Слике страница
PDF
ePub

$205]

GERMAN ARGUMENTS

141

concerned in seeing the principles of humanity realized in the present war. Also, this appeal meets with full sympathy in Germany, and the Imperial Government is quite willing to permit its statements and decisions in the case under consideration to be governed by the principles of humanity just as it has done always.

MAGNANIMITY OF GERMANY.

The Imperial Government welcomed it with gratitude when the American Government in its note of May 15 itself recalled that Germany had always permitted itself to be governed by the principles of progress and humanity in dealing with the law of maritime war.

Germany has likewise been always tenacious of the principle that war should be conducted against the armed and organized forces of the enemy country, but that the civilian population of the enemy must be spared as far as possible from the measures of war. The Imperial Government cherishes the definite hope that some way will be found when peace is concluded, or perhaps earlier, to regulate the law of maritime war in a manner guaranteeing the freedom of the seas, and will welcome it with gratitude and satisfaction if it can work hand in hand with the American Government on that occasion.

SACRED DUTY OF SELF-DEFENSE.

In the present war the principles which should be the ideal of the future have been traversed more and more the longer its duration, the German Government has no guilt therein. It is known to the American Government how Germany's adversaries, by completely paralyzing peaceable traffic between Germany and the neutral countries, have aimed from the very beginning, and with increasing lack of consideration, at the destruction not so much of the armed forces as the life of the German nation, repudiating in so doing all the rules of international law and disregarding all the rights of neutrals. .

While our enemies thus loudly and openly have proclaimed war without mercy until our utter destruction, we are conducting a war in self-defense for our national existence and for the sake of peace as assured permanency. We have been obliged to adopt submarine warfare to meet the declared intentions of our enemies and methods of warfare adopted by them in contravention of international law.

DUTY TO SAVE GERMANS.

With all its efforts in principle to protect neutral life and property from damage as much as possible, the German Government has recognized unreservedly in its memorandum of February 4 that the interest of neutrals might suffer from submarine warfare. However, the American Government will also understand and appreciate that, in the fight for existence which has been forced upon Germany by its adversaries and announced by them, it is the sacred duty of the Imperial Government to do all within its power to protect and to save the lives of German subjects. If the Imperial Government were derelict in these,

its duties, it would be guilty before God and history of violation of those principles of highest humanity which are the foundation of every national existence.

BLAME ON THE BRITISH.

The case of the Lusitania shows with horrible clearness to what jeopardizing of human lives the manner of conducting the war employed by our adversaries leads. In most direct contradiction of international law, all distinctions between merchantmen and war vessels have been obliterated by the order to British merchantmen to arm themselves and to ram submarines and promise of rewards therefor; and neutrals who use merchantmen as travelers have thereby been exposed in an increasing degree to all the dangers of war.

If the commander of the German submarine which destroyed the Lusitania had caused the crew and travelers to put out in boats before firing the torpedo this would have meant the sure destruction of his own vessel. After the experiences in the sinking of much smaller and less seaworthy vessels, it was to be expected that a mighty ship like the Lusitania would remain above water long enough, even after the torpedoing, to permit the passengers to enter the ship's boats. Circumstances of a very peculiar kind, especially the presence on board of large quantities of highly explosive materials, defeated this expectation.

In addition it may be pointed out that if the Lusitania had been spared thousands of cases of ammunition would have been sent to Germany's enemies, and thereby thousands of German mothers and children robbed of their supporters.

PROTECTION OF AMERICAN LIVES.

In the spirit of friendship with which the German nation has been imbued toward the Union (United States) and its inhabitants since the earliest days of its existence, the Imperial Government will always be ready to do all it can during the present war also to prevent the jeopardizing of the lives of American citizens.

The Imperial Government, therefore, repeats the assurances that American ships will not be hindered in the prosecution of legitimate shipping and the lives of American citizens on neutral vessels shall not be placed in jeopardy.

