants including forage per- 
 mitted. To that end the enemy Gov- 
 ernments Would have to permit the 
 free entry into Germanv of the raw 
 material mentioned in the free list of 
 the Declaration of London and to 
 treat materials included in the list of 
 conditicinal contraband according to 
 the same principles .as food and food- 
 stuffs. 
 
 The German Government venture to 
 hope that the agreement for which 
 the American Government have iiaved 
 the way may be reached after due 
 consideration of the remarks made 
 above, and that in this way pea"eable 
 
 THE BRITISH REPLY. 
 
 Aiinrhaii Ainbaisador at Lonrlnn tn 
 the Hwretary of ^tate: 
 
 London, March 15, 1915, 
 Following is the full text of a 
 memorandum dated March 13, which 
 Grev handed me to-day: 
 
 On the 22d of February last I re- 
 ceived a communication from Your 
 Excellency of the identic note ad- 
 dressed to His Ma,1esty's Government 
 and to Germany, respecting an agree- 
 ment on certain points as to the con- 
 duet of the war at sea. The reply of 
 the German Government to this note 
 has been published and it is not un- 
 derstood from the reply that the Ger- 
 man Government are prepared to 
 abandon the practice of sinking Brit- 
 ish merchant vessels by submarines 
 and it is evident from their reply that 
 they will not abandon the use of 
 mines for defensive purposes on the 
 high seas as contrasted with the use 
 ..f mines for defensive purposes only 
 within cannon range of their own har- 
 liiu's as su.ggested by the Government 
 ,.f the United States. This being so, 
 it might appear unnecessary for the 
 I'.ritish Government to make any fur- 
 ther reply than to take note of the 
 German answer. We desire, however, 
 to take the opportunity of making a 
 fuller statement of the whole position 
 and of our feeling with regard to it. 
 We recognize with sympathy the de- 
 sire of the Government of the United 
 States to see the European war con- 
 ducted in accordance with the pre- 
 viously recognized rules of Interna- 
 tion Law and the dictates of human- 
 ity. It is thus that the British forces 
 have conducted the war and we are 
 not .aware that these forces either 
 naval or military can have laid to 
 their charge any improper proceed- 
 ings, either in the conduct of hostil- 
 ities or in the treatment of prisoners 
 or wounded. <ln the German side it 
 has bi'cn very different. 
 
 1. The treatment of civilian inhab- 
 itants in Belgium and the north of 
 France h.is been mnde public by the 
 Belgian and Freiirh Gi>vernments and 
 by those who have hml experience of 
 it at first hand. Modern history af- 
 fords no precedent for the sufferings 
 that have been inflicted on the de- 
 fenseless and noncombatant popula- 
 tion in the territory that has been in 
 German mili(ar\' occupati<ui. Even 
 the food of the pop\iIation was cf)nns- 
 
34 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 cated until in Belgium an Interna- 
 tional Commission largely influenced 
 by American generosity and conducted 
 under American auspices came to the 
 relief of the population and secured 
 from the German Government a 
 promise to spare what food was still 
 left in the country though the Ger- 
 mans still continue to malie levies in 
 money upon the defenseless popula- 
 tion for the support of the German 
 army. 
 
 Allege Barbarous Treatment. 
 
 -. We have from time to time re- 
 ceived most terrible accounts . of the 
 barbarous treatment to which British 
 orticers and soldiers have been exposed 
 after they have been taken prisoner 
 wliile l)eing conveyed to German 
 prison camps, one or two instances 
 have already been given to the United 
 States Government founded upon au- 
 thentic and first-hand evidence which 
 is beyond doubt. Some evidence has 
 been received of the hardships to 
 which British prisoners of war are 
 subjected in the prison camps con- 
 trasting, we believe, most unfavorably 
 with the ti-eatment of German pris- 
 oners in this country. We have pro- 
 posed with the consent of the United 
 States Government that a commission 
 of United States officers should be per- 
 mitted in each country to inspect the 
 treatment of prisoners of war. The 
 United States Government have been 
 unable to obtain any reply from the 
 German Government to this proposal 
 and we remain in continuing anxiety 
 and apprehension as to the treatment 
 of British prisoners of war in Ger- 
 many. 
 
 3. At the very outset of the war a 
 German mine layer was discovered 
 laying a mine field on the high seas. 
 Further mine fields have been laid 
 from time to time without warning 
 and so far as we know are still being 
 laid on the high seas, and many neu- 
 tral as well as British vessels have 
 been sunk by them. 
 
 4. At various times during the war 
 German submarines have stopped and 
 sunk British merchant vessels, thus 
 making the sinking of merchant ves- 
 sels a general practice though it was 
 admitted previously, if at all. only as 
 an exception. The general rule to 
 which the British Government have 
 adhered being that merchant vessels 
 if captured, must be taken before a 
 prize court. In one case already 
 quoted in a note to the United States 
 Government, a neiiti-al ve.ssel carrying 
 foodstuffs to an unfortified town in 
 Great Britain has been sunk. An- 
 other case is now reported in which 
 a German armed cruiser has sunk an 
 American vessel, the William P. Frye. 
 carrying a cargo of wheat from Seat- 
 tle to Queenstown. In both cases the 
 cargoes were jiresumably destined for 
 the civil population. Even the car- 
 goes in such circumstances should not 
 ■have been condemned without the de- 
 cision of a prize court, much less 
 should the vessels have been sunk. 
 It is to lie noted that both these cases 
 occurred before the detention bv the 
 British authorities of the Wilhelmina 
 
 and her cargo of foodstuffs which the 
 German Government allege is the jus- 
 tification for their own action. The 
 Germans have announced their inten 
 tion of sinking British merchant ves- 
 sels Ijy torpedo without notice and 
 without any iM-ovision for the safety 
 of the crew. They have already car- 
 ried out this intention in the case of 
 neutral as well as of British vessels 
 and a number of noncombatant and 
 innocent lives on British vessels, un- 
 armed and defenseless, have been de- 
 stroyed in this way. 
 
 5. Unfortified, open, and defense- 
 less towns, such as Scarborough, Yar- 
 mouth, and Whitby have been delib- 
 erately and wantonly bombarded by 
 German ships of war, causing in some 
 cases considerable loss of civilian life 
 including women and children. 
 
 Acts of German Aircraft. 
 
 6. German aircraft have dropped 
 liombs on the east coast of England 
 where there were no military or stra- 
 tegic points to be attacked. On the 
 other hand I am aware of but two 
 criticisms that have been made on 
 British action in all these respects: 
 il) It is said that the British naval 
 authorities also have laid some an- 
 chored mines on the high seas. They 
 have done so, but the mines were an- 
 chored and so constructed that they 
 would be harmless if they went adrift 
 and no mines whatever were laid by 
 the British naval authorities till many 
 weeks after the Germans had made 
 a regular practice of laying mines on 
 the high seas. (3) It is said that the 
 British Government have departed 
 from the view of International Law 
 which they had previously maintained 
 that foodstuffs destined for the civil 
 poiuilation should never be interfered 
 with, this charge being founded on 
 the submission to a prize court of the 
 cargo of the Wilhelmina, the special 
 considerations affecting this cargo 
 have already been presented in a 
 memorandum to the United States 
 Government and I need not repeat 
 them here. Inasmuch as the stop- 
 page of all foodstuffs is an admitted 
 consequence of blockade it is ob- 
 vious that there can be no universal 
 rule based on considerations gf moral- 
 ity and humanity which is contrarv to 
 this practice. The right to stop food- 
 stuffs destined for the civil population 
 must therefore in any case be ad- 
 mitted if an effective "cordon" con- 
 trolling intercourse with the enemv is 
 drawn, announced and maintained. 
 Jtoreover, independently of rights 
 arising from belligerent action in the 
 nature of blockade some other nations 
 differing from the opinion of the Gov- 
 .•rrimeiits of the Uniteil States and 
 Great Britain have held that to stop 
 the food of the civil population is a 
 natural and legitimate method of 
 bringing pressure to bear on an enemy 
 country as it is upon the defense of 
 a besieged town. It is also upheld 
 on the authority of both Prince Bis- 
 marck and Count Caprivi and there- 
 fore presumably is not repugnant to 
 German morality. The following are 
 the ciuotations from Prince Bismarck 
 
 and Count Caprivi on this point. 
 Prince Bismarck in answering in 1885 
 an application from the Kiel Chamber 
 of Commerce for a statement of the 
 view of the German Government on 
 the question of the right to declare 
 as contraband foodstuffs that were 
 not intended for military forces said, 
 ■■I reply to the Chamber "of Commerce 
 that any disadvantage our commer- 
 cial and carrying interests may suffer 
 by the treatment of rice as "contra- 
 band of war does not justify our op- 
 posing a measure which it "has been 
 thought fit to take in carrying on a 
 foreign war. Every war is a calam- 
 ity which entails evil consequences 
 not only on the combatants, but also 
 on neutrals. These evils may easily 
 be increased by the interference of a 
 neutral power with the way in which 
 a third carries on the war to the dis- 
 advantage of the subjects of the in- 
 terfering power, and by this means 
 German commerce might be weighted 
 with far heavier losses than a transi- 
 tory prohibition of the rice trade in 
 Chinese waters. The measure in ques- 
 tion has for its object the shortening 
 of the war by increasing the diffi- 
 culties of the enemy and is a justi- 
 fiable step in war if impartially en- 
 forced against all neutral ships." 
 Count Caprivi during a discussion in 
 the German Reichstag on the 4th of 
 March, 1S92, on the subject of the 
 importance of International protection 
 for private property at sea, made the 
 following statements: "A country may 
 be dependent for her food or for her 
 raw products upon her trade. In 
 fact, it may be absolutely necessary 
 to destroy the enemy's trade." 
 • » • "The private introduction of 
 provisions into Paris was prohibited 
 during the siege, and in the same way 
 a nation would be justified in pre- 
 venting the import of food and raw 
 produce." The Government of Great 
 Britain have frankly declared, in con- 
 cert with the Government of France, 
 their intention to meet the German 
 attempt to stop all supplies of every 
 kind from leaving or entering British 
 or French ports by themselves .stop- 
 ping supplies going to or from Ger- 
 many for this end. The British fleet 
 has instituted a blockade effectively 
 controlling by cruiser "cordon" all 
 passage to and from Germany by sea. 
 The difference between the two pol- 
 icies is. however, that while our ob- 
 ject is the same as that of Germany 
 we propose to attain it without sac- 
 rificing neutral ships or noncom- 
 batant lives or inflicting upon neu- 
 trals the damage that must be en- 
 tailed when a vessel and its cargo are 
 sunk without notice, examination, or 
 trial. I must emphasize again that 
 this measure is a natural and neces- 
 sary consequence of the unprece- 
 dented methods repugnant to all law 
 .and morality which h.Tve been de- 
 scribed above which Germany began 
 to adopt at the very outset of the 
 war and the effects of which have 
 been constantly accumulating. 
 
 AMERICAN AMBASS.\DOR. 
 
 London. 
 
AMERICAN INQUIRY ON REPRISAL METHODS 
 
 Anglo-French Notice of Reprisals and United States Inquiry on Methods 
 
 With the French and British Replies 
 
 REPRISAL MEASURES OF ALLIES. 
 
 Britislt Aiiihiifi.sdilor lu the secretary 
 of State: 
 
 Germany has declared that the 
 English Channel, the Xorth and West 
 Coasts of France and the waters 
 around the British Isles are a war 
 area and has officially notified that all 
 enemy ships found in that area will 
 be destroyed and that neutral vessels 
 may be exposed to danger. This is 
 in effect a claim to torpedo at sight 
 without regard to the .safety of the 
 crew or passengers any merchant ves- 
 sel under any flag. As it is not in the 
 power of the German Admiralty to 
 maintain any surface craft in these 
 waters, this attack can only be deliv- 
 ered by submarine agency. 
 
 The law and custom of nations in 
 regard to attacks on commerce have 
 always presumed that the first duty 
 of the captor of a merch,ant vessel is 
 to bring it before a Prize Court where 
 it may be tried, where the regularity 
 of the capture may be challenged and 
 where neutrals may recover their 
 cargoes. The sinking of prizes is in 
 itself a questiunalde act to be resorted 
 to only in extranrdinary circumstances 
 and after provision has been made for 
 the safety of all the crew or pas- 
 sengers, if there are i:)assengers on 
 board. The responsiliility for discrim- 
 inating between neutral and enemy 
 vessels, and between neutr.al and en- 
 emy cargo, oliviously rests with the 
 attacking .ship, whose dut.v it is to 
 verify the status and character of the 
 vessel and cargo and to preserve -all 
 papers before sinking or even captur- 
 ing it. So also is the humane duty 
 of providing for the safety of the 
 crews of merchant vessels, whether 
 neutral or enemy, an oldigation upon 
 every belligerent. 
 
 It is upon this basis that all pre- 
 vious discussions of the law for regu- 
 lating warfare at sea have proceeded. 
 A German submarine, however, ful- 
 fills none of these obligations; she en- 
 joys no local command of the waters 
 in which she r»perates; she does not 
 take her captures within the .iurisdic- 
 tion of a Prize Court; she carries no 
 prize crew which she can put •■n l)oard 
 a prize; she uses no effective means 
 of discriminating between a neutral 
 and an enemy vessel: she does not 
 receive on board for .safety the crew 
 and passengers of the vessel she 
 sinks; her methods of warfare are 
 therefore entirely mitside the scope of 
 any of the international instruments 
 regulating operations against com- 
 merce in time of war. The German 
 declaration substitutes indiscrimin.ate 
 destruction for regulated capture. 
 Germany is adopting these methods 
 against peaceful traders and non- 
 combatant crews with the avowed ob- 
 .iect of preventing commodities of all 
 kinds including food for the civil pop- 
 ulation from reaching or leaving the 
 British Isles or Xorthern France. 
 
 Her ojiijonents are therefore driven 
 to frame retaliatory measures in order 
 in their turn to prevent commodities 
 of any kind from reaching or leaving 
 Germany. These measures will, how- 
 ever, be enforced by the British and 
 French Governments without risk to 
 neutral ships or to neutral or non- 
 combatant life and in strict observance 
 of the dictates of humanity. The 
 British and French Governments will 
 therefore hold themselves free to de- 
 tain and take into port ships carrying 
 goods of presumed enemy destination, 
 ownershij). or origin. it is not in- 
 tended to crmfiscate such vessels or 
 cargoes unless they would otherwise 
 be liable to condemnation. The treat- 
 ment of vessels and cargoes which 
 have sailed before this date will not 
 be affected. 
 
 CECIL SPRING RICE. 
 British Embassy, 
 
 Washington, JIarch 1, 1015. 
 
 [A Dfi larati'/ii from the Froicli Am- 
 hassailiir in practically identical 
 lanyuafie u-as presented at. the State 
 Department at the same time.] 
 
 AMERICAN INQUIRY ON METHODS. 
 
 Secretary of state to the Anwrican 
 Ambassador at London. — Identic 
 messafie sent to the American Ant- 
 hassador at Paris on the .lame date: 
 
 W.ashingtim. March ,">, 1915. 
 
 In regard to the recent communica- 
 tions received from the British and 
 French Governments concerning re- 
 straints upon commerce with Ger- 
 many, please communicate with the 
 British Foreign Ciflice in the sense 
 following: 
 
 The ditliculty of determining action 
 upon the British and French declara- 
 tions of intended retaliation upon 
 commerce with Germany lies in the 
 nature of the proposed measures in 
 their relation to ciiinmerce by neu- 
 trals. While it appears that the in- 
 tention is to interfere with and take 
 into custody all ships both outg<:jing 
 and incoming, trading with Germany, 
 which is in effect a blockade of Ger- 
 man ports, the rule of blockade, that 
 a ship attempting to enter or leave 
 a Gcrm.an port regardless of the char- 
 acter of its cargo m.ay be condemned, 
 is not assertfd. The language <if the 
 declaration is "the British and French 
 Governments will, therefore, hold 
 themselves free to detain and take 
 into port ships carrying goods of pre- 
 sumed enemy destination, ownership, 
 or firigin. It is not intended to con- 
 fiscate such vessels or cargoes unless 
 they would otherwise be liable to con- 
 demnation." 
 
 The first .sentence claims a right 
 pertaining only to a state of block- 
 ade. The IVtst sentence proposes a. 
 
 treatment of ships and cargoes as if 
 no blockade existed. The two to- 
 gether present a proposed course of 
 action previously unknown to Inter- 
 national Law. As a consequence neu- 
 trals have no standard by which to 
 measure their rights or to avoid dan- 
 ger to their ships and cargoes. The 
 paradoxical situation thus created 
 should be changed and the declaring 
 powers ought to assert whether they 
 rel.v upon the rules governing a block- 
 ade or the rules applicable when no 
 blockade exists. 
 
 The declaration presents other per- 
 plexities. 
 
 The last sentence quoted indicates 
 that the rules of contraband are to 
 be applied to cargoes detained. The 
 rule covering noncontraliand articles 
 c;irried in neutral bottoms is that the 
 cargoes shall be released and the ships 
 allowed to proceed. This rule can 
 not, under the finst sentence quoted, 
 lie aindied as to destination. What 
 then is to be done with a cargo of 
 niincontraband goods detained under 
 the declaration. The same question 
 may lie asked as to conditional con- 
 trab.and cargoes. 
 
 The foregoing comments apply to 
 cargoes destined for Germany. Car- 
 goes criming out of German ports jire- 
 sent aniither problem under the terms 
 of the declaration. Under the rules 
 governing enemy exports only goods 
 owned by enemy subjects in enemy 
 bottoms are subject to seizure and 
 condemnation. Yet iiy the declar.ation 
 it is purposed to seize and take into 
 piirt all goods nf ejiemy "ownership 
 and origin." The word "origin" is 
 particularly significant. The origin 
 of goods destined to neutral territory 
 on neutral ships is not and never has 
 been a ground for forfeiture except in 
 case a blockade is declared and main- 
 tained. Wb.-i.t then would the seizure 
 amount to in the present case except 
 to delay the delivery of the goods? 
 The declaration does not indicate 
 what disposition would be made of 
 such cargoes if owned In* a neutral or 
 if owned liy an enemy subject. Would 
 a different rule be applied according 
 to ownership? If so, upon what 
 principles of International Law wiould 
 it rest? And upon what rtile if no 
 blockade is declared .-nul maintained 
 could the cargo of a neutral ship 
 .sailing out of a German port be con- 
 demned? If it is not condemned, 
 what other legal course is there but 
 to release it? 
 
