sibly 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 arrangement designated to limit importation into neutral countries adjacent to Germany, to quantities actually required in those countries for bona fide home consumption. The American 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 representative of the American packers. This stage having now been reached, His Majesty's Government have decided to go on with the prize-court proceedings 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 injury 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 American trade with Germany and with neutral countries supplying Germany is annexed hereto. It certainly tends to disprove any contention that American 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. Similar 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 pointing 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 indicating 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 Government consider that the abnormal increase 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 sympathetic consideration. (The New York Times, May 21, 1915.)

The Secretary of State, on May 21, made the following statement touching an error in the foregoing:

The foreign-trade advisers' attention has been called to the statement of the foreign office of Great Britain, published in this morning's papers, an extract from which follows:

66

Fourth. In accepting this scheme, which, it may be noted, applies to shipments of cotton for a neutral destination only, the principal representatives of the American interests described it to His Majesty's ambassador at Washington as conceding all that the American interests could properly ask. It was never suggested that vessels or cargoes with an enemy destination should be allowed to proceed. His Majesty's Government were, moreover, given to understand that the provisions of the arrangements were acceptable to the United States Government."

The plan referred to is the one which was entered into between the cotton shippers of this country and the British Embassy, a portion of which is quoted in the Statement of the British foreign office.

Without discussing at this time the statement that "it was never suggested that vessels or cargoes with an enemy destination should be allowed to proceed," the foreign-trade advisers, who informally and unofficially represented the cotton shippers in the negotiations which led to the so-called cotton arrangement, state that it was distinctly understood between Sir Arthur Cecil Spring-Rice, the British ambassador, and Robert F. Rose, the foreign-trade adviser conducting this discussion on behalf of the American cotton exporters, that nothing done by the foreign-trade advisers should be regarded as official, and that everything done was to be considered as informal and unofficial, and in no way binding the United States Government to any arrangement reached, or be construed as a recognition of the order in council to be issued or the declaration of March 1 which has been issued. This statement was made to the British ambassador on March 3 when the first conference in the matter was held, was repeated at each subsequent conference, and each time the absolute assurance from the British ambassador was received that, in acting for the cotton shippers in any way, the foreign-trade advisers were to be regarded as not representing the United States Government in any manner. (The New York Times, May 22, 1915.)

Statement of the British Embassy, May 21, 1915, correcting the error in the foregoing:

The terms of the arrangement quoted in the British statement as telegraphed were arrived at in London between a private representative of the American cotton interests in London and British officials in London. The reference to the British ambassador in paragraph 4 is, therefore, an error.

The arrangement in question formed the subject of conversations between the ambassador and representatives of the cotton interests in this country. There never was any question of a formal and official understanding between the United States Government and the British Embassy. (The New York Times, May 22, 1915.)

A further statement of England upon the treatment of neutral rights on the sea, June 17, 1915:

British memorandum, June 17, 1915, in reference to the treatment of American commerce. (According to the letter of the American

* * *

ambassador, transmitting the memorandum, "it is not an answer to the principles set forth in the note of March 30, but merely an explanation of concrete cases and the regulations under which they are dealt with."

(The secretary of state for foreign affairs ad interim to the American ambassador.)

1. His Majesty's Government have on various occasions, and notably in the communication which was addressed to the United States ambassador on March 15 last, given assurances to the United States Government that they would make it their first aim to minimize the inconvenience which must inevitably be caused to neutral commerce from the existence of a state of war at sea, and in particular from the measures taken by the allied Governments for the restriction of the enemies' over-sea trade. In view of the representation and complaints made to this department by the ambassador from time to time as to the peculiar hardships alleged to have been wrongly inflicted on American trade and shipping by the operation of those measures, His Majesty's Government desire to offer the following observations respecting the manner in which they have consistently endeavored to give practical effect to those assurances:

2. It will be recalled that at the moment when His Majesty's Government announced their measures against enemy commerce, they declared their intention to refrain altogether from the exercise of the right to confiscate ships or cargoes which belligerents had always previously claimed in respect to breaches of blockade; that, under Article 1 of the enactment of March 11 it was expressly provided that any person claiming to be interested in goods placed in the prize court in pursuance of the provision of that enactment, might forthwith issue a writ against the proper officers of the Crown, the object being to confer upon claimants the right to institute proceedings without waiting for the writ of the procurator general, and thus to remove all possible cause of legitimate grievance on account of delay; and that, finally, a pacific assurance was given to the United States Government that the instructions to be issued by His Majesty's Government to the fleet and to the customs officials and executive officials concerned, would impress upon them the duty of acting with the utmost dispatch consistent with the object in view and of showing in every case such consideration for neutrals as might be compatible with that object, namely, to prevent vessels carrying goods for or coming from the enemy's territory.

3. The above measures were all designed to alleviate the burdens imposed upon neutral sea-borne commerce in general. Various special concessions, over and above those enumerated, have, moreover, been made in favor of United States citizens.