In order to exclude any unforeseen dangers to American passenger steamers, made possible in view of the conduct of maritime war on the part of Germany's adversaries, the German submarines will be instructed to permit the free and safe passage of such passenger steamers, when made recognizable by special markings and notified a reasonable time in advance. The Imperial Government, however, confidently hopes that the American Government will assume the guarantee that these vessels have no contraband on board. . .

The Imperial Government believes that it can assume that in this manner adequate facilities for travel across the Atlantic Ocean can be afforded American citizens. There would, therefore, appear to be no compelling necessity for American citizens

§§205-209] CONTINUED SUBMARINE WARFARE

143

to travel to Europe in time of war on ships carrying an enemy flag. In particular, the Imperial Government is unable to admit that American citizens can protect an enemy ship through the mere fact of their presence on board.

Germany merely followed England's example when it declared part of the high seas an area of war. Consequently accidents suffered by neutrals on enemy ships in this area of war cannot well be judged differently from accidents to which neutrals are at all times exposed at the seat of war on land, when they betake themselves into dangerous localities in spite of previous warning.

(Am. Journal of International Law, IX, Spec. Suppl., 149-153.)

G. [$206] SUBMARINE WARFARE, JUNE, 1915, TO FEBRUARY, 1917.

[blocks in formation]

Collier's. Story of the War, IV, 542.

"Arabic Episode," in Am. Jour. Internat. Law, IX, Spec. Supp., pp. 165. 203.

"Ancona Episode," ibid., pp. 297-305; Spec. Supp. X, pp.
297-305.

Anon. "Sinking of the Ancona," in N. Y. Times Current
History, III, 653. (Jan., 1916.)

Anon. "The Submarine Crisis," ibid, IV, 444 (June, 1916).
"Sussex Episode," Am. Jour. Internat. Law, IX, Spec. Supp.
166, 181, 230.

(b) Last warnings of the United States.

Whelpley, J. D. "The United States and Germany," in Fort-
nightly Review, vol. 107, pp. 492-501 (Mar., 1917).
Cecil, Lord Robert. "A British Reply to Germany's Note
on Submarine Warfare," in N. Y. Times Current His-
tory, IV., 456 (June, 1916).

Nicholson, J. S. "Pres. Wilson's Patience," in ibid, III, 472
(Dec., 1915).

Anon.

"The Facts Behind the Phrase," in New Republic, X, 5-7 (Feb. 3, 1917). An analysis of Pres. Wilson's address breaking off diplomatic relations with Germany. Anon. "Justification," in ibid, pp. 36-38 (Feb. 10, 1917).

2. Negotiations with Germany.

(a)
(b)

Arabic episode.

Sussex episode.

(c) Final German note.

3. Revival of Policy of Frightfulness.

(a) German zone order of February, 1917.

(b) Renewed destruction of American lives and ships.

(c) Outrages on other neutrals.

4. Last Warnings of the United States. 5. Declaration of War the Only Remedy.

6. Documents and Extracts on the Section.

(a) [§207]

Germany's Promise as to Liners.

BY AMBASSADOR J. VON BERNSTORFF. (September 1, 1915.) My Dear Secretary:

With reference to our conversation of this morning, I beg to inform you that my instructions concerning our answer to your last Lusitania note contains the following passage:

"Liners will not be sunk by our submarines without warning and without safety of the lives of noncombatants provided that the liners do not try to escape or offer resistance."

Although I know you do not wish to discuss the Lusitania question till the Arabic incident has been definitely and satisfactorily settled, I desire to inform you of the above because this policy of my Government was decided on before the Arabic incident occurred.

(Am. Journal of International Law, X, Spec. Suppl. 166.)

(b) [$208] Apology for the Sinking of the Arabic.

BY AMBASSADOR J. VON BERNSTORFF. (October 5, 1915.) Prompted by the desire to reach a satisfactory agreement with regard to the Arabic incident, my Government has given me the following instructions:

The orders issued by His Majesty the Emperor to the commanders of the German submarines of which I notified you on the previous occasions have been made so stringent that the recurrence of incidents similar to the Arabic case is considered out of the question.

