Mr. Fish to Baron Gerolt
The undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, duly received the note of the 4th instant, with the accompanying documents addressed to him by Baron Gerolt, envoy and minister plenipotentiary of the North German Union, relative to intercourse between the diplomatic representatives in Paris of the governments of neutral states and their respective governments. In that communication it is assumed that, Paris being in a state of siege by the German forces, the latter have a belligerent right under the public law to cut off all intercourse between the diplomatic representatives of foreign powers there and their governments at home; or, if such intercourse should be allowed at all, that the besieging forces may prescribe the conditions upon which it shall be permitted. The right seems further to be claimed upon the alleged impropriety of diplomatic agents continuing to reside in a beleaguered city which contains persons in authority whose title thereto has not been recognized by the assailant.
[Page 402]The undersigned, after a careful consideration of the subject, and with every disposition to acknowledge the just and necessary belligerent rights of the blockading force, cannot acquiesce in the pretension set up on behalf of that force. It is true that, when such a force invests a fortified place with a view to its reduction, one of the means usually relied upon for that purpose is the interruption of ordinary communication by messengers or by letters. This is acknowledged to be not only a belligerent right, but also one incident to the actual sovereignty over the enemy’s territory occupied by the assailant adjacent to the blockaded place. Paris, however, is the capital of France. There the diplomatic representatives of neutral states had their official residence prior to the investment. If they think proper to stay there while it lasts, they must expect to put up with the inconveniences necessarily incident to their choice. Among these, however, the stopping of communication, with their governments cannot be recognized. The right of embassy to a belligerent state is one which it is both the duty and the interest of its enemies to acknowledge, and to permit the exercise of in every usual or proper way. If this right should be denied, or unduly curtailed, wars might be indefinitely prolonged, and general peace would be impracticable.
The privilege of embassy necessarily carries with it that of employing messengers between the embassy and its government. This is a privilege universally recognized by publicists. There is no exception or reservation made for the case of an embassy having its abode in a blockaded place. Indeed, the denial of the right of correspondence between a diplomatic agent in such a place and his government, seems tantamount to insisting that he cannot elect to be a neutral, but must be regarded as an adversary if he continues to stay there, especially when the legitimacy of the authority of those directing the resistance is denied by the other assailant.
The opposite course, which it has suited the convenience of some neutral government to adopt, is obviously liable to be construed, partly, at least, the occasion of withholding the privilege of correspondence. Should this be a correct view of the case, no independent state, claiming to be a free agent in all things, could, in self-respect, acquiesce in a proceeding actuated by such a motive. The undersigned does not charge the government of the North German Union with being so actuated, but deems himself warranted in thus referring to the point, as it is adverted to by the representative of that government both at Berlin and before Paris.
The undersigned is consequently directed to claim that the right of correspondence between the representatives of neutral powers at Paris and their governments is a right sanctioned by public law, which cannot justly be withheld without assigning other reasons therefor than those which have hitherto been advanced. The burden of proof of the sufficiency of those reasons in furtherance of the belligerent rights of the assailant must be borne by him. While, however, the undersigned is directed to claim the right as due to all neutrals, he will not omit to acknowledge the partial exception made in favor of the minister of the United States for the reasons assigned.
The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to Baron Gerolt the assurance of his very high consideration.