TH FOREWORD. HE "War Message" of President Wilson, delivered before Congress on April 2d, 1917, voices the best ideals and aspirations of the American people. It sets forth in language of dignity and moderation, but with unmistakable indignation and emphasis, the grievous wrongs which have made the United States take up arms against Germany. It makes very plain, even to the hitherto unconvinced, why at the present general crisis it is the duty of all good Americans to enter this war, "that the world may be made safe for democracy.' In other words, Mr. Wilson's message is the best possible preparation for all loyal Americans who are studying the causes and justification for the present war, and who are trying to discover the proper mental attitude they themselves should take toward the personal part which they may be called to play in the struggle. Nevertheless, although the President was speaking in general to all good Americans, he was addressing, for the moment, Congress in particular. Now men at Washington, devoting all their time to public affairs, and most of them favored by long residence there and by special opportunities for information, did not need to be told of the many things which were not so obvious to even very intelligent citizens at home at least unless the latter were willing to spend considerable time in various forms of investigation. Consequently Mr. Wilson speaks of a good many matters that need amplifying details if they are to be entirely clear, and he draws a number of inferences, very sound indeed, but again sometimes not self-explanatory to busy men and women. Also, here and there, he contrasts the American and Prussian political philosophy and methods of doing things in a way that would become even more convincing if he had been allowed time to enter into specific details. Solemn official promises made only to be broken, conspiracies to burn and blow up American industries, to hamper our manufactures and cripple our Government by strikes and riots, spies in every center of political and industrial activity, plans made on American soil and financed by German funds to dynamite canals, bridges, and munition factories in Canada, invitations to Mexico in times of peace to join with Germany in dismembering our Union, have led people and President alike to see submarine warfare as but a more flagrant expression of a German state policy running amuck in absolute disregard of every sense of national and international morals and decency and callous to the claims of common humanity. A military autocracy astride the ruins of Europe and dominant on the seas by virtue of an arm that both serves and reveals its ambitions and irresponsibility has forced America to accept its challenge. A new Monroe Doctrine must be defended on the pathways of the seas and in the fields of Flanders if the Western World is to be preserved as the citadel of a free-developing, forward-looking democracy. This annotated copy of the President's message has been prepared in the hope that it may make clearer the spirit and the facts back of a decision so momentous. Many of the facts are very familiar to most Americans, but the effort has been to bring together in one place the chief lines of evidence which made Mr. Wilson say that he felt it his duty to urge Congress to declare that "the recent course of the German Government to be in fact nothing less than war against the United States." Very many of the documents quoted in these notes have the highest official validity, and almost none of the facts mentioned are capable of dispute by any fair-minded person. 5340°-17 3 Taken all in all, these facts, supporting the message, and many more that of course could be added, constitute something like "the case for America against Germany,'' and Americans after examining this case may rest well assured that their cause will be justified by the calm, impartial verdict of later-day history. The plan and much of the work are due to Prof. William Stearns Davis, of the history department of the University of Minnesota. He was very materially assisted by his colleagues, Prof. C. D. Allin and Dr. Wm. Anderson. Whether this evidence is valid can be tested by anybody with access to a good public library, for no secret documents have been used. The annotations represent a wholly volunteer service on the part of competent and patriotic scholars. The Committee on Public Information has had the assistance of the National Board for Historical Service in editing the manuscript. The Committee believes that pending the appearance of a more elaborate and official Government statement, the publication of this annotated copy of the President's address will serve a real national purpose. Copies of this document and of other publications may be had free on request. GUY STANTON FORD, Director of the Division on Civic and Educational Cooperation. THE WAR MESSAGE AND FACTS BEHIND IT. ENTLEMEN OF THE CONGRESS: I have called the Congress into extraordinary session ecause there are serious, very serious, choices of policy to e made, and made immediately, which it is neither right or constitutionally permissible that I should assume the esponsibility of making. 2 1 There had been only two other periods in the history of the country equally seriis-1776 and 1861. Nobody can pretend that there have been any other crises in merican history (barring the Revolution and the Civil War) when so much that citins of this country count dear has been at stake. The War of 1812, the Mexican and anish Wars, seem as child's play beside the present exigency. Now, as this message akes clear, the very liberties of the world and the possibilities of peaceful democracies e at stake. If Germany should win this war, and thus become supreme on land and a, the very existence of free democracies would be imperiled. 