 While this Government is fully alive 
 to the possibilit.v that the meilniils of 
 modern na\'al warfare, p.articubirly in 
 the use of the submarine for both de- 
 fensive and offensive operations, may 
 make the former means of maintain- 
 ing a blockade a physical imjiossibil- 
 ity. it feels that it can be urged with 
 great force that there should lie also 
 some limit to "the radius of nctiv- 
 I'tv." and esjiecialh- so if this action 
 by the Iielligerents c.an be cotistrued 
 to be a blockade. It would (^'crtainlv 
 create a serious state of affairs if. 
 
36 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 for example, an American vessel laden 
 with a cargo of German origin should 
 escape the British patrol in European 
 waters only to be held up by a cruiser 
 oft' Xew York and taken into Halifax. 
 Similar cablegram sent to Paris. 
 
 BRYAN. 
 
 FRENCH REPLY TO INQUIRY. 
 
 Aiiierica>i Amhassador at Paris to the 
 Secretary of State: 
 
 Paris, March 14, 1915. 
 
 French Government replies as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 In a letter dated March 7 Y'our Ex- 
 cellency was good enough to draw 
 my attention to the views of the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States regard- 
 ing the recent communications from 
 the French and British Governments 
 concerning a restriction to be laid 
 upon commerce with Germany. Ac- 
 cording to Y'our Excellency's letter, 
 the declaration made by the Allied 
 Governments presents some uncer- 
 tainty as regards its application, con- 
 cerning which the Government of the 
 United States desires to be enlight- 
 ened in order to determine what at- 
 titude it should take. 
 
 At the same time Tour Excellency 
 notified me that while granting the 
 possibility of using new methods of 
 retaliation against the new use to 
 which submarines have been put, the 
 Government of the United States was 
 somewhat apprehensive that the Al- 
 lied belligerents might (if their ac- 
 tion is to be construed as constituting 
 a blockade) capture in waters near 
 America any ships which might have 
 escaped the cruisers patrolling Euro- 
 pean waters. In acknowledging re- 
 ceipt of Y'our Excellency's communi- 
 cation I have the honor to inform you 
 that the Government of the Republic 
 has not failed to consider this point 
 as presented by the Government of 
 the United States, and I beg to spec- 
 ify clearly the conditions of applica- 
 tion, as far as my Government is con- 
 cerned, of the declaration of the Al- 
 lied Governments. As well set forth 
 by the Federal Government the old 
 methods of blockade cannot be en- 
 tirely adhered to in view of the use 
 Germany has made of her subm.arines, 
 and also by reason of the geograph- 
 ical situation of that country. In an- 
 swer to the challenge to the ne\itrals 
 as well as to its own adversaries, con- 
 tained in the declaration by which the 
 German Imperial Government st.ated 
 that it considered the seas surround- 
 ing Great Britain and the French 
 coast on the channel as a military 
 zone, and warned neutral vessels not 
 to enter the same on account of the 
 danger they would run, the Allied 
 Governments have been obliged to ex- 
 amine what measures they could 
 adopt to interrupt all maritime com- 
 munication with the German Empire 
 and thus keep it blockaded hv the 
 naval power of the two Allies, ,-it the 
 same time, however, safeguarding as 
 much as possible the legitimate in- 
 terests of neutral powers, and r'^spect- 
 iiig the laws of humanity which no 
 crime of their enemy will induce them 
 to viol.ate. 
 
 Conditions of French Seizures. 
 
 The Government of the Republic, 
 therefore, reserves to itself the right 
 of bringing into a French or allied 
 port any ship carrying a cargo jir"- 
 sumed to be of German origin, desti- 
 
 nation, or ownership, but it will not 
 go to the length of seizing any neu- 
 tral ship except in case of contraband. 
 The discharged cargo shall not be con- 
 fiscated. In the event of a neutral 
 proving his lawful ownership of mer- 
 chandise destined to Germany, he 
 shall be entirely free to dispose of 
 same, subject to certain conditions. 
 In case the owner of the goods is a 
 German they shall simply be seques- 
 trated during the war. 
 
 Merchandise of enemy origin shall 
 only be sequestrated when it is at the 
 same time the property of an enemy, 
 merchandise belonging to neutrals 
 shall be held at the disposal of its 
 owner to be returned to the port of 
 departure. As Y'our Excellency will 
 oliserve, these measures, while depriv- 
 ing the enemy of important resources, 
 respect the rights of neutrals and will 
 not in any way jeopardize private 
 property, as even the enemy owner 
 will only suffer from the suspension 
 of the enjoyment of his rights during 
 the term of hostilities. 
 
 The Government of the Republic, 
 being desirous of allowing neutrals 
 every facility to enforce their claims, 
 has decided to give the prize court 
 (an independent tribunal) cognizance 
 of these questions, and in order to 
 give the neutrals as little trouble as 
 possible it has specified that the prize 
 court shall give sentence within eight 
 days, counting from the date on which 
 the case shall have been brought be- 
 fore it. I do not doubt. Mr. Ambassa- 
 dor, that the Federal Government, 
 comparing on the one hand the 
 unspeakable violence with which 
 the German military government 
 threatens neutrals, the criminal ac- 
 tions unknown in maritime annals al- 
 ready perpetrated against neutral 
 property and ships and even against 
 the lives of neutral subjects or citi- 
 zens, and on the other hand the meas- 
 ures adopted by the Allied Govern- 
 ments of Fr.ance and Great Britain 
 respecting the laws of humanity and 
 the rights of individuals, will readilv 
 perceive that the latter have not over- 
 stepped their strict rights as bellig- 
 erents. 
 
 Finally. I am anxious to a.ssure you 
 that it is not and it has never been 
 the intention of the Government of 
 the Republic to extend the action of 
 its cruisers against enemy merchant- 
 disc beyond European seas, the Medi- 
 terranean included. 
 
 SH.A.RP. 
 
 REPLY OF GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 American Ambassailor nl London to 
 the Secretary of State: 
 
 London, March 15, 1915. 
 
 Following is the full text of a note, 
 dated to-day. and an order in council 
 T have just received from Grey: 
 
 1. His Majesty's Government have 
 had under careful consideration the 
 inquiries which under instructions 
 from your Government Tour Excel- 
 lency addressed to me on the eighth 
 instant regarding the scope and mode 
 of application of the measures, fore- 
 shadowed in the British and French 
 declarations of the first of March, for 
 restricting the trade of Germany. 
 Y'our Excellency explained and illus- 
 trated by reference to certain contin- 
 gencies the difficulty of the United 
 States Government in adopting a def- 
 inite attitude toward these measures 
 by reason of uncertainty regarding 
 
 their bearing upon the commerce of 
 neutral countries. 
 
 2. I can at once assure Y'our Excel- 
 lency that subject to the paramount 
 necessity of restricting German trade 
 His Majesty's Government have made 
 it their first aiin to minimize incon- 
 venience to neutral commerce. From 
 the accompanying copy of the order 
 in council, which is to be published 
 to-day, you will observe that a wide 
 discretion is afforded to the prize 
 court in dealing with the trade of 
 neutrals in such manner as may in 
 the circumstances be deemed just and 
 that full provision is made to facili- 
 tate claims by persons interested in 
 any goods placed in the custody of 
 the marshal of the prize court under 
 the order. I apprehend that the per- 
 plexities to which Y'our Excellency re- 
 fers will for the most part be dissi- 
 pated by the perusal of this docu- 
 ment and that it is only necessary for 
 me to add certain explanatory obser- 
 vations. 
 
 3. The effect of the order in coun- 
 cil is to confer certain powers upon 
 the executive officers of His Majesty's 
 Government, the extent to which those 
 powers will be actually exercised and 
 the degree of severity with which the 
 measures of blockade authorized will 
 l>e put into operation, are inatters 
 which will depend on the administra- 
 tive orders issued by the Government 
 and the decisions of the authorities 
 specially charged with the duty of 
 dealing with individual ships and'car- 
 goes, according to the merits of each 
 case. The United States Government 
 may rest assured that the instructions 
 to lie issued by His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment to the fleet and to the customs 
 officials and executive committees con- 
 cerned will impress upon thein the 
 duty of actin.g with the utmost dis- 
 patch consistent with the object in 
 view and of showing in every case 
 such consideration for neutrals as may 
 be compatible with that object which 
 is. succinctly stated, to establish a 
 blockade to prevent vessels from car- 
 rying goods for or coming from Ger- 
 many. 
 
 4. His Majesty's Government have 
 felt most reluctant at the moment of 
 initiating a policy of blockade to ex- 
 act from neutral ships all the penal- 
 ties attaching to a breach of blockade. 
 In their desire to alleviate the burden 
 which the existence of a state of war 
 at sea must inevitably impose on neu- 
 tral sea-borne commerce, they declare 
 their intention to refrain altogether 
 from the exercise of the right to con- 
 fiscate ships or cargoes which bellig- 
 erents have always claimed in respect 
 of breaches of blockade. They re- 
 strict their claim to the stopping of 
 c,ar.goes destined for or coming from 
 the enemy's territory. 
 
 5. As regards cotton, full particu- 
 lars of the arrangements contem- 
 plated have already been explained. 
 It will be admitted that every pos- 
 sible regard has been had to the le.git- 
 imate interests of the American cot- 
 ton tr,ade. 
 
 6. Finally, in reply to the penulti- 
 mate para.graph of Tour E.xcellency's 
 note. I have the honor to state tliat 
 it is not intended to interfere with 
 neutral vessels carrying enemy cargo 
 of noncontraband nature outside 
 European waters, including the Medi- 
 terranean. 
 
 AMERICAN' AMBASSADOR. 
 
 London. 
 (The text of the British Order in 
 Council, printed on following page, 
 was included in this communication.) 
 
BRITISH ORDER IN COUNCIL PROTESTED 
 
 Text of the British Order in Council on March 15, 1915, the American 
 Note of Protest and British Memorandum on Detentions 
 
 BRITISH ORDER IN COUNCIL. 
 
 The Brititi)i Order i)i Cuuiuil. >nade 
 
 piibUc on March 15, 1915, foUoics: 
 
 "Whereas, the German Government 
 has issued certain orders which, in 
 violation of the usages of war. pur- 
 port to declare tlie waters surround- 
 ing the United Kingdom a military 
 area, in which all British and allied 
 merchant vessels will be destroyed ir- 
 respective of the safety of the lives 
 of passengers and crew and in which 
 neutral shipping will be exposed to 
 similar danger in view of the uncer- 
 tainties of naval warfare: and 
 
 "Whereas, in a memorandum ac- 
 companying the said orders neutrals 
 are warned against entrusting crews, 
 passengers, or goods to British or al- 
 lied ships; 
 
 "Whereas, such attempts on the 
 part of the enemy give to His Majesty 
 an unquestionable right of retalia- 
 tion; 
 
 "And. wliereas. His Majesty has 
 therefore decided to adopt further 
 measures in order to prevent com- 
 modities of any kind from reaching 
 or leaving Germany, though such 
 ineasures will be enforced without 
 risk to neutral ships or to neutral or 
 noncombatant life, and in strict ob- 
 servance of the dictates of human- 
 ity; 
 
 "And. whereas, the allies of His 
 Majesty are associated with him in 
 the steps now to be announced for 
 restricting further the commerce of 
 Germany; 
 
 "His Majesty is therefore pleased by 
 and with the advice of his privy coun- 
 cil to order and it is hereby ordered 
 as follows: 
 
 "1. Xo inerchant vessels which 
 sailed from her port of departure af- 
 ter the first March. 1915, shall be al- 
 lowed to proceed on her voyage to 
 any German port. 
 
 "Unless the vessel receives a pass 
 enabling her to proceed to some neu- 
 tral or allied port to be named in the 
 pass, goods on board any such ves- 
 sel must be discharged in a British 
 port and placed in the custody of the 
 marshal of the prize court. Goods so 
 discharged, not being contr.Tband of 
 war. shall, if not requisitioned for the 
 use of His Majesty, be restored by 
 order of the court, upon such term.-' 
 as the court may in the circumstances 
 deem to be just, to the person en- 
 titled thereto. 
 
 "2. Xo merchant vessel which sailed 
 from any German port after the first 
 March, iflin. shall be allowed to pro- 
 ceed on her voyage 'vith any goods 
 on board laden at such port. 
 
 "All goods laden at such port must 
 be discharged in a British or allied 
 port. Goods so discharged in .a Brit- 
 ish port shall be placed in the cns- 
 todv of the marshal of the prize court, 
 and. if not requisitioned for the use 
 of His Majesty, sh.all be det.ained or 
 sold under the direction of the prize 
 court. The proceeds of goods so sold 
 shall be paid into co.irt and dealt with 
 
 in such manner as the court may in 
 the circumstances deem to be just. 
 
 "Provided, that no proceeds of the 
 sale of such goods shall be paid out 
 of coin't until the conclusion of peace, 
 except on the application of the proper 
 officer of the Crown, unless it be 
 shown that the goods had become 
 neutral property before the issue of 
 this order. 
 
 "Provided also, that nothing herein 
 shall prevent the release of neutral 
 property laden at such enemy port on 
 the application of the proper officer 
 of the Crown. 
 
 Provisions Effective March 1st. 
 
 "3. Every merchant vessel which 
 .sailed from her port of departure 
 after the first of March, l!tl5, on her 
 way to a port other than a German 
 port, carrying goods with an enemy 
 destination, or which are enemy prop- 
 erty, m.ay lie required to discharge 
 siich goods in a British or allied port. 
 Any goods so discharged in a British 
 port shall lie placed in tlie custody 
 of the marshal of the prize court, 
 and. imless they are contraband of 
 war. shall, if not requisitioned for the 
 use of His Majesty, be restored by or- 
 der of the court, tipon such terins as 
 the court may in the circumstances 
 deein to be just, to the person entitled 
 thereto. 
 
 "Provided, that this article shall 
 not apply in any case falling within 
 articles 2 or 4 of this order. 
 
 "4. Every merchant vessel which 
 sailed from a port other than a Ger- 
 man port after the first of March. 
 1915. having on board goods which 
 are of enemy origin or are enemy 
 property may be required to disch.ar.ge 
 stich goods in a British or allied port. 
 Goods so discharged in a British port 
 shall be placed in the custody of the 
 marshal of the prize court, and. if 
 not requisitioned for the use of His 
 Majesty, shall be detained or sold un- 
 der the direction of the prize court. 
 The proceeds of goods so sold sh.all be 
 paid into court and dealt ■\^'ith in such 
 manner as the court may in the cir- 
 cumstances deem to be just. 
 
 "Provided, that no proceeds of .sale 
 of such goods shall be paid out of 
 coiH't imtil the conclusion of peace 
 except on the application of the 
 proper officer of the Crown, unless it 
 be shown th.at the goods had become 
 neutral property before the issue of 
 this order. 
 
 "Provided also. th.at nothing herein 
 shall prevent the release of neutr.al 
 property of enemy origin on the ap- 
 plication of the proper officer of the 
 Crown. 
 
 ":>. Any person claiming to be in- 
 terested in. or to have any cl.aim in 
 respect of. any goods Cnot being con- 
 tr.abnnd of war") filaced in the custody 
 of the m.Trshal of the nrize court un- 
 der this order, or in the tiroceeds of 
 such goods, may fortlnvith issue a 
 writ in the prize co\irt ngninst the 
 jtroper officer of the Crown and an- 
 ply fi>r nu order th.nt the go<»ds should 
 
 be restored to him. or tliat tlieir pro- 
 ceeds should be paid to him. or for 
 such other order as the circumstances 
 of the case may require. 
 
 "The practice and procedure of the 
 prize court shall, so far as applicable, 
 be followed mutatis mutandis in any 
 proceedings consequential upon this 
 order. 
 
 "6. A merchant vessel which has 
 cleared for a neutral port from a 
 British or allied port, or which has 
 lieen allowed to pass, having an os- 
 tensible destination to a neutral port, 
 and proceeds to an enemy port, shall, 
 if captured on any subsequent voyage, 
 be liable to condemnation. 
 
 "7. X'othing in this order shall be 
 deemed to affect the liability of any 
 vessel or goods to capture or con- 
 demnation independently of this or- 
 der. 
 
 "S. Xothing in this order shall pre- 
 vent the relaxation of the provisions 
 of this order in respect of the mer- 
 chant vessels of any country which 
 declares that no commerce intended 
 for or originating in Germany or be- 
 longing to'Germany subjects shall en- 
 joy the protection of its flag." 
 
 AMERICAN NOTE OF PROTEST. 
 
 scrretari/ iif Slate to the Anierieatl 
 
 Amliassadnr at London: 
 
 Washington, March ?,0. 1015. 
 
 Tou are instructed to deliver the 
 following to His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment in reply to your numbers 1795 
 and 1798 of March 15: 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States has given careful consideration 
 to the subiects treated in the British 
 notes of March 13 and March 15. and 
 to the British Order in Council of the 
 l.Tter date. These communications 
 contain matters of grave importance 
 to neutral nations. They appear to 
 menace their rights of trade and in- 
 tercourse no^ only with belligerents 
 but also with one another. They call 
 for frank comment in order that mis- 
 understandings tnay be avoided. The 
 C,<ivernment of the United States 
 deems it its duty, therefore. spe.Tking 
 in the sincerest spirit of friendship, to 
 make its own view and position with 
 regard to them tmmistakably clear. 
 
 The Order in Council of the 15th of 
 March would constitute, were its pro- 
 visions to be acttially carried into ef- 
 fect as they stand, a practical asser- 
 tion of unlimited belli,gerent rights 
 over netitrnl commerce within the 
 who'e Europi'an are.a. and an almost 
 imqiKilified denial of the sovereign 
 rights of the nations now .at pe.ace. 
 This Government takes it for granted 
 tliat there can be no question what 
 those ri.ghts are. A nation's sov- 
 ereignty over its own ships and citi- 
 zens under its own flag on the high 
 seas in time of peace is. of course, un- 
 limited: and that soven-ignly suffers 
 no diminution in time of war. except 
 
38 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 in so far as the practice and consent 
 of civilized nations lias limited it by 
 the recognition of certain now clearly 
 determined rights, which it is con- 
 ceded may be exercised by nations 
 which are at war. 
 
 Declaration of Paris Cited. 
 