4. Thus His Majesty's Government have acted as regards shipments of American cotton in accordance with the provisions of an arrangement were, as the United States ambassador is aware, as of the American cotton interests. In accepting this scheme the principal representative of those interests described it as conceding all that American interests could properly ask. The provisions of the arrangement were, as the United States Ambassador is aware, as follows:

"1. All cotton for which contracts of sale and freight engagements have already been made before the 2d of March is to be allowed free

(or bought at contract price if stopped), provided the ship sails not later than the 31st of March.

"2. Similar treatment is to be accorded to all cotton insured before the 2d of March, provided it is put on board not later than the 16th of March.

"3. All shipments of cotton claiming the above protection are to be declared before sailing and the documents produced to and certificates obtained from consular officers or other authority fixed by the Government."

5. Considerable shipments of cotton have already been dealt with under this arrangement, and in certain cases the dates specified have been extended in favor of American shippers. The board of trade have already paid a sum exceeding £450,000 to various American claimants, and all claims are being and will continue to be paid as rapidly as they are presented and the proofs of title can be checked. If in some cases progress has been delayed, this has been due to the fact, which has seriously embarrassed His Majesty's Government, that a number of consignments, for which the American shippers had specifically invoked the protection of the arrangement, are now claimed by Swedish and Dutch firms, whose title of ownership, notwithstanding the action of the American shippers, appears in some cases to be valid, and in others has led to the issue of writs in the prize court.

6. It has been explicitly acknowledged by the special representatives of the American claimants, who have been in constant and direct communication with the board of trade, that all the claims so far submitted under the cotton arrangement have been settled with the utmost promptitude, so soon as the production of the necessary documents by the claimants allowed of this being done. There is at the present moment no claim before His Majesty's Government that has not been paid, and the sums so paid over are already considerably in excess of the amounts realized by the sale of the goods.

7. As regards the more general allegation of delay in dealing with cases of detained cargoes, the following facts and figures may be quoted:

The total number of vessels which, having cleared from United States ports since the initiation of the retaliatory measures against German trade, are still detained in United Kingdom ports is 27; of this number 8 are discharging cotton which His Majesty's Government has agreed to purchase under the above arrangement. Of the remaining 19 vessels, 7 are free to depart as soon as the items of their cargo placed in the prize court have been discharged. The other 12, of which 3 only are American ships, are detained pending inquiries as to suspicious consignments, and particulars as to the dates and approximate causes of detention are furnished in the accompanying list. It will be observed that 8 have been detained for a period of less than a week and 3 for a period of less than a fortnight, while the detention of 1 is due to the difficulties in regard to transit across Sweden and Russia.

8. His Majesty's Government remain convinced that, on an impartial review of the facts, it will be admitted that no arbitrary interference with American interests has, in regard to cotton cargoes, occurred; while, if due regard be paid to the enormous volume of American and neutral shipping which is continually engaged in the

trans-Atlantic trade, the figures and dates quoted in the preceding paragraph will emphasize the restricted nature of any interference which has taken place and the close attention with which the officials concerned have adhered to their instructions to act in all cases with expedition and with every possible consideration for neutrals.

9. Since His Majesty's Government have been compelled to adopt their present measures against German commerce, they have given special consideration to the question of avoiding as far as possible unnecessary damage to the interests of neutrals in regard to the export of goods of German origin, and here, again, liberal concessions have been made to United States citizens. Under the rules enacted on the 11th of March provision is made for the investigation of all neutral claims respecting such goods in the prize court, and it is obvious that these claims can receive due and equitable consideration most properly before a judicial tribunal. Nevertheless, in deference to the express desire of the United States Government, arrangements were made toward the end of March whereby United States citizens, who might desire to import goods of German origin via a neutral port, were enabled to produce proof of payment to His Majesty's Embassy at Washington. If such proof were deemed satisfactory, His Majesty's Government gave an undertaking that the goods concerned should not be interfered with in transit, and the American importer was freed from the necessity of submitting his claim to the prize court in London for adjudication. A few days later His Majesty's Government further agreed to recognize the neutral ownership of goods of enemy origin even if not paid for before the 1st of March, provided they were the subject of a f. o. b. contract of earlier date, and had arrived at a neutral port before the 15th of March.

10. Special treatment has also been accorded to cargoes of particular produce destined for the United States and stated to be indispensable for the industries of the country, and in notes addressed to the United States ambassador in April and May, undertakings were given not to interfere during transit with certain cargoes of dyestuffs, potash, and German beet seed.

11. When it became apparent that large quantities of enemy goods were still passing out through neutral countries His Majesty's Government felt it necessary to fix a definite date after which such shipments must cease to enjoy the special immunity, theretofore granted, from liability to being placed in the prize court. It had been observed that a large increase had taken place in the number of vessels sailing from neutral countries to America, and one of the principal lines of steamships advertised a daily in place of a weekly service. In such circumstances it appeared scarcely possible_that goods of enemy origin bought and paid for prior to the 1st March should not have already been shipped to their destination. First June was accordingly fixed as the date after which the privilege allowed in the case of such shipments should cease; but once more a special favor was granted by extending the date in exceptional cases to the 15th June.

12. Importers in the United States having now had three months in which to clear off their purchases in enemy territory, His Majesty's Government trust that, in presence of the circumstances enumerated, the United States Government will acknowledge the great consideration which has been shown to American interests.