T.
IFm w' ''vrji
The Commoner
6
7
' ' VOI. 35,' NO. 8
Si.
filT
m
p
.
81
f'
i
Sf '
ll
B
ESv
f..l
-"S-
kv r
F
It
ml
iji
1M
j;:
K
K
i$:.
'r
Third American Note
to Germany
- following Is tho complete text of American
' note delivered to German government July 23,
191G:
' DEPARTMENT OF STATE
" '-' Washington, July 21, 1915.
The Secretary of State to Ambassador Gerard:
Ydil are instructed to deliver textually tho
following note to tho minister for 'foreign affairs:
Tho note of the Imperial German government
dated tho 8th of July, 1916, has. received the
careful consideration of the government of the
United States and it regrets to be obliged to say
that it has found it very unsatisfactory, because
it fails -to meet tho real differences between the "
two governments and indicates no way in which
tho'accopted principles of law" and hifmanity may
bo applied in tho grave matter in controversy,
but proposes, on thd' contrary, arrangements for
a partial suspension of those principles which
virtually set them aside. v
Tito government of the United States notes
with satisfaction that tho Imperial German gov
ernment recognizes without reservation the val
idity of tho principles insisted on in the several
communications which this government has ad
'drossed to tho Imperial German government with
regard to its announcement of a war zone and
the use of submarines against merchantmen on
the high seas the principle that the high seas
are free, that the character an J cargo of a irier
chantman must first bo ascertained bef6re she
can lawfully be seized or destroyed, and that the
lives of noncombatants may in no case be put
In jeopardy unless tho vessel resists or seeks :o
escape after being summoned to submit to an
examination, for a belligerent act of retaliation
Is per se an act beyond the law, and the defense,
of an act as retaliatory is an admission that it is
illegal.
The government of the United States is, how
vever, keenly disappointed to find that the Im
perial German government regards itself as in
large degree exempt from tho obligation to ob
serve these principles, oven where neutral ves
sels are concerned, by what it believes the pol
icy and pr(actico of the government of Great
Britain to .be in the present war with regard to
neutral commerce. The Imperial German gov
ernment will readily understand that the gov
ernment; of the United States can not discuss tne
policy of the government of Great Britain with
regard to neutral trade except with that govern
ment itF.elf, and that, it must regard the conduct
of ;other belligerent governments as irrelevant
to any discussion with tho Imperial German gov
ernment of what this government regards as
grave and unjustifiable violations of the rights i
of American citizens by German naval command
erSr f
Illegal and inhuman acts, however justifiable
they may be thought to be against an enemy who
Is believed to have acted in contravention of law
-and humanity, aro manifestly indefensible when
they deprive neutrals of their acknowledged
rights, particularly when they violate the right to
life itself. If a belligerent can not retaliate
against an cn(5my without injuring the lives of
neutrals as well as their property, humanity, as
well as justice and due regard for "the dignity
of neutral powers, should dictate that the prac
tice be discontinued. If persisted in, it would
in such circumstances constitute an unpardon
able offense against the sovereignty of 'the neu
Iral nation affected. The. government of the
United States is riot unmindful of tho extraor
dinary conditions created by this War or of the
radical alterations of circumstance and method
of attack produced by the us. of instrumental
ities of naval warfare which the nations of th
world can not have had in view when the exist
ing rules of international Jaw were, formulated
and.it is readyla-mako every reasonable allow
ance for, these novel and unexpected aspects of
war at sea; but it can not consent to abate any
essential or fundamental .ight o: its people be
cause of a mere alteration of circumstance. The
rights of neutrals in time of war are based upon
principle, not upon expediency, and the prin-
ciples are immutable. It is the duty and obliga
tion of belligerents to find a way to adapt the
now circumstances to thra.