 A belligerent nation has been con- 
 ceded the right of visit and search, 
 and the right of capture and condem- 
 nation, if upon examination a neu- 
 tral vessel is found to be engaged in 
 unneutral service or to be carrying 
 contraband of war intended for the 
 enemy's government or armed forces. 
 It has been conceded the right to 
 establish and maintain a blockade of 
 an enemy's ports and coasts and to 
 capture and condemn any vessel taken 
 in trying to break the blockade. It 
 is even conceded the right to detain 
 and take to its own ports for judicial 
 examination all vessels which it sus- 
 pects for suVistantial reasons to be en- 
 gaged in unneutral or contraband ser- 
 vice and to 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 univer.sal equality 
 of sovereignty on the high seas as 
 between belligerents and nations not 
 engaged in war. 
 
 It is confidently assumed that His 
 Majesty's Government will not deny 
 that it is a rule sanctioned bv genera? 
 practice that, even though a 'blockade 
 should exist and the doctrine of con- 
 traband a.s to imblockaded territory 
 be rigidly enforced, innocent .ship- 
 ments may be freely transported to 
 and from the United .States through 
 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 Declaration of Paris 
 of 18.')fi — among them that free ships 
 make free goods — will hardly at this 
 day be disputed by the signatories of 
 that solemn agreement. 
 
 His Majesty's Government, like the 
 Government of the I'nited States, have 
 often and explicitly held that these 
 rights represent the best u.sa.ge of war- 
 fare in the dealings of belligerents 
 with neutrals at sea. In this connec- 
 tion I desire to direct attention to the 
 opinion of the Chief Justice of the 
 United States in the case of the Peter- 
 hof, which arose out of the Civil "War. 
 and to the fact that that opinion was 
 unanimously sustained in the award 
 of _ the .Arbitration Commission of 
 1871, to which the case was presented 
 at the request of Great Britain. Prnm 
 that time to the Declaration of I^on- 
 don of 1009, adopted with modifica- 
 tions by the Order in Council of the 
 23d of October last, these ri.ghts have 
 not been seriously questioned bv the 
 British Giivernment. And no "claim 
 on the T'art of Great Britain of anv 
 justification for interfering with these 
 clear rights of the I'nited States and 
 its citizens as neutrals could be ad- 
 mitted. To admit it would be to as- 
 sume an attitude of unneutralitv to- 
 ward the present enemies of Great 
 Britain which would be olivionsly in- 
 consistent with the solemn obligations 
 of this Government in the present cir- 
 cumstances; and for Great Britain to 
 make such a claim would be for her 
 to al'andon and set at naught the 
 principles for which she has con- 
 sistentlv and enrnestly contended in 
 othei- times and cir-^umstances. 
 
 The note of His Majesty's Principal 
 Secretary of State for Foreign Aff.nirs 
 which accompanies the Order in 
 
 Council, and which bears the same 
 date, notihes 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 territory. But the novel 
 and quite unprecedented feature of 
 that blockade, if we are to assume it 
 to be properly so defined, is that it 
 embraces many neutral ports and 
 coasts, bars access to them, and sub- 
 I jects all neutral ships seeking to ap- 
 proach them to the same suspicion 
 t that would attach to them were they 
 bound for the ports of the enemies 
 I of Great Britain, and to unusual risks 
 I and penalties. It is manifest that 
 such limitations, risks, and liabilities 
 I placed upon the ships of a neutral 
 I power on the high seas, beyond the 
 right of visit and search and "the right 
 j to prevent the shipment of contraband 
 I already referred to, are a distinct in- 
 I vasion of the sovereign rights of the 
 t nation whose ships, trade, or com- 
 merce is interfered with. 
 
 Recognizes Changed Conditions. 
 
 j The Government of the United 
 I States is of course not oblivious to 
 the great changes which have oc- 
 curred in the conditions and means 
 of naval warfare since the rules 
 hitherto governing legal blockade 
 were formulated. It might be ready 
 to admit that the old form of "close" 
 blockade with its cordon of ships in 
 the immediate offing of the blockaded 
 ports is no longer practicable in face 
 of an enemy possessing the means and 
 opportunity to make an effective de- 
 fence by the use of submarines, mines, 
 and air craft; but it can hardlv lie 
 maintained that, whatever form of ef- 
 fective blockade may be made use 
 of, it is impossible to conform at least 
 to the spirit and principles of the es- 
 tablished rules of war. If the neces- 
 sities of the case should seem to 
 render it imperative that the cordon 
 of blockading vessels be extended 
 acro.ss the approaches to any neigh- 
 boring neutral port or country, it 
 Would seem clear that it would still be 
 easily practicable to comply with the 
 well-recognized and reasonable pro- 
 hibition of international law a.gainst 
 the blockading of neutral ports by 
 according free admission and exit to 
 all lawful traffic with neutral ports 
 through the blockading cordon. This 
 traffic would of course include all out- 
 vvnrd-bound traffic from the neutral 
 country and all inward-bound traffic 
 to the neutnal country excejit contra- 
 band in transit to the enemy. Such 
 procedure need not conflict iri any re- 
 spect with the rights of the belliger- 
 ent 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 f.act, but not of right, investing. 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States notes that in the Order in 
 Council His Majesty's Government 
 give as their reason for entering upon 
 a course of action, which they are 
 aware is without precedent in niod- 
 ern warfare, the necessitv they con- 
 ceive them.selves to have been placed 
 under to retaliate upon their eneinies 
 for measures of a similar nature 
 which the later have announced it 
 their intention to adopt and which 
 they have to some extent adopted; but 
 the Government of the United States, 
 •■oeallin" the principles upon which 
 His Maiestv's Government have 
 hilherlo been scrupulous to act. in- 
 terprets this as merely a reason for 
 
 certain extraordinary 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 pur- 
 sued by the present enemies of Great 
 Britain should prove to be in fact 
 tainted by illegality and disregard of 
 the principles of war sanctioned by 
 enlignteneu nations, it can not be sup- 
 posed, and this Government does not 
 tor a moment suppose, that His 
 Majesty's Government would wish the 
 same taint to attach to their own ac- 
 tions or would cite such illegal acts 
 as in any sense or degree a justifica- 
 tion for similar practices on their part 
 in so far as they affect neutral rights. 
 It is thus that the Government of the 
 United States interprets the language 
 of the note of His Majesty's Principal 
 .Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs 
 which accompanies the copy of the 
 Order in Council which was handed 
 to the Ambassador of the United 
 States near the Government in Lon- 
 don and by him transmitted to Wash- 
 ington. 
 
 This Government notes with gratifi- 
 cation that "wide discretion is af- 
 forded to the Prize Court in dealing 
 with the trade of neutrals in such 
 manner as may in the circumstaitces 
 be deemed just, and that full pro- 
 vision 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;" that 
 "the effect of the Order in Council is 
 to confer certain powers upon the ex- 
 ecutive officers of His Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment;" and that "the extent to 
 which these powers will be actually 
 exercised and the degree of severity 
 with which the measures of blockade 
 authorized will be put into operation 
 are matters which will depend on the 
 administrative orders issued by the 
 Government and the decisions of the 
 authorities especially charged with the 
 duty of dealing with individual ships 
 and cargoes according to the merits of 
 each case." This Government further 
 notes with equal .satisfaction the 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 and ex- 
 ecutive committees concerned will im- 
 press upon them the duty of acting 
 with the utmost despatch consistent 
 with the object in view, and of show- 
 ing in every case such consideration 
 for neutrals as may be compatible 
 with that object, which is, succinctly 
 stated, to establish a blockade to pre- 
 vent vessels from carrying goods for 
 or Coming from Germany." 
 
 Certain Terms Give Satisfaction. 
 
 In view of these assurances for- 
 mally given to this Government, it is 
 confidently expected that the exten- 
 sive powers conferred by the Order 
 in Council on the executive officers of 
 the Crown will be restricted by "or- 
 ders issued by the Government" tli- 
 recting the exercise of their discre- 
 tionary powers in such a manner 
 as to modifv in practical application 
 those provisions of the Order in Coun- 
 cil which, if strictly enforced, would 
 violate neutral rights and interrupt 
 legitimate trade. Relying on the 
 faithful performance of these volun- 
 tary assurances by His Maiestv'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 Ord<-r in Council 
 will not be interfered with when it is 
 known that they do not carry goods 
 "hich are contraband of war or goods 
 destined to or proceeding from ports 
 
BRITISH ORDER IN COUNCIL PROTESTED. 
 
 39 
 
 within tiie belligerent territory af- 
 fected. 
 
 British Method Extraordinary. 
 
 Tlie G^jvernment u£ ilie United 
 State.s assumes witli tlie greater con- 
 fidence tliat His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment will thus adjust their practice 
 to the recognized rules of interna- 
 tional law, becau.se it is manifest that 
 the British Government have adopted 
 an extraordinary method of "stopping 
 cargoes destined for or coming from 
 tlie enemy's territory," which, owing 
 to the existence of unusual conditions 
 in modern warfare at sea. it will be 
 diffleult to restrict to the limits which 
 have been heretofore required by the 
 law of nations. Though the area of 
 operations is confined to "European 
 waters including the Mediterranean," 
 so great an area of the liigh 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 Britain as a belligerent 
 has not the legal right to blockade 
 and which, therefore, it is presumed 
 she has no intention of claiming to 
 blockade. The Scandinavian and 
 Danish ports, for exainple, 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 es.sential ele- 
 ment of blockade that it bear with 
 equal severity upon all neutrals. 
 
 This Government, therefore, infers 
 that the commanders of His Majes- 
 ty's ships of war engaged in maintain- 
 ing the so-called blockade will be in- 
 structed to avoid an enforcement of 
 the proposed measures of non-inter- 
 course 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 belligerent 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 many, and the 
 methods proposed are so unusual and 
 seem liable to constitute so great an 
 impediment and embarrassment to 
 neutral coninierce that the Govern- 
 ment of the United States, if the Or- 
 der in Council is strictly enforced, 
 apprehends many interferences with 
 its legitimate trade which will im- 
 pose upon His Majesty's Government 
 heavy responsibilities for acts of the 
 British authorities clearly subversive 
 of the rights of neutral nations on the 
 high seas. It is. therefore, expected 
 that His Majesty's Go\'ernment hav- 
 ing 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 
 every act, which under the rules of 
 international law constitutes a viola- 
 tion of neutral rights. As stated in 
 its communication of October 22, 
 1914, "this Government will insist that 
 the rights .and d\ities of the United 
 States and its citizens in the present 
 war be defined by the existing rules 
 of international law and the treaties 
 of the United St.ates. irrespective of 
 the provisions of the Declaration of 
 London, and that this Government re- 
 serves to itself the right to enter a 
 protest or demand in each case In 
 which those rights and duties so de- 
 fined are violated or their free exer- 
 cise interfered with, by the nuthor- 
 ities 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 accor- 
 dance 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 ex- 
 isting between the two nations with- 
 out interruption for a century, 
 
 BRYAX. 
 
 MEMORANDUM ON DETENTIONS 
 
 Thi' folliniiiiij ini'Diuriinduni ini.s is- 
 sued by the British Foreign Office 
 ej-ptaininri Great Britain's attitude 
 tiiirard American ships and Ameri- 
 can cargoes in other neutral iwssels. 
 detained under the British Order in 
 Council : 
 
 London, May 2(t, 1915. 
 The Foreign IJtfice has issued the 
 following memorandum: 
 
 "First — There are at the present mo- 
 ment thi'ee American shijjs detained 
 in this country. Two of them are cot- 
 ton ships, which are dealt with below. 
 The third is the steamer Joseph W. 
 Fordney. This vessel, with a cargo 
 of foodstuffs consigned to E. Klingener 
 at Malmo. i Sweden.) was brought 
 into Kirkwall on April 8. She had 
 been sighted by his Majesty's ships 
 about ten miles from the Norwegian 
 coast and had thereupon endeavored, 
 with the evident desire to evade search 
 to escape rai)idly into Norwegian ter- 
 ritorial waters, but without success. 
 
 "On the vessel's arrival in Kirkwall, 
 inquiries were at once addres.sed to his 
 Majesty's Minister at Stockholm, with 
 regard to the consignee of the cargo, 
 and a reply was received to the effect 
 that no person of that name could lie 
 identified at Malmo, though there was 
 .a person of that name who resided at 
 Gothenburg, and was manager of the 
 Gothenliurg branch of Hugo Hartvig. 
 and whii had stated that the con- 
 signments .addressed to him on board 
 the Jose|>li W. Fordney were intended 
 fur storage in Malmo. 
 
 Vessel's Conduct Suspicious. 
 
 "Second — The suspicious conduct of 
 the vessel in endeavoring to elude his 
 Majesty's patrols and the known con- 
 nections nf the consignee of her cargo 
 have tended to confirin other evidence, 
 which h,as come to the knowledge of 
 his Maiesty's Government, that the 
 foodstuffs were in reality destined for 
 Germany. It was accordingly decided 
 that the cargo must be placed in the 
 prize court and the vessel is at pres- 
 ent discharging at Portishead. l';ng- 
 land. on the completion of which 
 operation she will be released. 
 
 "His Majesty's Government feel 
 satisfied th.at in the circumstances of 
 this case undue interference with 
 American interests cannot with rea- 
 son be imputed to them. 
 
 "Third — The number of neutral ves- 
 sels carrying American cargoes and at 
 present held up is thirty-six. Of 
 the.se twenty-three carry cargoes of 
 .American cotton. The United St.ates 
 Government are aware th.at since the 
 enforcement of the blockade measures 
 announced in the supplement to The 
 London Gazette of the 12th of March, 
 l.'ist. His Majesty's Government have 
 acted as reg.ards shipments of Ameri- 
 can cotton in accordance with the pro- 
 visicnis of an arrangement arrived at 
 in collaboration with representatives 
 of the American cotton interests. The 
 ti-rms of the arrangement are as 
 follows: 
 
 " A — All cotton for which contracts, 
 .sale and freight engagements already 
 have been made before March 2 is to 
 be albfWed free transit or bought at 
 the contract price if stojiped, provided 
 the ship sails not later that the 31st 
 of March. 
 
 "B — Similiar ti'eatment is to be ac- 
 corded all cotton insui'ed before the 
 2d of March, jirovided it is put al)oard 
 not later than the 16th of March. 
 
 "C — All shipments of cotton claim- 
 ing the above protection are to be 
 declared before sailing, ,and documents 
 l)roduced and certificates olitained 
 from Consular officers or other 
 
 i authorities fixed by the Government. 
 
 1 "l''ourth — In accepting this scheme, 
 which it may be noted applies to ship- 
 ments of cotton for a neutral destina- 
 tion only, the princiijal represent.atives 
 lit the American cotton interests de- 
 .scriljed it to His Majesty's Amliassador 
 at Washington as conceding all that 
 the American interests could properly 
 ask. It was never suggested lltat 
 vessels or cargoes with an enemy des- 
 tin.-ition should lie allowed to proceed. 
 His Majesty's Government were, more- 
 over, given to understand that the 
 provisions <if the arrangement were 
 acceptalde to tlie I'nited States (_;tiv- 
 ernment. 
 
 "Fifth — It is intended shortly to 
 furnish a statement showin.g precisely 
 what cargoes or poi^tions of cai'goes 
 His Majesty's Government have dealt 
 with under the above arrangement, 
 and as regards tiiose which they have 
 decided to purchase at the contract 
 price under the terms of I'aragraph A 
 of the arrangement, direct discussiims 
 ha\'e already been opened with the 
 special representatives of the Ameri- 
 can parties interested in London. 
 
 •'Sixth — A consideralile portion of 
 the cotton has already been sold, and 
 ari'angements are lieing made for 
 handing over the proceeds to the par- 
 ties entitled to receive the total value, 
 as a first installment of the completed 
 tran.saction. It is obvious that all 
 these arrangements require some time 
 for adjustment. Meanwhile, it is not 
 believed that the original owners can. 
 as appears to be appi"ehen<led, be suf- 
 fering acutely by the delay of full 
 payment. It is to be presumed that 
 in accordance with the customs of 
 trade, the owners drew liills to the 
 value of their goods before or at the 
 time of shipment, and. if such liills 
 have been negotiated in the usual 
 way. it is difficult to understand why 
 the drawers should be put to incon- 
 venience on this account, at least be- 
 fore the date when the bills fall due. 
 
 Shippers Not to Suffer Loss 
 
 "Seventh — On an imparti.al review 
 of the facts it will, His aiajesty's Gov- 
 ernment feel sure, be admitted that 
 no ai"l)itrary interference with Amer- 
 ican interests has, in regard to these 
 cargoes occurred, seein.g that His 
 Majesty's Government has acted 
 throughout in conformity with the 
 terms (if an ai'r.angement agreealde to 
 the interests concerned, and that 
 I-^nited States citizens will sutler no 
 pecuniary loss. 
 
 "I'^ighth — As regards other Ameri- 
 can cargoes, or portions of cargoes, 
 which have been placed in the prize 
 court. His Majesty's Government re- 
 sort to this measure in cases where 
 either the gooiis concerned are con- 
 trabrand or there is evidence that, 
 although ostensibly consigned to a 
 person in neutral countries, they are 
 in reality destined to the enemy in 
 contravention of the rules of block- 
 ade. The right to svibmit such cases 
 to the publii- investigation of .a jud'- 
 
40 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 cial tribunal is one which His Maj- 
 esty's Governnnent cannot forego, and 
 they feel convinced that the enlight- 
 ened opinion in the United States can- 
 not adversely criticise their course of 
 action in this respect. 
 
 "Ninth — It is true that a number 
 of these cases have been pending in 
 the prize court for some time. This 
 is notably the case in regard to cer- 
 tain vessels carrying large shipments 
 of meat and lard ostensibly consigned 
 to Scandinavian ports. The United 
 States Government are. however, no 
 doubt aware that much of the delay 
 involved in these instances is due to 
 the fact that the negotiations have 
 been carried on for many weeks with 
 a representative of the principal 
 American meat packers, for an ar- 
 rangement designed to limit impor- 
 tation into neutial countries adjacent 
 to Germany, to quantities actually 
 reciuired in those countries for bona 
 fide home consumption. The Amer- 
 ican meat packers have demanded as 
 a part of the settlement to be agreed 
 upon, that His Majesty's Government 
 should buy the cargoes of several 
 ships now held up in the prize court. 
 Hence the delay in bringing these 
 cases to adjudication. 
 
 "The negotiations for an amicable 
 settlement have, unfortunately, come 
 to a standstill owing to the exorbitant 
 terms insisted upon by the represen- 
 tative of the American packers. This 
 stage having now been reached His 
 Majesty's Government have decided 
 
 to go on with the prize court pro- 
 ceedings in these cases, and it is not 
 expected that a decision will be much 
 longer delayed. 
 
