File No. 763.72112/1054
The Consul General at London (Skinner) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 27.]
Sir: Referring to the Department’s instruction to the Ambassador, No. 1398, dated April 9,1 in regard to the Segurança and to the long detention of the S. S. Kim , Fridland , Alfred Nobel , Björnstjerne Björnson , and many other vessels, I have the honor to suggest that it it is most difficult to make substantial progress in securing the release of these vessels and others similarly situated and their cargoes, for the reason that the British authorities are acting almost entirely, on suspicions and are very slightly concerned respecting legal rights, or for that matter, their own rules. Even in the case of cotton-carrying ships which cleared from the United States with cargoes passed by British consuls, and certificates from British consuls proving that the goods were sold prior to March 2 and forwarded under freight engagements of earlier date than March 31, protracted delays arise and there is no apparent disposition to propose a line of conduct which would render the dispatch of shipping from the United States to neutral ports less hazardous than it is.
Obviously the American Government cannot recognize the right of the British Government to set up rules and regulations which are beyond the limits of international law, and therefore is denied the possibility of initiating a discussion with a view to arranging for the dispatch of vessels from American ports in a manner agreeable to the British authorities. On the other hand, I am convinced that there is no inclination in this country to lighten the weight of existing regulations in the slightest respect or to take any chances whatever under which occasional cargoes might filter through to or from Germany.
I can see but one possible hope of reaching a relatively satisfactory working basis, and that by provoking in some way a meeting in London of representatives of the principal shipping interests for the purpose of formulating definite proposals to the British Government. It seems not beyond the range of possibility that these proposals, emanating from purely private organizations, might bring forth a set of rules governing the dispatch of cargoes to and from the United States. Conceivably, the American Government might consent to deliver manifests to departing vessels conclusively showing that the cargo was forwarded in accordance with the agreement, and thereupon the British Government would undertake not to interfere with the free navigation of such vessels. Our own Government [Page 374] would not waive any of its rights or alter its point of view, but would merely lend itself to private interests, guaranteeing a state of fact for the benefit of those immediately concerned.
If this arrangement could be put into effect, vessels departing from American ports which neglected or declined to adhere to this arrangement would be no less well off than they are at present and would have every opportunity of submitting claims to the British Government for future consideration.
The Department cannot initiate any such effort as I have briefly outlined, but may be inclined to lend itself to the carrying out of the proposals should they ever take definite form. I have not discussed this matter with any person whatever, nor shall I do so without first being advised that there are no objections to my doing so.
As the whole problem now stands, there appears to be little to do but to make representations here and there, and eventually to submit a claim for damages sustained.
I have [etc.]