The events of the last two months have clearly
indicated that it is possible and practicable to
conduct such submarine oneratlnun no im v
acterized the activity of the Imperial Gorman
navy within the so-called war zone in substantial
accord with the accepted practices of regulated
warfare. The whole world has looked with in
terest and increasing satisfaction at the demon
stration of that possibility, by German naval com
manders. It is manifestly possible, therefore, to
lift the whole practice of submarine attack above
tho criticism which it has aroused and remove
the chief causes of offense.
In view of the admission of illegality made by
the Imperial government when it pleaded the
right of retaliation and defense of .its acts, and
in view of the manifest possibility of conform-,
ing to the established rules of naval warfare, the
government of the United States can not believe
that the Imperial government will longer refrain
frohi disavowing the wanton act of its naval com-,
manner in sinking tho Lusitania, or from offer- ,
ing reparation for the American, lives lost, so
far as reparation can be made for "a needless de
struction, of human life by an illegal act. t
The government of the United States, while
not indifferent to the friendly spirit in which it
Is made, can not'accept the suggestion of the Im
perial German government that certain "vessel
be designated and agree'd upon which shall be
free on the seas now illegally proscribed. The
very agreement would by implication subject
other vessels to illegal attack and would be a
curtailment and therefore an abandonment of '
the principles for which this government con
tends and which in times of calmer counsels ev
ery nation would concede as of course.
The government of the United States and the
Imperial German government are contending for
the same great object, have long stood together
In urging the very principles upon which -the
government of the United, States now solemnly
insists. They. are both contending for the free- '
dom of the seas. The government of the United
States will continue to contend for that freedom,
from whatever quarter violated, without com
promise and at any cost. It invites the practical
co-operation of the Imperial German government
at this time when co-operation may accomplish
most and this great common object be most strik-
inglv and effectively achieved.
The Imperial German government expresses
hope that this object nay be in some measure
accomplished even before the present war ends.
It can be The government of the United States not
onlv. feels obliged to insist upon it, by whomsoever
violated or ignored, in the protection of its own
citizens, but is also deeply interested in seeing
it, made practicable between the belligerents
themselves, and holds itself ready at any time
to act as the common friend who may bo priv
ileged to suggest a way. . ......
In the meantime, the very value-which this '
government sets upon the long and unbroken
friendship between the people and government
of the United States and the people and govern
ment of the German nation impels it to press
very solemnly upon the Imperial German govern- '
ment the necessity for a scrupulous observance
of neutral rights in this critical matter. Friend- .
ship itself prompts it to say to the Imperial
government that repetition hy the commanders
of German naval vessels of. acts in contravention -of
these rights must be. regarded by the . govern-.
ment of the United States, when they affect ,
American citizens, as deliberately -unfriendly.
' ' M LAN3ING. .
' : ; i . r . , . .
AMERICAN REPLY TO AUSTRIA'S PROTEST
AGAINST EXPORT OF ARMS
An Associated Press dispatch from Washing
ton, dated Aug. 15, says: The state department '
tonight made public the reply of the United
States rejecting views set forth by the Austro
Hungarian recent note declaring that transporta
tion of war munitions from the United States to
Austria's 'enemies was conducted on such a scale
as to be "not in consonance with the definition
of neutrality."
a. . TEXT OF NOTE
Following is the full text of. the American re
ply to Austro-Hungariannote regarding exnorta
tion of arms and ammunition from the United
States to the allies: eQ.
"Tho secretary of state to Ambassador Pen
field. American Embassy, Vienna:
"Department of State, Washington, Aug 12
1915. Please present a note to the royal for
eign office in reply to its note of June 29, in the
following sense:
"The government of the United States has
given careful consideration to the statement of
the imperial and royal government in regard to
the exportation of arms and ammunition from
the United States to countries at war with Aus-tro-Hungary
and Germany.