2 President Wilson had the sworn duty to lay the facts before Congress and recomend to it the needful action. The Constitution of the United States prescribes his ties in such emergencies. It is worthy of note that the Constitution lays this duty and power of declaring war rectly upon Congress, and that it can not be evaded by Congressmen by any referdum to the voters, for which not the slightest constitutional provision is made. Congress performed this duty by voting on the war question as requested. The te of the Senate was 82 to 6 for war; of the House 373 to 50. Such comparative animity upon so momentous a question is almost unparalleled in the history of free tions. On the 3d of February last I officially laid before you the traordinary announcement of the Imperial German Gov:nment, that on and after the 1st day of February it was its urpose to put aside all restraints of law or of humanity and se its submarines to sink every vessel that sought to pproach either the ports of Great Britain and Ireland or le western coasts of Europe or any of the ports controlled y the enemies of Germany within the Mediterranean.3 hat had seemed to be the object of the German submarine arfare earlier in the war, but since April of last year the nperial Government had somewhat restrained the comanders of its undersea craft, in conformity with its promise, 5 4 then given to us, that passenger boats should not be sur and that due warning would be given to all other vesse which its submarines might seek to destroy, when no resis ance was offered or escape attempted, and care taken th their crews were given at least a fair chance to save the lives in their open boats. The precautions taken we meager and haphazard enough, as was proved in distressin instance after instance in the progress of the cruel a unmanly business, but a certain degree of restraint w observed.5 * * * 3 The German Chancellor in announcing this repudiation of all his solemn pled in the Imperial Parliament (Reichstag), on January 31, frankly admitted that t policy involved "ruthlessness" toward neutrals. "When the most ruthless meth are considered the best calculated to lead us to victory and to a swift victory * they must be employed. The moment has now arrived. Last Aug [when he was, as he himself here admits, allowing the American people to beli that in response to its protest he had laid aside such ruthless methods] the time not yet ripe, but to-day the moment has come when, with the greatest prospect success, we can undertake this enterprise."' 4 The broken Sussex pledge. On May 4, 1916, the German Government, in re to the protest and warning of the United States following the sinking of the Suss gave this promise: That "merchant vessels both within and without the area decla a naval war zone shall not be sunk without warning, and without saving human li unless the ship attempt to escape or offer resistance." Germany added, indeed, that if Great Britain continued her blockade policy, would have to consider "a new situation."' On May 8, 1916, the United States replied that it could not admit that the ple of Germany was "in the slightest degree contingent upon the conduct of any ot Government' (i. e., on any question of the English blockade). To this Germa made no reply at all, and under general diplomatic usage, when one nation makes statement to another, the latest statement of the case stands as final unless there is protest made. The promise made by Germany thus became a binding pledge, and as such was to up with other " 'scraps of paper" by the German "unlimited submarine warfar note of January 31, 1917. 5 As to the proper usages in dealing with merchant vessels in war, here are the ru laid down some time ago for the American Navy (a fighting navy, surely), and th rules hardly differed in other navies, including the Russian and Japanese: United States Naval War Code, now in preparation, retains and amplifies following provisions of the Code published in 1900 (p. 48): "The personnel of a merchant vessel captured as a prize their personal effects. * * * are entitled "All passengers not in the service of the enemy, and all women and children board such vessels should be released and landed at a convenient port at the f opportunity. "Any person in the naval service of the United States who pillages or maltre in any manner, any person found on board a merchant vessel captured as a pri shall be severely punished.'' United States Naval War College, International Law Topics, 1905, page 62: “If a seized neutral vessel can not for any reason be brought into court for adjudication it should be dismissed." United States Naval War Code, on safety required for persons on a captured vessel (United States Naval War College, International Law Topics, 1913, p. 165): “The lestruction of a vessel which has surrendered without first removing its officers and crew would be an act contrary to the sense of right which prevails even between enemies in time of war. And also Lawrence (standard authority on international law), International Law, 1910 edition, page 484: "It is better for a naval officer to release a ship as to which ae is doubtful than to risk personal punishment and international complications by lestroying innocent property."' The new policy has swept every restriction aside. Vessels of every kind, whatever their flag, their character, their cargo, their destination, their errand, have been ruthlessly sent to the bottom without warning and without thought of help or mercy for those on board, the vessels of friendly neutrals along with those of belligerents. Even hospital ships and ships carrying relief to the sorely bereaved and stricken people of Belgium, though the latter were provided with safe conduct through the proscribed areas by the German Government itself and were distinguished by unmistakable marks of identity, have been sunk with the same reckless lack of compassion or of principle. 6 6 Mr. Wilson was undoubtedly thinking of the cases of the British hospital ships Asturias sunk March 20, and the Gloucester Castle. These vessels had been sunk although protected by the most solemn possible of international compacts. The Germans seem to have acknowledged the sinking of the Asturias and to have regarded their feat with great complacency. Somewhat earlier in the war the great liner Britannic had been sunk while in service as a hospital ship, and the evidence seems to be it was torpedoed by a U-boat, although the proof here is not conclusive. Since this message was written the Germans have continued their policy of murdering more wounded soldiers and their nurses by sinking more hospital ships. The Belgian relief ships referred to were probably the Camilla, Trevier, and the Feistein, but most particularly the large Norwegian steamer Storstad, sunk with 10,000 tons of grain for the starving Belgians. Besides these sinkings, two other relief shipsthe Tunisie and the Haelen-were attacked unsuccessfully. I was for a little while unable to believe that such things would in fact be done by any Government that had hitherto subscribed to the humane practices of civilized nations." International law had its origin in the attempt to set up some law which would be respected and observed upon the seas, where no nation had right of dominion and where lay the free highways of the world. By painful stage after stage has that law been built up with meager enough results, |