 "Tenth — It may finally be pointed 
 out that repeated complaint, as to in- 
 jury suffered generally by American 
 trade in consequence of interference 
 due to British naval measures, derives 
 little substance from the published 
 American trade returns. A table of 
 figures taken from these returns and 
 showing the amount of recent Amer- 
 ican trade with Germany and witli 
 neutral countries supplying Germany, 
 is annexed hereto. It certainly tends 
 to disprove any contention that Amer- 
 ican trade with neutral countries has 
 recently suffered. It will be seen that 
 whereas American exports to Germany 
 and Austria in February. 1915. fell by 
 $21,500,000, as compared with the 
 same month in 1914, American exports 
 to Scandinavia. Holland and Italy rose 
 by the enormous figure of $61,100,000. 
 
 "Eleventh — Siniiliar figures for the 
 month of March have not yet reached 
 His Majesty's Government, but they 
 have received statistics for that month 
 of the value of exports and imports 
 through New York, as issued by the 
 Collector of the Port, and while point- 
 ing out a large increase in the value 
 of exports in 1915, compared with 
 those of 1914, as shown in the tables 
 annexed, they desire especially to call 
 attention to a separate statement in- 
 dicating the increase in the amount 
 of the export to Scandinavian and 
 
 Dutch ports of two commodities only 
 — bacon and lard. These figures show 
 that as against 1,253 boxes of bacon 
 and 9,816 tierces of lard exported to 
 the ports noted in the above countries 
 in March, 1914, there were exported 
 in March, 1915, 32,222 boxes of bacon 
 and 95,676 tierces of lard. 
 
 "Twelfth — His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment consider that the abnormal in- 
 crease in supplies imported by neutral 
 countries, as shown in these statistics, 
 alone justifies their assumption as to 
 the ultimate destination of many items 
 in cargoes consigned to one or the 
 other of the countries in question in 
 the vessels which they have detained, 
 but they would call attention to the 
 fact that it is only when they have 
 believed themselves to be in possession 
 of conclusive evidence of the enemy 
 destination of a cargo that they have 
 seized such a cargo, and that American 
 interests, as for instance in the case of 
 cotton, have received especially sym- 
 pathetic consideration." 
 
 The explanation has a paragraph 
 attached showing exports from the 
 United States to belligerent and neu- 
 tral European countries and compar- 
 ing the figures issued before the war 
 with those issued since. These com- 
 pare the exports of January and Feb- 
 ruary, 1914, with the same months of 
 1915, and an additional table shows 
 an increase in the exportation of bacon 
 and lard to neutral countries for the 
 month of March. 
 
 REVISED BRITISH and FRENCH CONTRABAND LIST 
 
 List of Articles to be Treated as Contraband of War by the Governments 
 
 of Great Britain and France 
 
 REVISED CONTRABAND LIST. 
 
 BY THE KING. 
 
 A proclamation revising the list of ar- 
 ticles to be treated as contraband 
 of war: 
 GEORGE R.I. 
 
 Whereas on the fourth day of 
 August. 1914. We did issue Our Royal 
 Proclamation specifying the articles 
 which it was Our intention to treat 
 as contraband of war during the war 
 between Us and the German Em- 
 peror; and 
 
 Whereas on the twelfth day of 
 August, 1914, We did by Our Royal 
 Proclamation of that date extend Our 
 Proclamation aforementioned to the 
 war between Us and the Emperor of 
 Austria. King of Hungary; and 
 
 Whereas on the twenty-first day of 
 September, 1914, We did by Our 
 Royal Proclamation of that date 
 make certain additions to the list of 
 articles to be treated as contraband 
 of war; and 
 
 Whereas on the twenty-ninth day 
 of October, 1914, We did by Our Royal 
 Proclamation of that date withdraw 
 the said lists of contraband, and sub- 
 stitute therefor the lists contained in 
 the schedules to the .said Proclama- 
 tion; and 
 
 Whereas it is expedient to make 
 certain alterations in and additions to 
 the said lists; 
 
 Now, Therefore. We do hereby de- 
 clare, by and with the advice of Our 
 
 Privy Council, that the lists of con- 
 traband contained in the schedules to 
 Our Royal Proclamation of the twen- 
 ty-ninth day of October aforemen- 
 tioned are hereby withdrawn, and that 
 in lieu thereof during the continu- 
 ance of the war or until We do give 
 further notice the articles enumerated 
 in Schedule I hereto will be treated 
 as absolute contraband, and the ar- 
 ticles enumerated in Schedule II here- 
 to will be treated as conditional con- 
 traband. 
 
 SCHEDULE I. 
 
 1. Arms of all kinds, including arms 
 for sporting purposes, and their dis- 
 tinctive component parts. 
 
 2. Projectiles, charges, and car- 
 tridges of all kinds, and their distinc- 
 tive component parts. 
 
 3. Powder and explosives specially 
 prepared for use in war. 
 
 4. Ingredients of explosives, viz., 
 nitric acid, sulphuric acid, glycerine, 
 acetone, calcium acetate and all other 
 metallic acetates, sulphur, potassium 
 nitrate, the fractions of the distilla- 
 tion products of coal tar between ben- 
 zol and cresol inclusive, aniline, 
 methylaniline, dimethylaniline, am- 
 monium perchlorate. sodium per- 
 chlorate, sodium chlorate, barium 
 chlorate, ammonium nitrate, cyana- 
 mide, potassium chlorate, calcium ni- 
 trate, mercury. 
 
 5. Resinous products, camphor, and 
 turpentine (oil and spirit). 
 
 6. Gun mountings, limber bo.Kes, 
 
 limbers, military wagons, field forges, 
 and their distinctive component parts. 
 
 7. Range-finders and their distinc- 
 tive component parts. 
 
 S. Clothing and equipment of a dis- 
 tinctively military character. 
 
 9. Saddle, draught, and pack ani- 
 mals suitable for u.se in war. 
 
 10. All kinds of harness of a dis- 
 tinctively military character. 
 
 11. Articles of camp equipment and 
 their distinctive component parts. 
 
 12. Armour plates. 
 
 13. Ferro alloys, including ferro- 
 tungsten, ferro-molybdenum, ferro- 
 manganese, ferro-vanadium, ferro- 
 chrome. 
 
 14. The following metals; Tungsten, 
 molybdenum, vanadium, nickel, selen- 
 ium, cobalt, hsematite pig-iron, man- 
 ganese. 
 
 15. The following ores: Wolframite, 
 scheelite, molybdenite, manganese ore, 
 nickel ore, chrome ore, haematite iron 
 ore, zinc ore, lead ore, bauxite. 
 
 16. Aluminium, alumina, and salts 
 of aluminium. 
 
 17. Antimony, together with the 
 sulphides and oxides of antimony. 
 
 18. Copper, unwrought and part 
 wrought, and copper wire. 
 
 19. Lead, pig, sheet, or pipe. 
 
 20. Barbed wire, and implements 
 for fixing and cutting the same. 
 
 21. Warships, including boats and 
 their distinctive component parts of 
 such a nature that they can only be 
 used on a vessel of war. 
 
REVISED BRITISH AND FRENCH CONTRABAND LIST. 
 
 41 
 
 22. Submarine sound signaling ap- 
 paratus. 
 
 23. Aeroplanes, airships, balloons, 
 and aircraft of all kinds, and their 
 component parts, together with acces- 
 sories and articles recognizable as in- 
 tended for use in connection with bal- 
 loons and aircraft. 
 
 24. Motor vehicles of all kinds and 
 their component parts. 
 
 25. Tires for motor vehicles and for 
 cycles, together with articles or ma- 
 terials especially adapted for use in 
 the manufacture or repair of tires. 
 
 26. Rubber (including raw, waste, 
 and reclaimed rubber) and goods 
 made wholly of rubber. 
 
 27. Iron pyrites. 
 
 2 8. Mineral oils and motor spirit, 
 except lubricating oils. 
 
 29. Implements and apparatus de- 
 signed e.xclusively for the manufac- 
 ture of munitions of war. for the man- 
 ufacture or repair of arms, or war 
 material for tise on land and .sea. 
 
 SCHEDULE II. 
 
 1. Foodstuffs. 
 
 2. Forage and feeding stuffs for ani- 
 mals. 
 
 3. Clothing, fabrics for clothing, 
 and boots and shoes suitable for use 
 in war. 
 
 4. Gold and silver in coin or bul- 
 lion; paper money. 
 
 a. Vehicles of all kinds, other than 
 motor vehicles, available for use in 
 war, and their component parts. 
 
 6. Vessels, craft, and boats of all 
 kinds: floating docks, parts of docks, 
 and their component parts, 
 
 7. Railway materials, both fixed 
 and rolling stock, and materials for 
 telegraphs, wireless telegraphs, and 
 telephones. 
 
 8. Fuel, other than mineral oils. 
 Lubricants. 
 
 9. Powder and explosives not spe- 
 jially prepared for use in war. 
 
 10. Horseshoes and shoeing mater- 
 ials. 
 
 11. Harness and saddlery. 
 
 12. Hides of all kinds, dry or wet; 
 pigskins, raw or dressed; leather, un- 
 dressed or dressed, suitable for sad- 
 dlery, harness, or military boots. 
 
 13. Field glasses, telescopes, chro- 
 nometers, and all kinds of nautical 
 instruments. 
 
 Given at Our Court at Buckingham 
 Palace, this Twenty-third day of De- 
 cember, in the year of our Lord one 
 thousand nine hundred and fourteen, 
 and in the Fifth year of Our Reign. 
 GOD SAVE THE KING. 
 
 A contraband list the same as the 
 British Government's list was issued 
 at the same time by the French Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 ADDITIONS TO THE LIST. 
 
 BY THE KING. 
 
 A proclamation adding to the Ust of 
 
 articles to be treated as contraband 
 
 of war: 
 GEORGE R. I. 
 
 Whereas on the twenty-third day of 
 December. 1914, We did issue Our 
 Royal I'roclamation specifying the ar- 
 ticles which it was Our intention to 
 treat as contraband during the con- 
 tinuance of hostilities or until We did 
 give further public notice, and 
 
 Whereas it is expedient to make 
 certain additions to the lists con- 
 tained in the said Proclamation: 
 
 Now. Therefore, We do hereby de- 
 clare, by and with the advice of C)ur 
 Privy Council, that during the con- 
 tinuance of the war or until We do 
 give further public notice the follow- 
 ing articles will be treated as abso- 
 lute contraband in addition to those 
 set out in Our Royal Proclamation 
 aforementioned : 
 
 Raw wool, wool tops and noils and 
 woollen and worsted yarns. 
 
 Tin, chloride of tin, tin ore. 
 
 Castor oil. 
 
 Paraffin wax. 
 
 Copper iodide. 
 
 Lubricants. 
 
 Hides of cattle, buffaloes, and 
 horses; skins of calves, pigs, sheep, 
 goats, and deer; leather, undressed or 
 dressed, suitable for saddlery, har- 
 ness, military boots, or military cloth- 
 ing. 
 
 Ammonia and its salts whether sim- 
 ple or compound; ammonia liquor; 
 urea, aniline, and their compounds. 
 
 And We do hereby further declare 
 that the following articles will be 
 treated as conditional contraband in 
 addition to those set out in Our Royal 
 Proclamation aforementioned: 
 
 Tanning substances of all kinds (in- 
 cluding extracts for use in tanning). 
 
 And We do hereby further declare 
 that the terms "foodstuffs" and "feed- 
 ing stuffs for animals" in the list of 
 conditional contraband contained in 
 Our Royal Proclamation aforemen- 
 tioned shall be deemed to include ole- 
 aginous seeds, nuts and kernels; ani- 
 mal and vegetable oils and fats I other 
 
 than linseed oil) suitable for use in 
 the manufacture of margarine; and 
 cakes and meals made fi-om oleagi- 
 nous seeds, nuts and kernels. 
 
 Given at Our Court at Buckingliam 
 Palace, this Eleventh day of March, 
 in the year of our Lord one thous/ind 
 nine hundred and fifteen, and in the 
 Fifth year of Our Reign. 
 
 GOD SAVE THE KING. 
 
 The articles mentioned in this Proc- 
 lamation are also included in the 
 French contraband list. 
 
 The following statement regarding 
 the classification of hides has been re- 
 ceived by the Department of State 
 from the British Government: "The 
 whole of the 'Hides' heading (Article 
 12) in the conditional list of Decem- 
 ber 23, 1914, may be regarded as 
 transferred to the list of absolute con- 
 traliand. Harness and .saddlery (Ar- 
 ticle 11) remain conditional contra- 
 band unless it falls within Article 10 
 of the absolute list of December 23." 
 
 EXPLANATION OF TERMS. 
 
 Interpretation by the British Govern- 
 ment of the terms "copper" and 
 "lubricants" in British contraband 
 list; 
 
 Copper. — "Copper unwrought" was 
 intended to include all copper in such 
 form as to render it usable for manu- 
 facturing purposes. This description 
 being vague the former heading will 
 be changed in new lists to read "Cop- 
 per unwrought and part wrought and 
 copper wire." This is intended to in- 
 clude copper sheets, circles, slabs, 
 bars, pipes, ingots, scrap, rods, plates, 
 solid drawn, tubes, etc., and all grades 
 of copper wires. The word copper is 
 deemed to include alloys in which 
 copper is the main ingredient. 
 
 Lubricants. — Mineral: Including 
 mineral oils, jellies or greases of all 
 kinds, pure or compounded; graphite, 
 natural or artificial. Vegetable: In- 
 cluding vegetable lubricating oils and 
 fats of all kinds, and resin greases, 
 and their mixtures. Animal; Includ- 
 ing all animal oils and fats for use as 
 lubricants and their mixtures. Fish: 
 Including whale oil i train, blubber, 
 sperm), seal or sh.ark oil. and fish oil 
 generally. Mixtures or compounds of 
 any of the foregoing. 
 
THE CASE OF THE WILLIAM P. FRYE 
 
 United States Asks Compensation of Germany for Sinking of American 
 Vessel — Response of the German Government and Further 
 
 Correspondence 
 
 FRYE CLAIM PRESENTED. 
 
 iiecretary of Htate to the American 
 Ambassador at Berlin.- 
 
 Washington, March 31. 1915. 
 
 You are instructed to present the 
 following note to the German Foreign 
 Office: 
 
 Under instructions from my Gov- 
 ernment I have the honor to present 
 a claim for $228,059.54 with interest 
 from January 28, 1915, against the 
 German Government on behalf of the 
 owners and captain of the American 
 sailing vessel William P. Frye for 
 damages suffered by them on account 
 of the destruction of that vessel on 
 the high seas by the German armed 
 cruiser Prinz Eitel Friedrich on Janu- 
 ary 28. 1915. 
 
 Tlie facts upon which this claim 
 arises and by reason of ■which the 
 German Government is held re- 
 sponsible by the Government of the 
 United States for the attendant loss 
 and damages are briefly as follows: 
 
 The William P. Frye, a steel sail- 
 ing vessel of 3374 tons gross tonnage, 
 owned by American citizens, and sail- 
 ing under the United States flag and 
 register, cleared from Seattle, Wasli- 
 ington, November 4, 1914, under char- 
 ter to M. H. Houser, of Portland, Ore- 
 gon, bound for Queenstown, Falmouth 
 or Plymouth for orders, with a cargo 
 consisting solely of ]S6,9r>0 bushels of 
 wheat owned by the aforesaid Houser. 
 and consigned "unto order or to its 
 assigns," all of which ai)pears from 
 the ship's papers which were taken 
 from the vessel at the time of her 
 destruction l)y the Commander of the 
 German Cruiser. 
 
 On Jan\iary 27, 1915, the Prinz 
 Eitel Friedrich encountered the Frye 
 on the high seas: compelled her to 
 stop, and sent on board an armed 
 bo.'irding party, who took j^ossession. 
 After an examination of the ship's 
 papers the Commander of the Cruiser 
 directed th.at the cargo be thrown 
 overlioard, liut subsequently decided 
 to destroy the vessel, and on the fol- 
 lowing morning, by his order, the 
 Frye was sunk. 
 
 The claim of the owners ,-ind cap- 
 tain consists of the following items: 
 Value of ship, equil>ment 
 
 and outfit $150,000.00 
 
 Actual freight as per 
 
 freight list 5034 lOOO- 
 
 2240 tons at 32-G-8180- 
 
 19-6 at $4.SS 39.7.=;9.54 
 
 Traveling and other ex- 
 penses of Captain Kiehne 
 
 and Arthur Sew.all & Co.. 
 
 Agents of ship, in con- 
 nection with making af- 
 fidavits, preparing: and 
 
 filing claim 500.00 
 
 Personal effects of Captain 
 
 H. H. Kiehne 300.00 
 
 D.nnia.ges covering loss due 
 
 t'> deprivation of use of 
 
 ship 37.500.00 
 
 Total $228,059.54 
 
 By direction of my Government, I 
 have the honor to request that full 
 reparation be made by the German 
 Government for the destruction of the 
 William I'. Frye by the German 
 cruiser Prinz Eitel Friedrich. 
 
 BRYA.N'. 
 
 GERMAN REPLY TO OUR NOTE. 
 
 //('//• Vwi Jaijoic to the American Am- 
 hussador at Berlin: 
 
 The undersigned has the honor to 
 make reply to the note of his Excel- 
 lency. Mr. James W. Gerard. Ambas- 
 .sador of the United States of America, 
 dated the 3d instant. Foreign OIRce 
 Xo. 2892, relative to claims for dam- 
 ages for the sinking of the American 
 merchant vessel William P. Frye by 
 the German auxiliary cruiser Prinz 
 Eitel Friedrich. 
 
 According to the reports which have 
 re.iclied the German Government, the 
 Commander of the Prinz Eitel Fried- 
 rich stopped the William P. Frye on 
 the high seas Jan. 27, 1915, and 
 searched her. He found on board a 
 cargo of wheat consigned to Queens- 
 town. Falmouth or Plymouth, to or- 
 der. After he had first tried to re- 
 move the cargo from the William P. 
 Frye he took the ship's papers and 
 her crew on board and sank the ship. 
 
 It results from these facts that the 
 German Commander acted quite in .ac- 
 cordance with the principles of inter- 
 national law as laid down in tlie Dec- 
 laration of London and the German 
 Prize Ordinance. The ports of (.Queens- 
 town. Falmouth. and Plymouth, 
 whither the ship visited was bound, 
 are strongly fortified English coast 
 places, which, moreover, serve as 
 bases for the British naval forces. 
 The cargo of wheat being food or 
 foodstuffs was conditional contraband 
 within the meanin.g of Article 24. No. 
 1. of the Declaration of London, and 
 Article 23. No. 1. of the German Prize 
 Ordinance, and was, therefore, to Vie 
 considered as destined for the armed 
 forces of the enemy, pursuant to Ar- 
 ticles 33 and 34 of the Declaration of 
 London and .-\rticles 32 and 33 of the 
 German Prize Ordinance, and to be 
 treated as contraband pending proof 
 of the contrary. 
 