According to the report of Commander Schneider of the submarine which sank the Arabic and his affidavit, as well as those of his men, Commander Schneider was convinced that the Arabic intended to ram the submarine. On the other hand the Imperial Government does not doubt the good faith of the affidavit of the British officers of the Arabic, according to which the Arabic did not intend to ram the submarine.

The attack of the submarine was undertaken against the instructions issued to the commander. The Imperial Government regrets and disavows this act and has notified Commander Schneider accordingly.

Under these circumstances my Government is prepared to pay an indemnity for American lives which, to its deep regret, have been lost on the Arabic.

I am authorized to negotiate with you about the amount of this indemnity.

(New York Times, Oct. 6, 1915.)

(c) [$209] Protection of American Rights.

BY PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON.

(February 24, 1916.)

I very warmly appreciate your kind and frank letter of to-day and feel that it calls for an equally frank reply.

Your are right in assuming that I shall do everything in my power to keep the United States out of war. I think the country will feel no uneasiness about my course in that respect. Through many anxious months I have striven for that object, amidst difficulties more manifold than can have been apparent upon the surface, and so far I have succeeded. I do not doubt that I shall continue to succeed. The course which the Central European Powers have announced their intention of following in the future with regard to undersea warfare seems for the moment to threaten insuperable obstacles, but its apparent meaning is so manifestly inconsistent with explicit assurances recently given us by those Powers with regard to their treatment of the

§§209-210]

INSISTENCE BY AMERICA

145

merchant vessels on the high seas that I must believe that explanations will presently ensue which will put a different aspect upon it. We have had no reason to question their good faith or their fidelity to their promises in the past, and I for one feel confident that we shall have none in the future.

AMERICAN RIGHTS.

But in any event our duty is clear. No nation, no group of nations, has the right while war is in progress to alter or disregard the principles which all nations have agreed upon in mitigation of the horrors and sufferings of war; and if the clear rights of American citizens should ever unhappily be abridged or denied by any such action we should, it seems to me, have in honor no choice as to what our own course should be.

For my own part, I cannot consent to any abridgement of the rights of American citizens in any respect. The honor and self-respect of the nation are involved. We covet peace, and shall preserve it at any cost but the loss of honor. To forbid our people to exercise their rights for fear we might be called upon to vindicate them would be a deep humiliation indeed. It would be an implicit, all but an explicit, acquiescence in the violation of the rights of mankind everywhere, and of whatever nation or allegiance. It would be a deliberate abdication of our hitherto proud position as spokesmen, even amidst the turmoil of war, for the law and the right. It would make everything this Government has attempted, and everything that it has achieved during this terrible struggle of nations, meaningless and futile.

EXPEDIENCY AND PRINCIPLE.

It is important to reflect that if in this instance we allow expediency to take the place of principle the door would inevitably be opened to still further concessions. Once accept a single abatement of right, and many other humiliations would certainly follow, and the whole fine fabric of international law might crumble under our hands piece by piece. What we are contending for in this matter is of the very essence of the things that have made America a sovereign nation. She cannot yield them without conceding her own impotency as a nation, and making virtual surrender of her independent position among the nations of the world.

I am speaking, my dear Senator, in deep solemnity, without heat, with a clear consciousness of the high responsibilities of my office, and as your sincere and devoted friend. If we should unhappily differ, we shall differ as friends; but where issues so momentous as these are involved we must, just because we are friends, speak our minds without reservation.

(Letter to Hon. William J. Stone.)

(d) [§210] America Relies on Scrupulous Execution of Germany's Pledges (May 8, 1916).

BY SECRETARY OF STATE ROBERT LANSING.

The note of the Imperial German Government under date of May 4, 1916, has received careful consideration by the Gov

« ПретходнаНастави »