"The government of,.the United States notes
With satisfaction the recognition by the imperial
and royal government of the undoubted fact that
its attitude with regard to the exportation of
arms and ammunition" from the" United States is
prompted by its intention td 'maintain the strict
est neutrality and to conform to the letter of the
provisions of the international treaties' but is
surprised to find the imperial arid royal govern
ment implying -that the observance of the strict
principles ofthclaw under the conditions which
have developed in- the present war is insufficient
and asserting that this government 'should go be
yond" the long recognized rules governing such"
traffic by neutrals and adopt-measures to 'main
tain an attitude of strict neutrality with respect
to -both belligerent parties.'
' , . , " CAN NOT GRANT, THAT "
'.LTo this assertion of an obligation to change
or modify, the rules of international usage on ac
count of speoial conditions,' the government of
the United States can not accede. The recog
nition of an obligation, of this sort, unknown to
the international practice of. the past would im
pose upon every neutral nation a-duty to sit in
judgment on the progress of war and to restrict
its . commercial intercourse .with a belligerent
whose naval successes prevented the neutral
from trade with the enemy. The contention of
the imperial and royal government appears to be
that the advantages gained to a belligerent by
its superiority on the sea should-be equalized by
the. neutral powers by the establishment of a
system of non-intercourse with the victor. The
imperial and royal, government confines its. com
ments to arms and ammunition hut if the prin
ciple for which it contends iz sound, it should
apply with eaual force to, a,ll articles of contra
band. A belligerent controlling the high seas
might possess an ample supply of arms and am
munition, but be in want of food and clothing.
On the novel principle that equalization is a neu
tral duty, neutral nations" would be obliged to
place an embargo on such articles because one
of the belligerents could not obtain them through
commercial intercourse.
"But, if this principle, so , strongly urged hv, ,
the imperial and royal 'government should be ad
mitted to obtain, by reason, of .the superiority of
a belligerent at sea. ought it not to oDerate
equally as to a belligerent superior on land? Ap
pivfnp to this thebrv of eoualizatioh a bel
ligerent ,who lacks the necessary munitions to
contend successfully on land ought to be per
mitted to purchase them from, neutrals, while a
beljigerentwith an abundance-of war. stores or
with the power to produce them should be de
barred from such traffic.
WOULD MEAN -MORE TROUBLE.
"Manifestly the idea of qtr.ict, neutrality npw
advanced by the imperial and royal government
-would involve 'a neural nation in a'mass of ner
plexiti.es which would" obscure the Whole field of
international 'oblig'ation, 'produce economic scon
f usion and '.deprive all commerce , and industry
of legitimate fields'of.nterprisealready' heavilv
burdenedby the unavoidable restrictions of wnr.
"In. this connecti.ori it is pertinent' to direct the
attention of the ijnperial and royal" government
to the fact that Austria-Hungary and Germany,
particularly the latter, have' during 'the yeprs
preceding the present European warproduce a
gr.eat 'surplus of arms and ammunition, which
thev sold throughout the world and especially to
belligerents. 'Never during that'period did either
of 'them suggest or apply the principle now ad
vocated by 'the imperial and royal government.
''During 'the Boer war between Great Britalu
and the South 'African republics the patrol-of the
coasts of the v neighboring neutral colonies bv
British riayal vessels prevented arms an: am
munition reaHiingv the Transvaal or the'Orannre
Free State. The 'allied republics were in a' situa
tion almost identical in that respect with that
in' which Austria-Hungary and Germany find
themselves at tho present time Yet,' in snite
of tho commercial isolation of one -belligerent.
Germany sold to Great Britain and other bel
ligerents hundreds of thousands of kilos of ex
plosives, fninnowder, cartridge's, shot arid wenn
ons. and it is known that Austrla-Hungarv'also
sold similar munitions to tho same purchaser,
though in small quantities. While, as compared
with tho present war, tho quantities sold werj
small, (a table of the sales is-appended), and
the principles of neutrality involved was the
same. If at that time Austria-Hungary and her
present ally had refused, to sell arms and ammu
nition to GrpPt Britain on the ground that to do
. so would violate -the spirit of' strict neutrality,
the imperial and royal' government might with
S