 This proof was certainly not cap- 
 able of being adduced at the time of 
 the visitin,g of the vessel, since the 
 cargo papers read to order. This, 
 however, furnished the conditions un- 
 der which, pursuant to Article 49 of 
 the Declaration of London and Ar- 
 ticle 113 of the German Prize Ordi- 
 nance, the sinking of the ship was 
 permissible since it was not possible 
 for the auxiliary cruiser to take the 
 prize into a Germ.an port without in- 
 volving danger to its own security or 
 the success of its operations. The 
 duties devolving upon the cruiser be- 
 fore destruction of the ship, pursuant 
 to Article 50 of the Declaration of. 
 
 London and Article 116 of the German 
 Prize Ordinance, were fulfilled by the 
 cruiser in that it took on board all 
 the persons found on the sailing ves- 
 sel as well as the ship's papers. 
 
 The legality of the measures taken 
 by the German Commander is fur- 
 thermore subject to examination by 
 the German Prize Court pursuant to 
 Article 51 of the Declaration of Lon- 
 don and Section 1, No. 2, of the Ger- 
 man code of prize procedure. These 
 prize proceedings will be instituted 
 before the prize court at Hamburg as 
 soon as the ship's papers are received 
 and will comprise the settlement of 
 questions whether the destruction of 
 the cargo and the ship was necessary 
 within the meaning of Article 49 of 
 the Declaration of London; whether 
 the property sunk was liable to cap- 
 ture, and whether or to what extent 
 indemnity is to be awarded the 
 owt\ers. 
 
 Cites Treaty of 1828. 
 
 In the trial the owners of ship and 
 cargo would be at liberty, pursuant 
 to Article 34. Paragraph 3. of the Dec- 
 laration of London, to adduce proof 
 that the cargo of wheat had an in- 
 nocent destination and did not, there- 
 fore, have the character of contra- 
 band. If such proof is not adduced, 
 the German Government would not 
 be liable for any compensation what- 
 ever according to the general prin- 
 ciples of international law. 
 
 However, the legal situation is 
 somewhat different in the light of the 
 speiial stipulations applicable to the 
 relations between Germany and the 
 United States, since Article 13 of the 
 Prussian-American Treaty of Friend- 
 ship and Commerce of July 11, 1799, 
 taken in connection with Article 12 
 of the Prussian-American Treaty of 
 Commerce and Navigation of May 1. 
 182S, iirovides that contraband be- 
 longing to the subjects or citizens of 
 either party cannot be confiscated by 
 the other in any case, but only de- 
 tained or used in consideration of pay- 
 ment of the full value of the same. 
 
 On the ground of this treaty stipula- 
 tion, which is, as a matter of course, 
 binding on the German Prize Court, 
 the American owners of ship and 
 cargo would receive compensation 
 even if the court should declare the 
 cargo of wheat to be contraband. 
 .Vevertheless, the approaching prize 
 proceedings are not rendered super- 
 fluous, since the competent prize court 
 must examine into the legality of the 
 capture and destruction, and also pro- 
 nounce upon the standing of the 
 claimants and the amount of indem- 
 nity. 
 
 The undersigned begs to suggest 
 th.at the Ambassador bring the above 
 to the knowledge of his Government, 
 ,and avails himself, &c. 
 
 JAGOW. 
 
 April 4. 1915. 
 
THE CASE OF THE WM. P. FRYE. 
 
 43 
 
 SECOND AMERICAN NOTE. 
 
 The Secietari/ nf State to Amlxissa- 
 .(ioi- Gerard: 
 
 Wawhinstun. April -'S. 
 
 Foil are instructed to present the 
 juUowhig note to the German Foreign 
 Office: 
 
 111 reply to your Excellency's note 
 of the 5th inst.. which the Govern- 
 ment of the United States under- 
 stands admits the liability of the Im- 
 perial German Government for the 
 damages resulting from the sinlving 
 of the American sailing vessel Wil- 
 liam P. Frye l)y the German auxiliary 
 cruiser Prinz Eitel Friedrich on Jan. 
 2 8. last. I have the honor to say. by 
 direction of my Government, that 
 while the pnimptness with which the 
 Imperial German Government has ad- 
 mitted its liability is highly appre- 
 ciated, my Government feels that it 
 would be inappropriate in the circum- 
 stances of this case, and would in- 
 volve unnecessary delay, to adopt the 
 .suggestion in your note that the legal- 
 ity of the capture and destruction, the 
 standing of the claimants and the 
 amount of indemnity should lie sub- 
 mitted to a prize court. 
 
 L'nquestion,al>l.\' the destruction of 
 this vessel was a violation of the obli- 
 gations imposed upon the Imjierial 
 German Government under exi.sting 
 treaty stipulations between the United 
 States and Piussia, and the United 
 States Government l)y virtue of its 
 treaty rights has presented to the 
 Imperial German Governinent a claim 
 for indeinnity on account of the re- 
 sulting damages suffered by Ameri- 
 can citizens. 
 
 The lialjilit.v nf the Imperial Ger- 
 man Government and the standing of 
 the claimants as American citizens 
 and the amount of indemnity are all 
 questions which lend themselves to 
 diplomatic negotiati<jn between tlie 
 two Governments, and haijpily the 
 question of lialiility has already been 
 settled in that way. The st.atus of the 
 claimants and the ainount of indem- 
 nit.v are the only questions remaining 
 to be settled, and it is appropriate 
 that they should be dealt with in tlie 
 same wa.v. 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States fully understands that. as 
 stated in your Bxcellency's note, the 
 German Government is liable under 
 the treaty provisions above mentioned 
 for the damages arising from the de- 
 struction of the cargo as well as from 
 the destruction of the vessel. But it 
 will be observed that the claim under 
 discussion does not include damages 
 for the destruction of the cargo, and 
 the question of the value of the cargo, 
 therefore, is not involved in the pres- 
 ent di.scussion. 
 
 The Government of the United 
 States recognizes that the German 
 Government will wish to Vie satis- 
 fied as to the American ownership of 
 the vessel and the amount of the 
 damages sustained in consec|uence of 
 her destruction. 
 
 These matters are readily ascer- 
 tainatjle. and if the German Govern- 
 ment desires any further evidence in 
 substantiation of the claim on these 
 points, in addition to that furnished 
 by the ship's papers, which are al- 
 ready in the possession of the Ger- 
 man Government, any additional evi- 
 dence fcuuid necessary will be pro- 
 duced. In that case, however, inas- 
 much as any evidence which the Ger- 
 man Governinent inay wish to have 
 produced is more accessible, and can 
 more ci>nveniently he examined in the 
 United States than elsewhere, on ac- 
 Cf.itmt of the presence there of the 
 owners and Captain of the William P. 
 Frye and their documentary records, 
 and other possiljle witnesses, the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States ven- 
 tures to suggest the advisaVdlity of 
 transferring the negotiations for the 
 settlement of these points Xu the Im- 
 perial Germ.'in Endiassy at Washing- 
 ton. 
 
 In view of the admission of liabil- 
 ity liy reason of s])ecific tre.aty stipu- 
 lations, it has l:iec<ime unnecess.ary to 
 enter into a discussion of the mean- 
 ing and effect of the Declaration of 
 London, which is .given some i)rom- 
 inence in your Excellency's note of 
 Aiiril .".. further than to sav that, as 
 the German Go\-ernment has already 
 been advised, the Government of the 
 United States does not regard the 
 Declaration c»f London as in force. 
 
 RESPONSE TO SECOND NOTE. 
 
 Genua II Minister fm- Fmeigii Af- 
 fair.'S to the American Ainlntifsador at 
 Berlin : 
 
 Berlin. .lune 7. HUG. 
 
 The undersigned has the honor to 
 make the following re|dy to the note 
 of his Excellency, Mr. .lames W. Ger- 
 ard, Ambassador of the United States 
 of America, dated April 30, 1915. For- 
 eign Office No. 3, 2.(1, on the subject 
 of the sinking of the American sailing 
 vessel William P. Frye by the German 
 auxiliary cruiser Prinz Kitel Friedrich. 
 
 The fiernian Government cannot ad- 
 mit that, as the American Government 
 assumes, the destruction of the sail- 
 ing vessel mentioned constitutes a vio- 
 lation of the treaties concluded be- 
 tween Prussia and the United States at 
 an earlier date and now applicable to 
 the relations between the Cierman Em- 
 pire and the Unitf'd States, or of the 
 American rights derived therefrom. 
 For, these treaties did not have the in- 
 tention of depriving one of the con- 
 tracting parties engaged in war of the 
 right of sto|)iiing the supply of contra- 
 band to his enemy when he recognizes 
 the supply of such as detrimental to 
 liis military interests. 
 
 (in the contrary. Article XIII of the 
 Prussian-American treaty of .luly 11. 
 17i*,'t, ex]^i"ess]y reser ."es to tlu^ part\' at 
 war the ri,ght to stop the carrying of 
 contraliaiid and to detain the contra- 
 l),'ind. It follows, then, that if it cannot 
 
 lie accomplished in any other way, the 
 stopping of the supply may in the ex- 
 treme case lie effected by the destruc- 
 tion of the contraband and of the shij) 
 carr.vin.g it. As a matter of course, the 
 obligation of the party at war to pay 
 compensation to the parties interested 
 of the neutral contracting party re- 
 m.ains in force whatever lie the man- 
 ner of stopping the supply. 
 
 Suggests Prize (oiirl Hearing. 
 
 According to general principles of 
 international law. any exercises of the 
 right of control over the trade in con- 
 traliaiid is suliject to the decision of 
 the prize courts even thou.gh such 
 right may lie restricted Ijy special 
 treaties. 
 
 At the beginnin.y of the present war 
 Germany, pursuant to these princi- 
 ples, estalilished liy law piize juris- 
 diction for cases of the kind under 
 consideration. The case of the Wil- 
 liam P. Frye is likewise subject to the 
 German prize jurisdiction, for the 
 Prussian-American treaties mentioned 
 contain no stipulation as to how the 
 amount of the compensation. pro\"ided 
 b.v Article XIII of the treaties, cited, 
 is to be fixed. 
 
 The German Goveininent, therefore. 
 Ci.implies with its treat\' obligations 
 to a full extent when the prize courts 
 instituted by it in accordance with in- 
 teriiiitional law proceed in jiursuance 
 to the treat.v stipulation and thus 
 award the American interested an 
 equitable indemnity. There would, 
 therefore, be no foundation for a claim 
 of the American Government unless 
 the prize court should not grant in- 
 demnitj" in aec(.irdance with the treatj'; 
 in sticli event, however, the German 
 ( lOvermiient would not liesitate to ar- 
 range for equitable indeinnity not- 
 withstanding. 
 
 For the rest, prize iir<iceedings of 
 the case of the Frye .are indisiiensable, 
 apart from the American claims, for 
 the re.ason that other claims of tiie 
 neutral and enemy interested parties 
 are to be considered in tlie matter. 
 
 As was stated in the note of April 
 4 last, the prize court should have to 
 decide the question whether the de- 
 struction of the ship and cirgo was 
 legal, whether and under what con- 
 ditions the property sunk was liable 
 to confiscation, and to whom and in 
 what amount indemnity is to lie paid 
 lirovided aiiiilication therefor is re- 
 ceived. 
 
 Since the decision of the prize court 
 must first be awaited before an.v fur- 
 ther position is taken by the ('lermaii 
 Government, the simplest way for the 
 American interested parties to settle 
 their claims would lie to enter them 
 in the competent records in accord- 
 ance with the provision of the Ger- 
 man code of prize proceeding. 
 
 The undersigned begs to suggest 
 that tlie Ambassador bring the above 
 to the knowledge of his Government, 
 ind avail himself, etc. 
 
 VON .lAGOW 
 
GERMAN COMPLAINT AND AMERICAN ANSWER 
 
 Bernstorff Note Claiming This Government Acquiesced in British Blockade 
 Without Placing an Embargo on Arms, and American Reply 
 
 BERNSTORFF'S MEMORANDUM. 
 
 Gennaii Aiiihani-ador to tlte .•^erretary 
 
 of mate (Translation): 
 
 Imperial German Embassy, 
 
 Washinsjlun, April 4, 1915. 
 Mr. Secretary of State: 
 
 I have the honor to deliver to Your 
 Excellency the enclosed memorandum 
 on German-American trade and the 
 question of delivery of arms. Accept, 
 etc., 
 
 J. BEFL.XSTORFF. 
 
 MEMORANDUM (Translation): 
 Washington. D. C, April 4, 11(15. 
 
 The various British Orders in Coun- 
 cil have one-sidedly modified the gen- 
 erally recognized principles of inter- 
 national law in a way which arbitrar- 
 ily stops the commerce of neutral na- 
 tions with Germany. Even before the 
 last British Order in Council, the 
 shipment of conditional contraband, 
 especially food supplies, to Germany 
 was practically impossible. Prior to 
 the prote.st .sent by the American to 
 the British Government on December 
 2S last, such a shipment did not ac- 
 tually take place in a single case. 
 Even after this protest the Imperial 
 Embassy knows of only a single case 
 in which an American shipper has 
 ventured to make such a shipment for 
 the purpose t>f legitiituite sale to Ger- 
 m.iny. Both ship and cargo were im- 
 mediately seized by the English and 
 are being held in an English port un- 
 der the prete.xt of an order of the 
 German Federal Council (Bundesrat) 
 regarding the grain trade, although 
 this resolution of the Federal Council 
 relates e.xclusively to grain and flour, 
 and not to other foodstuffs, besides 
 making an e.xpre.s.s exception with re- 
 spect to imported foodstuffs, and al- 
 though the German Government gave 
 the American Government an assur- 
 ,ance, and proposed a special organi- 
 zation whereby the exclusive con- 
 sumption by the civilized population is 
 absidutely guaranteed. 
 
 Under the.se circumstances, the seiz- 
 ure of the American ship was inad- 
 missible according to recognized prin- 
 ciples of international law. Neverthe- 
 less the United States Government has 
 not to date secured the release of the 
 ship and cargo, and has not, after a 
 duration of the war of eight month.s. 
 succeeded in protecting its lawful 
 trade with Germ.any. Such a long de- 
 lay, especially in matters of food sup- 
 ply, is equivalent to an entire denial. 
 The Imperial Embassy must therefore 
 assume that the United States Govern- 
 ment acquiesces in the vicdations of 
 international law by Great Britain. 
 Then there is also the attitude of the 
 United .St.ates in the question of the 
 exportation of arms. The Imperial 
 Government feels sure that the United 
 States Government will agree that In 
 questions of neutralil^y it is necessary 
 to take into consideration not only the 
 formal aspect of the case, but" also 
 the spirit in which the neutralitv is 
 carried out. 
 
 Export of Arms Violates Neutrality. 
 
 The situation in the present war 
 differs from that of any previous war. 
 
 Therefore any reference to arms fur- 
 nished by Germany in former wars 
 is not justified, for then it was not 
 a question whether war inaterial 
 should be supplied to the belligerents, 
 but who should supply it in competi- 
 tion with other nations. In the pres- 
 ent war all nations having a war 
 material industry worth mentioning 
 are either involved in the w.ar them- 
 .selves or are engaged in perfecting 
 
 (^J^itf^m^sy 
 
 COUNT JOHANN VON BERNSTORFF 
 
 German Ambassador to the 
 
 United States 
 
 their own arm.aments. and have there- 
 fore laid an emliargo against the ex- 
 portation of war material. The United 
 States is accordingly the only neutral 
 country in a position to furnish war 
 materials. The conception of neutral- 
 ity is thereby given a new purport, 
 independently of the formal question 
 of hitherto existing law. In contra- 
 diction thereto, the United States is 
 building up a powerful arms industry 
 in the broadest sense, the existing 
 plants not only being worked but en- 
 larged by all available means, and 
 new ones built. The interii.ational 
 conventions for the protection of the 
 rights of neutral nations doubtless 
 sprang from the necessity of protect- 
 ing the existing industries of neutral 
 nations as far as possible from injury 
 in their business. But it can in no 
 event l>e in accordance with the spirit 
 of true neutrality if, under the protec- 
 tion of such international stipulations, 
 an entirely new industry is created in 
 a neutral state, such as is the devel- 
 opment of the arms industry in the 
 
 United States, the business whereof, 
 under the present conditions, can 
 benefit only the belligerent powers. 
 
 This industry is actually delivering 
 goods only to the enemies of Germany. 
 The theoretical willingness to supply 
 Germany also if shipments thither 
 were possible, does not alter the case. 
 If it is the will of the American people 
 that there shall be a true neutrality, 
 the United States will find means of 
 preventing this one-sided supply of 
 arms or at least of utilizing it to pro- 
 tect legitimate trade w-ith Germany, 
 especially that in foodstuffs. This 
 view of neutrality should all the more 
 appeal to the United States Govern- 
 ment because the latter enacted a sim- 
 ilar policy toward Mexico. On Feb- 
 ruary 4, 1914, President Wilson, ac- 
 cording to a statement of a Represen- 
 tative in Congress in the Committee 
 for Foreign Affairs of December 30, 
 1914, upon the lifting of the embargo 
 on arms to Mexico, declared that "we 
 should stand for genuine neutrality, 
 considering the surrounding facts of 
 the case • * *." He then held 
 that "in that case, because Carranza 
 had no ports, while Huerta had them 
 and was able to import these mater- 
 ials, that it was our duty as a nation 
 to treat (Carranza and Huerta) upon 
 an equality if we wished to observe 
 the true spirit of neutrality as com- 
 pared with a mere paper neutrality." 
 
 If this view were applied to the 
 present case, it would lead to an em- 
 bargo on the exportation of arms. 
 
 REPLY TO BERNSTORFF'S NOTE. 
 
 Sr( rrlari/ of State to the German Am- 
 liasaudor: 
 
 Washington, April 21, 1915. 
 
 E.xcellency: I have given thought- 
 ful consideration to Tour Excellency's 
 note of the 4th of April. 1915, en- 
 closing a memorandum of the same 
 date, in which Your Excellency dis- 
 cusses the action of this Government 
 with regard to trade between the 
 United States and Germ.any and the 
 attitude of this Government with re- 
 gard to the exportation of arms from 
 the United States to the nations now 
 at war with Germany. I must admit 
 that I am somewhat at a loss how 
 to interpret Tour Excellency's treat- 
 ment of these matters. There are 
 many circumstances connected with 
 these important subjects to which I 
 would have expected Your Excellency 
 to advert, but of which you make no 
 mention, and there are other circum- 
 stances to which you do refer which 
 I would have supposed to be hardly 
 appropriate for discussion between 
 the Government of the United States 
 ,and the Government of Germany. 
 
 I shall take the liberty, therefore, 
 of regarding Tour Excellency's refer- 
 ences to the course pursued by the 
 Government of the United States with 
 regard to interferences with trade 
 from this country such as the Gov- 
 ernment of Great Britain have at- 
 tempted, as intended merely to illus- 
 trate more fully the situation to which 
 you desire to call our attention, and 
 
GERMAN COMPLAINT AND AMERICAN ANSWER. 
 
 4> 
 
 
 not as an invitation to discuss that 
 course. Your Excellency's long ex- 
 perience in international affairs will 
 have suggested to you that the rela- 
 tions of the two Governments with 
 one another can not wisely be made 
 a subject of discussion with a third 
 Government, which can not be fully 
 informed as to the facts, and which 
 can not be fully cognizant of the rea- 
 sons for the course pursued. I be- 
 lieve, however, that I am justified in 
 assuming that what .vou desire to call 
 fnrth is a frank statement of the po- 
 sition of this Government in regard 
 to its obligations as a neutral power. 
 The general attitude and course of 
 policy of this Government in the 
 maintenance of its neutrality I am 
 particularly anxious that Your Excel- 
 lency should see in their true light. 
 I had hoped that this Government's 
 po.sition in these respects had been 
 made abundantly clear, but I am of 
 course perfectly willing to state it 
 again. This seems to me the more 
 necessary and desirable because. I re- 
 gret to say. the language which Your 
 Excellency employs in yoiu' menio- 
 randtim is susceptible of being con- 
 strued as impugning the good faith 
 of the United States in the perfor- 
 mance of its duties as a neutral. I 
 take it for granted th.at no such im- 
 plication was intended, but it is so 
 evident that Your Excellency is labor- 
 ing under certain false impressions 
 that I can not be too explicit in set- 
 ting forth the facts as they are. when 
 fiiliy reviewed and comprehended. 
 
 In the first place, this Government 
 has at no time and in no manner 
 yielded any one of its rights as a 
 neutral to any of the iiresent belli.g- 
 erents. It has acknowledged, as a 
 matter of cour.se. the right of visit and 
 search and the right to apply the 
 rules of contraband of war to articles 
 of commerce. It has. Indeed, insisted 
 upon the use of visit and search as 
 an absolutely necessary .safeguard 
 against mistaking neutral vessels for 
 vessels owned by an enemy and 
 
 against mistaking legal cargoes for il- 
 legal. It has admitted also the right 
 of blockade if actually exercised and 
 effectively maintained. Tliese are 
 merely the well-known limitations 
 which war places upon neutral com- 
 "merce on the high seas. But nothing 
 Ijeyond these has it conceded. I call 
 Your E.xcellency's attention to this, 
 notwithstanding it is already known 
 to all the world as a consequence of 
 the puVdication of our correspondence 
 m regard to these matters with several 
 of the lielligerent nations, because I 
 can not assume that you have official 
 cognizance of it. 
 
 America a Friend of Both Parties. 
 
 In the .second place, this Govern- 
 ment attempted to secure from the 
 German and British Governments mu- 
 tual concessions with regard to the 
 measures those Governments respec- 
 tively adopted for the interruption of 
 trade on the high seas. This it did, 
 not of right, but merely as exercising 
 the pri\ lieges of a sincere friend of 
 both parties and as indicating its im- 
 partial good will. The attempt was 
 unsuccessful; but I regret that Your 
 E.xeellency did not deem it worthy of 
 mention in modificatiiin of the im- 
 pressions you expressed. We had 
 hoped that this act on our part had 
 shown our spirit in these times of 
 distressing war as our diplomatic cor- 
 resp(]ndence had shown our steadfast 
 refusal In acknowledge the right of 
 any lielligerent to alter the accejited 
 rules of war at sea in so far as they 
 affect the rights and interests of neu- 
 trals. 
 
 In the third place. I note with sin- 
 cere regret that, in discussing the 
 sale and exportation of arms by citi- 
 zens of the United States to the en- 
 emies of Germany. Your Excellency 
 seems to be under the impression that 
 it was within the choice of the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States, not- 
 withstanding its professed neutrality 
 and its diligent efforts to maintain it 
 in other particulars, to inhibit this 
 
 trade, and that its failure to do so 
 manifested an unfair attitude towanl 
 Germany. This Government liolds, as 
 I believe Your E.xeellency is aware, 
 and as it is constrained to hold in 
 view of the present indisputalile doc- 
 trines of accepted international law, 
 that any change in its own laws of 
 neutrality during the progress of a 
 war which would affect unequally the 
 relations of the United States witii the 
 nations .at war would be an unjusti- 
 fiable departure from the principle of 
 strict neutrality by which it has con- 
 sistently sought to direct its actions, 
 and I respectfully submit that none 
 Id' the circumstances urged in Your 
 i'-xcellenc>'s memorandum altei's the 
 principle involved. The placing of an 
 embargo on the trade in arms at the 
 present time would constitute sucli a 
 change and be a direct violation of 
 the neutrality of the United States. It 
 will, I feel assured, be clear to Your 
 Excellency that, holding this view and 
 considering itself in honor bound by 
 it, it is out of the question for this 
 Government to consider such a course. 
 I hope that Your Excellency will 
 realize the sidrit in which I am draft- 
 ing this reply. The friendship be- 
 tween the people of the United States 
 and the people of Germany is so warin 
 and of such long standing, the ties 
 which bind them to one another in 
 amity are so many and so strong, that 
 this Government feels under a spe- 
 cial compulsion to speak with perfect 
 frankness when any occasion arises 
 which seeins likely to create any mis- 
 understanding, however slight or tem- 
 porary, between those who represent 
 the Governments of the two countries. 
 It will be a matter of .gratification to 
 me if I have removed from Your Ex- 
 cellency's mind any misapprehension 
 you may have been under regarding 
 either the policy or the spirit and 
 purposes of the Government of the 
 United States. Its neutrality is 
 founded upon the firm basis of con- 
 science and good will. Accept, etc.. 
 
 ■V\'. J. BRYAN. 
 
 AMERICAN STEAMER GULFLIGHT, SUNK BY GERMAN TORPEDO 
 
 t//it>£^i!iiia-i'*sff>i»'»»s~ 
 
 
 The American oil tanker Gulflight, bound for Rouen, France, with 50,000 barrels of gasoline, 
 was torpedoed by a German submarine on May 1, while off the Scilly Islands. Captain Alfred Gunter, 
 of the Gulflight, and two members of the crew lost their lives. 
 
THE SINKING OF THE LUSITANIA 
 
 Official German Report — Denial That Vessel Was Armed — German Em- 
 bassy Warning, Note of Regret and Policy Toward Neutral Ships 
 
 GERMAN OFFICIAL STATEMENT. 
 
 Official communication issued in Berlin 
 
 May 9: 
 
 The Cunard liner Lusitania was yes- 
 terday torpedoed by a German sub- 
 marine and sank. The Lusitania was 
 naturally armed with guns, as were 
 recently most of the English mercan- 
 tile steamers. Moreover, as is well 
 known here, she had large quantities 
 of war material in her cargo. Her 
 owners, therefore, knew to what dan- 
 ger the passengers were exposed. 
 They alone bear all the responsibility 
 for what has happened. Germany, on 
 her part, left notliing undone to re- 
 peatedly and strongly warn them. 
 The Imperial Ambassador in AVash- 
 ington even went so far as to make a 
 public warning, so as to draw atten- 
 tion to this danger. The English press 
 sneered at the warning and relied on 
 the protection of the British fleet to 
 safeguard Atlantic traffic. 
 
 DENIALS THAT SHE WAS ARMED. 
 
 The British Government made the fol- 
 loiring announcement on May 8; 
 The statement appearing in some 
 
 newspapers that the Lusitania was 
 
 armed is wholly false. 
 
 Dudley Field Malone. Collector of the 
 Port of Sew York, made the follow- 
 ing official statement regardinij the 
 charge that the Lusitania was armed 
 when she left this port; 
 
 This report is not correct. The 
 Lusitania was inspected liefore sailing, 
 as is customary. N'o guns were found, 
 mounted or unmounted, and the ves- 
 sel sailed without any armament. Xo 
 merchant ship would be allowed to 
 arm in this port and leave the harbor. 
 
 GERMANY'S NOTE OF REGRET. 
 
 German Foreign Office to the German 
 
 Embassy at Washington: 
 
 Berlin, May 10. 
 
 Please communicate the following 
 to the State Department: The Ger- 
 man Government desires to express 
 its deepest sympathy at the loss of 
 lives on board the Lusitania. The re- 
 sponsibility rests, however, with the 
 British Government, which, through 
 its plan of starving the civilian popu- 
 lation of Germany, has forced Ger- 
 many to resort to retaliatory measures. 
 
 In spite of the German offer to stop 
 the submarine war in case the starva- 
 tion plan was given up, British mer- 
 chant vessels are bein.g generally 
 arniiMl with guns and have repeatedly 
 trii'd to ram submarines, so that a 
 previous search was impossible. 
 
 They cannot, therefore, be treated 
 
 as ordinary merchant vessels. A re- 
 cent declaration made to the British 
 Parliament by the Parliamentary Sec- 
 retary in answer to a question by Lord 
 Charles Beresford said that at the 
 present practically all British mer- 
 chant vessels were armed and pro- 
 vided with hand grenades. 
 
 Besides, it has been openly ad- 
 mitted by the English press that the 
 Lusitania on previous voyages re- 
 peatedly carried large quantities of 
 war material. On the present voy- 
 age the Lusitania carried 5.400 cases 
 of ammunition, while the rest of her 
 cargo also consisted chiefly of contra- 
 band. 
 
 If England, after repeated official 
 and unofficial warnings, considered 
 herself able to decl.are that that lioat 
 ran no risk and thus light-heartedly 
 a.ssumed responsibility for the human 
 life on board a steamer which, owing 
 to its armament and cargo was liable 
 to destruction, the German Govern- 
 ment, in spite of its heartfelt sym- 
 [lathy for the loss of American lives, 
 cannot but regret that Americans felt 
 more inclined to trust to English 
 promises rather than to pay attention 
 to the warnings from the Gerinan 
 side. 
 
 FOIIEIGX OFFICE. 
 
 GERMAN EMBASSY'S WARNING. 
 
 Adrertisement inserted in American 
 neicspapers warning travellers of 
 tear zone dangers: 
 
 NOTICE ! 
 TRAVELLERS intending 
 to embark on the Atlantic 
 voyage are reminded that a 
 state of war exists between 
 Germany and her allies and 
 Great Britain and her allies; 
 that the zone of war includes 
 the waters adjacent to the 
 British I.sles: that, in ac- 
 cordance with formal notice 
 given by the Imperial Ger- 
 man Government, vessels fly- 
 ing the flag of Great Britain, 
 or of any of her allies, are 
 liable to destruction in those 
 waters and that travellers 
 sailing in the war zone on 
 ships of Great Britain or her 
 allies do so at their own risk. 
 
 IMPERIAL GERMAN 
 EMBASSY 
 
 Washington. D. C, April 22. 
 Ill 1.5. 
 
 GERMANY'S NEUTRAL POLICY 
 
 Text of an official declaration by the 
 German Government received by 
 Secretary Bryan from Ambassador 
 Gerard at Berlin and made public 
 on May 11. The time required by 
 transmission makes it apparent that 
 this declaration was formulated be- 
 fore the sinking of the Lusitania. 
 
 This declaration was handed to Mr. 
 Gerard by the German Foreign Oflice, 
 which e.vplained that it was being is- 
 sued as a "circular statement" in re- 
 gard to "mistaken attacks by German 
 submarines on commerce vessels of 
 neutral nations." It reads: 
 
 First — The Imperial German Gov- 
 ernment has naturally no intention of 
 causing to be attacked by submarines 
 or aircraft such neutral ships of com- 
 merce in the zone of naval warfare, 
 more delinilely described in the no- 
 tice of the German Admiralty staff of 
 Feb. 4 last, as have lieen guilty of no 
 hostile act. On the contrary, the most 
 definite instructions have repeatedly 
 been issued to German war vessels to 
 avoid attacks on such ships under all 
 circumstances. Even when such ships 
 have contraband of war on board they 
 are dealt with by submarines solely 
 according to the rules of international 
 law applying to prize warfare. 
 
 Second — Should a neutral ship 
 nevertheless come to harm through 
 German suH)marines or aircraft on ac- 
 count of an unfortunate (X) [mis- 
 take?) in the .above-mentioned zone 
 of naval warfare, the German Gov- 
 ernment will unreservedly recognize 
 its resi)c]nsihility therefor. In such a 
 case it will express its regrets and 
 afford damages without first insti- 
 tuting a prize court action. 
 
 Third — It is the custom of the Ger- 
 man Govei'ument as soon as the sink- 
 ing of a neutral ship in the aliove- 
 nientioned zone of naval warfare is 
 ascribed to German war vessels to in- 
 stitute an immediate investigation into 
 the cause. If grounds appear thereby 
 to be given for association of such a 
 hypothesis, the German Navy places 
 itself in communication with the in- 
 terested neutral Government so that 
 the latter may also institute an in- 
 vestigation. If the German Govern- 
 ment is thereby convinced that the 
 ship has been destroyed by Germany's 
 war vessels, it will not delay in carry- 
 ing out the provisions of Paragraph 2 
 aliove. In case the Germ.an Govern- 
 ment, contrary to the viewpoint of the 
 neutral Government, is not convinced 
 by the result of the investig.ation, the 
 German Government has already on 
 several occasions declared itself ready 
 to allow the question to be decided by 
 an international investigation com- 
 mission, according to Chapter 3 of 
 The Hague Convention of Oct. IS, 
 1907, f(U' the peaceful solution of in- 
 ternational disputes. 
 
IB 
 
 SECRETARY BRYAN'S RESIGNATION. 
 
 Note of Retiring Cabinet Member, President Wilson's Acceptance of 
 
 and Mr. Bryan's Formal Statement 
 
 Resignation 
 
 LETTER OF RESIGNATION. 
 
 Secretary Bryan's letter tendering 
 his resigv.atioii follows: 
 
 THE SECRETARY OF .STATE. 
 Washington. June 8, iyi5. 
 
 My Dear llr. President — It is with 
 .sincere regrt-t that I have reached the 
 conclusion that I shouUl return to you 
 the commission of .Secretary of State 
 with which you honored nie at the lie- 
 ginning of your Administration. 
 
 Obedient to your sense of duty and 
 actuated by the highest motives, you 
 have prepared for transmission to "the 
 German Government a note in which 1 
 cannot join without violating what I 
 deem to be an obligation to my coun- 
 try, and the issue involved is of such 
 moment that to remain a member of 
 the Cabinet would be as unfair to you 
 as it would be to the cause which is 
 nearest my heart, namely, the pre- 
 vention of war. 
 
 I therefore respectfully tender my 
 resignation to take effect when the 
 note is sent, unless you jjrefer an e.ir- 
 lier hour. Alike desirous of reaching 
 a peaceful solution of the problems 
 arising out of the use of sul>marines 
 against merchantmen, we And our- 
 selves differing irreconcilalily as to the 
 methods which should be employed. 
 
 It falls to your lot to speak otficially 
 for the nation; I consider it to be 
 none the less my duty to endeavor, as 
 a private citizeti. to promote the ends 
 which you have in view by means 
 which you do not feel at lioerty to use. 
 
 In severing the intimate and pleasant 
 relations which have e.xisted between 
 us during the past two years permit 
 me to acknowledge the profound satis- 
 faction which it has given me to lie as- 
 sociated with you in the important 
 «i>rk which has come before the State 
 Department and to thank you for the 
 courtesies extended. 
 
 With the heartiest good wishes for 
 your personal welfare and for the suc- 
 cess of your Administration, I am. my 
 dear Mr. President, verv trulv vours, 
 
 w. .1. i;i:y.\7\". 
 
 THE PRESIDENT'S ACCEPTANCE. 
 
 The President's acceptance nf fho 
 resignation follows: 
 
 The White Hous.'. .Inn.> s, l.il.i. 
 
 My Dear .\lr. Bryan — I acce]jt your 
 resignation only because you insist 
 uixm its acceptance; and I acceiit it 
 with much more than deep regret — 
 with a feeling of personaf sorrow. 
 
 Our two years of close association 
 have been very delightful to me. Our 
 judgments have accorded in iiractlcal- 
 ly every matter of official duty and of 
 iniblic policy until now; your support 
 of the work and jnirposes of the -Ad- 
 ministration has lieen generous and 
 loyal lieyond praise; .\'our devotion to 
 the duties of your 
 your eagerness to tak 
 
 c 
 
 f>HOTO BY BUCK ^/ft*^ U^O£fri^OOD d v^OC^tVOOO 
 
 ROBERT LANSING 
 Secretary of State ad Interim 
 
 every great opiiortunity for servici' it 
 afforded has been an examfde to the 
 rest of us; you have earned our .affec- 
 tionate admiration and friendshij). 
 Even now we are not separated in 
 reat office and; the object we seek, but only lu the 
 idvantage of method by which we seek it. 
 
 It is for these reasons 
 ing about your retirem 
 Secretaryship of .State 
 ileeper than regret. I 
 plore it. Owr objects 
 an<l we ought to pursu 
 I get her. 
 
 that my feel- 
 ent from the 
 2;oes so much 
 
 sincerely de- 
 
 ;ire the same 
 
 tlie-ni to- 
 
48 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 I yield to your desire only because 
 I inust, and wish to bid you Godspeed 
 in the parting. We shall continue to 
 work for the same causes even when 
 we do not work in the same way. 
 "With affectionate regard, 
 Sincerely yours. 
 
 WOODROW TVILSOX. 
 
 MR. BRYAN'S STATEMENT. 
 
 The foUoivlng is Mr. Bryan's formal 
 statement, given to the press after 
 leaving office: 
 
 My reason for resi.erning is clearly 
 stated in my letter of resignatiori, 
 namely, that I may employ, as a pri- 
 vate citizen, the means which the 
 President does not feel at liberty to 
 employ. I honor him for doing what 
 he believes to be right and I am sure 
 that he desires, as I do, to find a 
 peaceful solution of the problem 
 which has been created by the action 
 of the submarines. 
 
 Two of the points on which we dif- 
 fer, each conscientious in his convic- 
 tion, are; 
 
 First, as to the suggestion of in- 
 vestigation by an international com- 
 niission, and 
 
 Second, as to warnin.g Americans 
 against traveling on belligerent ves- 
 sels or with cargoes of ammu!iition. 
 
 I believe that this nation should 
 frankly state to Germany that we are 
 willing to apply in this case the prin- 
 ciple which we are bound by treaty 
 to apply to disputes between the 
 United States and thirty countries 
 with which we have inade treaties, 
 providing for investigation of all dis- 
 putes of every character and n.ature. 
 
 These treaties, negotiated under this 
 Administration, make war practically 
 impossilile between this country and 
 these thirty governments, represent- 
 ing nearly three-fourths of all the 
 people of the world. 
 
 Among the nations with wliich we 
 have these treaties are Great Britain, 
 France and llussia. No matter what 
 disputes may .'irise between us and 
 these treaty nations, we agree that 
 there shall be nn declar.-itinn .and no 
 commencement of hostilities until the 
 matters in disi)ute iiave been investi- 
 gated by an international ciunmissinn, 
 and a >'ear*s time is allowed for inves- 
 
 tigation and report. This plan was of- 
 fered to all the nations without any 
 exceptions whatever, and Germany 
 was one of the nations that accepted 
 the principle, being the twelfth, I 
 think, to accept. 
 
 Stanos for Arbitration. 
 
 Xo treaty was actually entered into 
 with Germany, but I cannot see that 
 that should stand in the way when 
 both nations indorsed the principle. I 
 do not know whether Germany would 
 accept the offer, but our country 
 should, in my judgment, make the of- 
 fer. Such an offer, if accepted, would 
 at once relieve the tension and silence 
 all the jingoes who are demanding 
 war. 
 
 Germany has always been a friendly 
 nation, and a great many of our peo- 
 ple are of German ancestry. Why 
 should we not deal with Germany ac- 
 cording to this plan to which the 
 nation has pledged its support? 
 
 The second point of difference is as 
 to the course which should tie pursued 
 in regard to Americans traveling on 
 belligerent ships or with cargoes of 
 ammunition. 
 
 Why should an American citizen be 
 permitted to involve his country in 
 war by traveling upon a belligerent 
 ship, when he knows that the ship 
 will pass through a danger zone? The 
 question is not whether .an American 
 citizen has a right, under international 
 law. to travel on a belligerent ship: 
 the question is whether he ought not. 
 out of consideration for his country, 
 if not for his own safety, avoid danger 
 when avoidance is possible. 
 
 It is a very one-sided citizenship 
 that compels a government to go to 
 war over a citizen's rights and yet re- 
 lieve the citizen of all oliligations to 
 consider his nation's welfare. I do not 
 know just how far the President can 
 legally ,go in actually preventing .Amer- 
 icans from traveling on belligerent 
 ships, but I believe the Government 
 should go as far as it can. and that 
 in case of doubt it .should give the ben- 
 efit of the doubt to the Government. 
 
 But even if the Government could 
 not legally prevent citizens from trav- 
 eling on belligerent ships, it could, and 
 in my judgmfnt should, earnestly ad- 
 vise .-Vmerican citizens not to risk 
 themselves or the peace of their coun- 
 
 try, and I have no doubt that these 
 warnings would be heeded. 
 
 Should ATaru Americans. 
 
 President Taft advised Americans to 
 leave Mexico when insurrection broke 
 out there, and President Wilson has 
 repeated the advice. This advice, in 
 my judgment, was eminently wise, and 
 I think the same course should be fol- 
 lowed in regard to warning Americans 
 to keep off vessels subject to attack. 
 
 I think, too, that American pas- 
 senger ships should be prohibited from 
 carrying ammunition. The lives of pas- 
 sengers ought not to be endangered by 
 cargoes of ammunition whether that 
 danger comes from possible explosions 
 within or from possible attacks from 
 without. Passen.gers and ammunition 
 should not travel together. The at- 
 tempt to prevent American citizens 
 from incurring these risks is entirely 
 consistent with the effort which our 
 Government is niaking to prevent at- 
 tacks from submarines. 
 
 The use of one remedy does not ex- 
 clude the use of the other. The most 
 familiar illustration is to be found in 
 the action taken by municipal authori- 
 ties during a riot. It is the duty of the 
 Mayor to suppress the mob, and to 
 prevent violence, but he does not hes- 
 itate to warn citizens to keep off the 
 streets during the riots. He does not 
 question their right to ues the streets, 
 but for their own protection and in the 
 interest of order he warns them not 
 to incur the risks involved in going 
 upon the streets when men are shoot- 
 ing at each other. 
 
 The President does not feel justified 
 in taking the action above stated. That 
 is, he does not feel justified, first, in 
 suggesting the submission of the con- 
 troversy to investigation, or. second, 
 in warning the people not to incur the 
 extr.a h.azards in traveling on belliger- 
 ent ships or on ships carrying amrnu- 
 nitiDU. And he may be right in the 
 position he has taken, Ijut as a pri- 
 vate citizen I am free to urge both of 
 these propositions, and to call public 
 attention to these remedies in the 
 hojie of securing such an expression 
 of public sentiment as will support the 
 President in employing these reme- 
 dies, if in the future, he finds it con- 
 sistent with his sense of dt\ty to favor 
 them. 
 
 STATUS OF THE DECLARATION OF LONDON, 
 
 Notes Relating to the Application of Laws of Naval Warfare as 
 
 Laid Down in 1909 
 
 INQUIRY OF MR. BRYAN. 
 
 The Secretary of State to Ambassa- 
 dor II'. H. Page. Same mutatis 
 mxtauftis to the Americati Embassies 
 at St. Petersburg. Paris, Berlin and 
 X'tetnia and the .American Legation at 
 Bi (issels: 
 
 Department of State. 
 Washington. August G. I'.il4. 
 
 Mr. Bryan instructs Mr. I'ase to in- 
 eiuire whether the British Government 
 is willin.y tn agree that the laws of 
 li.'iv.ul w.irfare as laid dnwn by the 
 
 Declaration of London of 190i» shall 
 be applicable to naval warfare dur- 
 ing the present conflict in Europe pro- 
 vided that the governments with 
 whom Great Britain is or may be 
 at war also agree to such application. 
 Mr. Br>'an further instructs Mr. Page 
 to .state that the Government of the 
 I'niied States believes that an accep- 
 tance of these laws Iiy the belligerents 
 would iirevent grave misunderstand- 
 ings which may .arise as to the relations 
 between neutral powers and the l.ielli.g- 
 erenis. Mr. Br\an adds that it is 
 earnestly hoped that this inijuiry may 
 
 receive favorable consideration. 
 
 t)n \ugust 13. Ambassador Penfield 
 notified the Secretary of State that the 
 Austria-Hungarian Government h.ad 
 instructed their forces to observe stip- 
 ulations of Declaration of London as 
 applied to naval as well as land war- 
 fare di'ring the present conflict con- 
 ditional on like observance on part 
 of the enemy. 
 
 The German Government, on August 
 2i), notifird this Government, through 
 Ambassador Gerard, that it would ap- 
 ply the Declaration of London, pro- 
 
STATUS OF THE DECLARATION OF LONDON. 
 
 49 
 
 vided its iJ'''JVisions were not disre- 
 garded by uther belligerents. 
 
 BRITISH REPLY TO INQUIRY. 
 
 Mivistcr for Foreign Affairs of 
 Great Britain to Ambassador W. H. 
 Payc : 
 
 London. August 22. i;il4. 
 
 Your Excellency — On the 7th in- 
 stant you were so good as to address to 
 me a note inquiring, pursuant to in- 
 structions from the Secretary of State 
 at Washington, whether His ila.iesty's 
 Government were willing to agree that 
 the laws of naval warfare, as laid 
 down by the Declaration of London. 
 ItUUi. should be applicable to naval 
 warfare during the present European 
 contlict. provided that the govern- 
 ments with whom Great Britain is at 
 war. or with whom her relations are 
 not normal, also agree to such applica- 
 tion. 
 
 Your Excellency added that it was 
 the Ijelief of your Government th.at 
 the acceptance of these laws by the 
 belligerents would prevent the possi- 
 bility of grave misunderstandings as 
 to the relations between belligerents 
 and neutrals. 
 
 I have the honor to inform Y'our 
 Excellency that His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment, who attach great importance tc 
 the views expressed in Y'our Excellen- 
 cy's note and are aniinated by a keen 
 desire to consult so far as possible the 
 interests of neutral countries, have 
 given this matter their most careful 
 consideration and have pleasure in 
 stating that they have decided to adopt 
 generally the rulfs of the declaration 
 in iiuestion. suViject to certain modifi- 
 cations and additions which they .iudge 
 indispensable to the efHcient conduct 
 of their naval operations. A detailed 
 explanation of these additions and 
 modifications is contained in the in- 
 closed memorandum. 
 
 The necessary .steps to carry the 
 aliove decision into effect have now 
 been taken by the issue of an order in 
 council, of which I have the honor to 
 inclose copies herein for Y'our Excel- 
 lenc.v's information and for transmis- 
 sion to \'our Governnnent. 
 
 1 may add that His Jla.iesty's Gov- 
 ernment, in deciding to adhere to the 
 rules (jf the Declaration of London, 
 subject only to the aforesaid modifica- 
 tions and additions, ha^'e not waited 
 to learn the intentions of the enemy 
 governments, but have been actuated 
 by a desire to terminate at the earliest 
 moment the condition of tmcertainty 
 which has been prejudicing the inter- 
 ests of neutral trade. I have. etc.. 
 
 E. A. ri:<>\VF,. 
 
 MEMORANDUM ON CONTRABAND 
 
 1. Tht lists of contraband alrea<b' 
 published b\' His Majest,\' are substi- 
 lut'-'d for those contained in articles 
 22 and 24 of the Declaration of Lon- 
 don. Lists similar to those published 
 by His Majesty have l>een issued hy the 
 French Go\"ernment. 
 
 2. His Majesty's Government do 
 not feel able to accejtt in its entirety 
 the rule laid down in article 3S of the 
 declaration. It has been the practice 
 of the British navy to treat as liable 
 to capture a vessel which carried con- 
 traband of war with false papers if she 
 was encountered on the return voyage, 
 and to this exception His Majesty's 
 Government feel it necessary to ad- 
 here. 
 
 3. The peculiar conditions in the 
 present war due to the fact that neu- 
 tral ports .such as Rotterdam are the 
 chief means of access to a large part 
 of Germany and that exceptional 
 measures have been taken in the 
 enemy country for the control by the 
 government of the entire supply of 
 foodstuffs have convinced His Majes- 
 t.v's Government that inodifications are 
 required in the applications of articles 
 3 4 and 3.5 of the declaration. These 
 nicdifications are contained in para- 
 graphs 3 and 5 of the accompanying 
 Or ler in Council. 
 
 I. Article 15 of the declaration 
 contains a provision as to presumptive 
 knowledge of the blockade in certain 
 ca.ses if the vessel has sailed from a 
 neutral i>ort. Xo mention is made of 
 British or allied enemy ports. These 
 omissions are supplied by article 4 of 
 the Order in Council. 
 
 5. The Lirder in Cotmcil also pro- 
 vides for the accefitance of the very 
 valuable commentary on the declara- 
 tion which was embodied in the gen- 
 eral report liy Monsieur Renault. 
 
 The British C>rder in Cotmcil of 
 .\ugnst 20. I'jl4. with additions and 
 modifications to the Declaration of 
 London, is printed under "Exchange of 
 Notes with Great Britain." 
 
 The l"r</nch Government ni'tified 
 the State Department that the Decla- 
 ration of London would be oljserved 
 with certain reservations. Sulisequent 
 revisions of tlie list of contraband as 
 adopted by Great Britain and her 
 allies will be found under sejutrate 
 headini;s _ 
 
 U. S. WITHDRAWS SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 The Acting Secretanj of State to 
 Ambassador IT'. H. Page: 
 
 \\'ashington, Oct<iber 22. 1914. 
 
 Inasnnich as the British Govern- 
 ment consider that the conditions of 
 
 the present Europe.m conflict make it 
 impossilde for them to accci.t without 
 modification the Declaration of L'.'n- 
 don. you are re(|Uested to infoiin His 
 Majesty's GoveiTUnent that in the cir- 
 cumstances the Government of the 
 United States feels oldiged to with- 
 draw its suggestion that the Declara- 
 tion of London Ije adcjpted as a tem- 
 porary code of naval warfare to be 
 (observed b\- belligerents .and neutrals 
 dviring the present war; tluit theiefore 
 this ("lovernmenl ^\■ill insist that the 
 rights ami duties of the I'nited States 
 and its citizens in the present war be 
 delined \>y the existing rules of inter- 
 nati(mal law and the treaties of the 
 t'nited States irres]>ecti ve of the pro- 
 visions i>f the Declaration of London: 
 ami that this Government reserves to 
 itself the right to enter a protest or 
 demand in each case in which those 
 rights and duties so defined are \'ir)- 
 lateil or their free exercise interfered 
 with by the authorities of His Britan- 
 nic Majest.\'s Government. 
 
 LAXSIXG. 
 
 The Acting Secretary of State to 
 Aml}assador Gerard: 
 
 Washington, Oct. 24, 1914, 5 p.m. 
 
 iteferring to Department's August 
 ij. 1 p.m.. and Embassy's October 22, 
 relative to the Declaration of London. 
 Mr. Lansing instructs Mr. Gerard to 
 inform the German Government that 
 the suggestion of the department to 
 belligerents as to the adoption of dec- 
 laration for sake of uniformity as to a 
 temporary code of naval warfare dur- 
 ing the present conflict has Ijeen with- 
 drawn because some of the belliger- 
 ents are unwilling to accept the decla- 
 ration without inodifications and that 
 this Government will therefore insist 
 th.at the rights and duties of the Gov- 
 ernment and citizens of the United 
 States in the present war be defined 
 by existing rules of international law 
 aiid the treaties of the t^nited States 
 without regard to the provisions of the 
 declaration and that the Government 
 of the United States reserves to itself 
 the right to enter a protest or demand 
 in every case in which the riahts and 
 duties so defined are violated f.r their 
 free exercise interlered with by the 
 authorities of the belligerent govern- 
 ments. 
 
 [The same message was si-nt to the 
 embassies at St. Peterslnirg. \'ieiina 
 and Baris. and th.- leg.ition at Brus- 
 sels.] 
 
TREATY OF 1828 WITH PRUSSIA 
 
 Text of Old Document Cited in Recent Notes Exchanged Between This 
 
 Government and Germany 
 
 TREATY OF 1828. 
 
 The Treaty of 1S2S, between the 
 United States and Prussia, mentioned 
 in the Oerman note on the sinkinr/ of 
 the William P. Frye. and referred to 
 in the American note to Germany on 
 the Lnsitaniu and other cases, is as 
 folloics: 
 
 The United States of America and 
 hiK Majesty the King of Prussia, 
 equally animated with the desire of 
 maintaining the relations of good un- 
 derstandins which have hitherto so 
 happily subsisted between their re- 
 sjiective States, of extending, also, and 
 consolidating the commercial inter- 
 course between them, and convinced 
 that this object cannot better be ac- 
 complished than by adopting the sys- 
 tem of an entire freedom of naviga- 
 tion, and a perfect reciprocity, based 
 upon principles of equity equally ben- 
 eficial to both countries and applic- 
 able in time of peace as well as in 
 time of war, have, in consequence, 
 agreed to enter into negotiations for 
 the conclusion of a treaty of naviga- 
 tion and commerce; for which pur- 
 pose the President of the United 
 States has conferred full powers on 
 Henry Clay, their Secretary of State; 
 and his Majesty the King of Prussia 
 has conferred like powers on the 
 Sieur Ludwig Xeiderstetter, charge 
 d'affaires of his said Majesty, near 
 the United States; and the said pleni- 
 potentiaries having exchanged their 
 .-i.aid full powers, found in good and 
 due form, have concluded and signed 
 the following articles: 
 
 .\rli<'Ic I. 
 
 There shall be between the terri- 
 torioc of the hiiih contracting i>arties 
 a reciprocate body of commerce and 
 navigation. The inhabitants of their 
 respective Slates shall mutually have 
 liberty to enter the ports, places, and 
 rivers of the territories of each i>arty, 
 wherever foreign comniei-ce is jn'rmit- 
 ted. They shall be at liberty to so- 
 journ and reside in all parts whatso- 
 ever of salt} territories, in order to at- 
 tend to their affairs, and they shall 
 enjoy to that effect the same secvirity 
 and protection as natives of the coun- 
 try wherein they reside, on condition 
 of their submitting to the laws .and 
 ordinances there prev.iiUng. 
 
 Articio 11. 
 
 Prussian vessels .arriving either 
 laden or in ballast, in the p.jrts of the 
 United States of .America: and. recip- 
 rocally vessels of the Uniteil States 
 arriving either laden or in b.illast. in 
 the ports of the Kingdom of Prussia, 
 sh.all lie treated, on their enti-ance, 
 during their stay, and nt their de- 
 Iiarture. upon the same footing as na- 
 tional vessels, ciuning from the same 
 place, with respect to the duties of 
 tonnage, lighthouses, pilotage, sal- 
 vage, and port charges, as well ns to 
 the fees and perquisites of luiblic of- 
 ficers, and all other duties and 
 charges, of whatever kind or denomi- 
 nation, levied in the name, or to the 
 profit, of the Government, the local 
 authorities, or of any private estab- 
 lishment whatsoever. 
 
 Article III. 
 
 All kind of merchandise and ar- 
 ticles of commerce, either the produce 
 of the soil or the industry of the 
 United States of America, or of any 
 other country, which may be lawfully 
 imported into the ports of the King- 
 doin of Pru.ssia. in Prussian ve.ssels, 
 may. also, be so imported in vessels 
 of the United States of America, with- 
 out paying other or higher duties or 
 charges, of whatever kind or denomi- 
 nation, levied in the name, or to the 
 profit of the Government, the local 
 authorities, or of any private estab- 
 lishments whosoever, than if the 
 same merchandise or produce had 
 been im]><;>rted in Prussian vessels. 
 
 And. reciprocally, all kinds of mer- 
 chandise and articles of commei'ce, 
 either the produce of the soil or of 
 the industry of the Kingdom of Prus- 
 sia, or of any other country, which 
 may be lawfully imported into the 
 ports of the United States, in vessels 
 of the said States, may also be so 
 imported in Prussian vessels, with- 
 out paying other or higher duties or 
 charges, of whatever kind or denomi- 
 nation, levied in the name, or to the 
 profit of the Government, the local 
 authorities or of any private estab- 
 lishments whatsoever, than if the 
 same merchandise or produce had 
 been imported in vessels of the United 
 States of America. 
 
 .\iti<lo IV. 
 
 To prevent the iiossibilify of any 
 misunderstanding, it is hereliy de- 
 clared that the stipulations contained 
 in the two preceding articles are to 
 their full extent, applicable to Prus- 
 sian ve.ssel.s and their cargoes arriv- 
 ing in the ports of the United States 
 of America; and. recii")rocall,\'. to ves- 
 sels of the s,aid States and their car- 
 goes, arriving in the ports of the 
 Kingdom of Pru.ssia. whether the said 
 vessels clear directlv from the ports 
 of the country to which they respec- 
 tively belong, or from the ports of 
 any other foreign cotmtry. 
 
 .'Vrticle V. 
 
 Xo higher or other duties shall be 
 imposed on the importation into the 
 United States, of any article, the pro- 
 duce or manufacture of Prussia: and 
 no higher or other duties shall he iin- 
 posed im the importatifui into the 
 Kingdom of Piaissia. of anv article, 
 the produce or manufacture of the 
 United States, th.an are. or shall be 
 payable on the like article, being the 
 produce or manufact\ire of any other 
 foreign country. Xor shall nnv )iro- 
 hibition be imposed on the import.a- 
 tion or exportation of any article, the 
 Produce or manufacture of the United 
 States, or of Prussia, to, or from, the 
 ports of the TTnited States, or to, or 
 from, the ports of Prussia, which 
 shall not equally extend to all other 
 nations, 
 
 .Article VI. 
 
 A]\ kind of merchandise and ar- 
 ticles of commerce, either the produce 
 of the soil or of the industry of the 
 United States of America, or of any 
 other country, which may be lawf\illy 
 exported from the ports of the said 
 United States, in national vessels, may. 
 
 also, lie exported therefrom in Prus- 
 sian vessels, without paying other or 
 higher duties or charges, of whatever 
 kind or denoinination, levied in the 
 name of. or to the profit of the Gov- 
 ernment, the local authorities, or of 
 any private establishments whatso- 
 ever, than if the same merchandise 
 or produce had been exported in ves- 
 sels of the United States of America. 
 
 An exact reciprocity shall be ob- 
 served in the ports of the Kingdona of 
 Prussia, so that all kind of merchan- 
 dise and articles of commerce, either 
 the produce of the soil or the industry 
 of the said kingdom, or of any other 
 country, which inay be lawfully ex- 
 ported from Prussian ports in na- 
 tional vessels, may also be exported 
 therefrom in vessels of the United 
 States of America, without paying 
 other or higher duties or charges of 
 whatever kind or denomination, 
 levied in the name, or to the profit 
 of the Government, the local author- 
 ities, or of any private establishments 
 whatsoever, than if the same mer- 
 chandise or produce had been ex- 
 ported in Prussian vessels. 
 
 Article VII. 
 
 The preceding articles arc not ap- 
 plicalile to the coastwise navigation of 
 the two countries, which is respec- 
 tively reserved by each of the high 
 contracting parties exclusivelv to it- 
 .self. 
 
 Article VIII. 
 
 X'o priority or preference shall be 
 given, directly or indirectly, by either 
 of the contracting parties, nor by any 
 company, corporation, or agent, act- 
 ing on their behalf "V under their 
 authority, in the purchase of any ar- 
 ticle of coirmierce, lawfully imported, 
 on account of or in reference to the 
 char.acter of the ves.sel, whether it be 
 of the one party or of the other, in 
 which such article was imported; it 
 being the true intent and meaning of 
 the ccmtracting parties that no dis- 
 tinction or difference whatever shall 
 be made in this respect. 
 
 .\rticlo IX. 
 
 If either party shall hereafter grant 
 to any other nation any particular 
 favor in navigation or commerce it 
 shall immediately become common to 
 the other party, freely, where it is 
 freely granted to such other nation, 
 or on yielding the .same compensa- 
 tion when the grant is conditional. 
 
 Article X. 
 
 The two contr.acting p.arties have 
 granted to each other the liberty of 
 having, each in the ports of the other. 
 Consuls, Vice Consuls, agents, and 
 commis.saries of their own appoint- 
 ment, who .shall enjoy the same priv- 
 ileges and powers as those of the most 
 favored nations. P.ut if any such 
 Consuls shall exercise commerce, they 
 shall lie submitted to the same laws 
 and usages to which the private in- 
 dividuals of their nation are submit- 
 ted in the same place. 
 
 The Consuls. Vice Constils, and 
 coiTiiTiercial agents shall have the 
 rights, as such, to sit as judges and 
 
TREATY OF 1828 WITH PRUSSIA. 
 
 51 
 
 arbitrators in such differences as may 
 arise between the Captains and crews 
 of the vessels belonging to the nation 
 whose interests are committed to their 
 charge without the interference of the 
 local authorities, unless the conduct 
 of the crews or of the Captain should 
 disturb the order or tranquility of the 
 country, or the said Consuls, Vice 
 Consuls, or commercial agents should 
 require their assistance to cause their 
 decisions to be carried into effect or 
 supported. It is, however, under- 
 stood, that this species of judgment 
 or arbitration shall not deprive the 
 contending parties of the right they 
 have to resort, on their return, to the 
 judicial authority of their country. 
 
 Article XI. 
 
 The said Consuls, Vice Consuls, and 
 Commercial Agents are authorized to 
 require the assistance of the local 
 authorities for the search, arrest, and 
 imprisonment of the deserters from 
 the ships of war and merchant ves- 
 sels of their country. For this pur- 
 pose they shall apply to the com- 
 petent tribunals. Judges, and officers, 
 and shall, in writing, demand said 
 deserters, proving by the exhibition 
 of the registers of the vessels, the 
 rolls of the crews, or by other of- 
 ficial documents, that such individuals 
 formed part of the crews; and, on 
 this reclamation being thus substan- 
 tiated, the surrender shall not be re- 
 fused. Such deserters, when arrested, 
 shall be placed at the disposal of the 
 .said Consuls. Vice Consuls, or Com- 
 mercial Agents, and may be confined 
 in the public prisons at the request 
 and cost of those who shall claim 
 them, in order to be sent to the ves- 
 sels to which they belonged, or to 
 others of the same country. But if 
 not sent back within three months 
 from the day of their arrest, they 
 shall be set at liberty and shall not 
 be again arrested for the same cause. 
 However, if the deserter should be 
 found to have committed any crime 
 or offense, his surrender may be de- 
 layed until the tribunal before which 
 his ca.se shall be depending shall have 
 pronounced his sentence and such 
 sentence shall have been carried into 
 effect. 
 
 Article XII. 
 
 The twelfth article of the Treaty of 
 Amity and Commerce, concluded be- 
 tween the parties in 1785, and the ar- 
 ticles from the thirteenth to the 
 twenty-fourth, inclusive, of that which 
 was concluded at Berlin in 1799. with 
 the exception of the last paragraph in 
 the nineteenth article, relating to 
 treaties with Great Britain, are here- 
 by revived with the .same force and 
 virtue as if they made part of the 
 
 context of the present treaty, it being, 
 however, understood, that the stipu- 
 lations contained in the articles thus 
 revived shall be always considered as 
 in no manner affecting the ti'eaties 
 or conventions concluded by eitiier 
 party with other powers during the 
 interval between the expiration of tlie 
 .said Treaty of 1799 and the com- 
 mencement of the operation of the 
 present treaty. 
 
 The parties still desirous, in con- 
 formity with their intention declared 
 in the twelfth article of the said 
 Treaty of 1799, to establish between 
 themselves, or in concert with other 
 maritime powers, further provisions, 
 to insure just protection and freedom 
 to neutral navigation and commerce, 
 and which may, at the same time, 
 advance the cause of civilization and 
 humanity, engage again to treat on 
 this sul>ject at some future and con- 
 venient period. 
 
 Article XIII. 
 
 Considering the remoteness of the 
 respective countries of the two high 
 contracting parties, and the uncer- 
 tainty resulting therefrom, with re- 
 spect to the various events which may 
 take place, it is agreed that a mer- 
 chant vessel belonging to either of 
 them, which may be bound to a port 
 supposed at the time of its departure 
 to be blockaded, shall not, however, 
 l)e captured or condemned for liaving 
 attempted a lirst time to enter said 
 port, unless it can be proved that said 
 vessel could and ought to have 
 learned, during its voyage, that the 
 blockade of the place in question still 
 continued. But all vessels which, af- 
 ter liaving been warned off once, 
 shall, during the same voyage, at- 
 tempt a second time to enter the same 
 blockaded port during the continu- 
 ance of the said vlockade, shall then 
 sul>ject themselves to be detained and 
 condemned. 
 
 Article XIV. 
 
 The citizens or subjects of each 
 party shall have power to dispose of 
 their personal goods within the juris- 
 diction of the other, by testament, do- 
 nation, or otherwise; and their repre- 
 sentatives, being citizens or subjects 
 of the other party, shall succeed to 
 their said personal .goods, whether by 
 testament or ab intestato, and may 
 t.ake possession thereof, either by 
 theinselves or by others acting for 
 them, .and dispose of the same at their 
 will, paying such dues only as the 
 inhabitants of the country wherein 
 the s.aid goods are shall be subject 
 to pay in like ca.ses. And in case of 
 the al)sence of the representative, 
 such care shall be taken of the said 
 goods as would be taken of the goods 
 
 of a native, in like case, until the 
 lawful owner may take measures for 
 receiving them. And if question 
 should .arise among several claimants 
 to wliicli of them said goods lielong 
 the same shall Ije decided finally by 
 the laws and .Judges of the land 
 wherein the said goods are. And 
 where, on the death of any person 
 holding equal estate within the ter- 
 ritories of the one party, such real 
 estate would, by the laws of the land, 
 descend on a citizen or subject of 
 the other, were he not disqualified by 
 alienage, such citizen or subject shall 
 be allowed a reasonable time to sell 
 the same, and to withdraw the pro- 
 ceeds without molestation and exempt 
 frimi all duties of detraction on the 
 part of the Government of the re- 
 spective States. But this article shall 
 not derogate in any manner from the 
 force of the laws already published, 
 or hereafter to be published by his 
 Majesty the King of Prussia, to pre- 
 vent the einigration of his subjects. 
 
 Article XV. 
 
 The present treaty shall continue 
 in force for twelve years, counting 
 from the day of the exchange of the 
 ratifications; and if twelve months he- 
 fore the expiration of that period, 
 neither of the high contracting parties 
 shall have announced, by an official 
 notilication to the other its intention 
 to arrest the operation of said treaty, 
 it shall remain binding for one year 
 lie>-ond that time, and sr) on, imlil 
 tlie expiration of the tweU-e mouths 
 which will follow a similar notifica- 
 tion whatever the time at which it 
 may take place. 
 
 Article XVI. 
 
 This treaty shall be approved and 
 ratified by the President of the Uniteil 
 States of America. )3y, and with the 
 advice and consent of the Senate 
 thereof .and by his Ilajesty the King 
 of I'ru.ssia. and the ratifications shall 
 lie exchanged in the City of Wash- 
 ington, within nine nuinths from the 
 date of the signature hereof, or 
 sooner, if possilde. 
 
 In faith whereof the respective 
 rdeniiiotentiaries have signed the 
 above articles, both in the French and 
 JOnglish languages; and they have 
 thei'elo affixed their seals: Decl.aring. 
 nevertheless, that the signing in both 
 languages shall not be brought into 
 precedent, nor in any way operate to 
 llie prejudice of cither party. 
 
 IJone in triplicate at the City of 
 \V;ishington, on the fir.st day of May, 
 in the year of our Bord One Thousand 
 Kight Hundred .ind Twenty-eight; 
 and the fifty-second of the Indejjen- 
 dence of the United States of America. 
 [Seal.] H. CLAY. 
 [.Seal.] LUDWIG NBIDERSTETTER. 
 
 MAHHEWS PIANO WAREROOMS 
 
 FRANCIS S. MATTHEWS, Proprietor 
 
 PIANOS, PLAYER-PIANOS and TALKING MACHINES 
 
 Brooklyn representative for the famous Krakauer, Christnian and W. P. Haines & Co. Pianos 
 and Player-Pianos. Sold on easy terms if desired. 
 
 We specialize in fine Repairing, Refinishing and Rebuilding of Pianos. Lost tone restored. 
 Player mechanisms built into any piano at reasonable cost. Send card, representative will call. 
 
 422 GATES AVE., NEAR NOSTRAND AVE. 
 
 Phone 3859-W Bedford Hrooklyn, N. Y. 
 
52 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WAR. 
 
 r 
 
 "^ 
 
 When you want a special treat without 
 paying an extravagant pi ice for it, take 
 home a box of 
 
 WALLACE'S 
 
 CHOCOLATES 
 
 You will instantly appreciate their su- 
 periority over other kinds. 
 
 "Candies of Character" 
 They sweeten life. 
 
 Sold in boxes at 
 
 60c., 80c., $1.00 the Box 
 
 Your local dealer should have them. 
 Ask for and insist upon getting 
 
 WALLACE'S 
 
 a^ 
 
 OF 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 Made for the fine retail trade and a 
 
 discriminating public. 
 
 Washington and Park Aves., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 :±J 
 
 The Brooklyn Daily 
 
 EAGLE 
 
 Is the Home Newspaper 
 of Brooklyn and Long Island 
 
 Strictly in the interest of the public 
 welfare and a loyal representative 
 of the community in which it is 
 published. 
 
 The Eagle is the only paper having 
 Associated Press service. 
 
 An Institutional New^spaper. 
 
 ESTABLISHED IN 1841 
 
 Use STARS AND STRIPES Candles 
 The Genuine Safety Night Light 
 
 Bright, Clean, Odorless, Smokeless, Sparkless, Hygienic, Sanitary 
 
 Be Sure and Ask for "Stars and Stripes" Candles 
 
 Accept no Substitute 
 
 Warranted to burn 1 hours. Price 1 cent each. Glass container, will 
 not blacken or crack, 5 cents. Can be had at all grocers, or send 25 
 cents for box of 20 candles and glass holder, to 
 
 SAFETY NIGHT LIGHT CO. 
 
 147 JACKSON STREET, BROOKLYN, N. Y. 
 
 COLONIAL VAN COMPANY 
 Fireproof Storage Warehouse 
 
 TELEPHONE 5110 BUSHWICK 
 
 FURNITURE and PIANOS MOVED and STORED 
 
 AT LOWEST RATES 
 
 ALL -WORK DOMO WITH AITO VANS 
 
 LICENSED PIANO MOVERS 
 
 OUT OF TOWN MOVING OUR SPECIALTY 
 
 Packing and Shipping to All Parts of the World 
 
 niOKORi: \ov movk okt oiir estimates 
 Write or Phone and We Will Send Our RepresentatiTe 
 
 Cor. Gates and St. Nicholas Aves., 
 
 BROOKLYN, New York. 
 
/f= 
 
 =!\ 
 
 A GAS WATER HEATER 
 
 IS A SUMMER NECESSITY 
 
 A Simplex Water Heater should be in every home. It is an efficient 
 appliance that gives an abundant supply of hot water quickly and 
 economically. 
 
 It is neat in design, occupies little space and is attached to boiler 
 as shown in the illustration. 
 
 Hot Water for dish- 
 washing purposes may be 
 obtained in less than four 
 minutes. 
 
 Hot Water sufficient 
 for a bath may be ob- 
 tained in less than 20 
 minutes. 
 
 No. 7A Simplex 
 
 The Simplex has two scientifically designed, spiral shaped, copper 
 heating coils inclosed in a black japanned cast iron jacket. 
 
 A door extending the full length of the Gas Water Heater gives 
 easy access to the coil and to the burner for lighting. 
 
 Price $16.00 
 
 $4.00 Down and $1.00 Per Month lor 12 Months 
 
 CASH PRICE $14.40 
 
 On Display and Demonstrated at All Branches of 
 
 The Brooklyn union Gas Company 
 
 ^ 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 020 914 143 7 4 
 
 i;f)e peoples! tE^rusit Company 
 
 INCORPORATED 1889 
 
 181-183 MONTAGUE STREET 
 
 NOSTRAND AVENUE, CORNER HERKIMER STREET 
 CLINTON AVENUE, CORNER MYRTLE AVENUE 
 FIFTH AVENUE, CORNER FIFTY-FOURTH STREET 
 43 FLATBUSH AVENUE, NEAR FULTON STREET 
 
 MEMBER OF THE NEW YORK CLEARING HOUSE 
 
 J. G. DETTMER 
 HORACE J. MORSE 
 WILLIAM B. HILL 
 HOWARD M. SMITH 
 DAVID A. BOODY 
 CLARENCE W. SEAMANS 
 HERBERT L. PRATT 
 WILLIAM C. COURTNEY 
 
 TRUSTEES 
 
 WILLIAM H. GOOD 
 W. EUGENE KIMBALL 
 ADRIAN T. K.1ERNAN 
 CHARLES M. ENGLIS 
 WILLIAM E. HARMON 
 CHARLES A. BOODY 
 MAX RUCKGABER, Jr. 
 WALTER V. CRANFORD 
 
 CHARLES E. ROBERTSON 
 JAMES H. JOURDAN 
 JOHN F. HILDEBRAND 
 THOMAS E. MURRAY 
 GEORGE W. DAVISON 
 ALBERT TAG 
 ANDREW D. BAIRD 
 
 OFFICERS 
 
 CHARLES A. BOODY, President 
 
 J. G. DETTMER, 1st Vice-Pres. J. FRANK BIRDSELL, Asst. Sec'y 
 
 HORACE J. MORSE, 2d Vice-Pres. HENRY M. HEATH, Asst. Sec'y 
 
 CHARLES L. SCHENCK, 3d V.-Pres. & Sec'y CLARENCE I. McGOWAN. Asst. Sec'y 
 
 WILLIAM A, FISCHER, Asst. Sec'y WILLIAM F. AYLING. Asst. Sec'y 
 
 By combining liberal treatment w^ith prompt, 
 courteous and efficient service, a mutually profitable 
 relationship is established betw^een The Peoples Trust 
 Company and its many customers. Transact your busi- 
 ness either at our Main Office or any Branch.