763.72116/42½

The Counselor for the Department of State (Lansing) to the Secretary of State

Dear Mr. Secretary: In view of the bombardment by a German military balloon of the city of Antwerp during the night of August 24th–25th, it becomes necessary for us to consider:

(1)
Whether or not this Government should formally protest against the act, which appears to have been in violation of certain provisions of The Hague Convention of 1907, No. 4;1 and
(2)
Whether, if it is decided to protest, the ground of the protest should be limited to the endangering of the lives of American citizens in Antwerp or should be general in nature as contrary to the laws of civilized warfare.

As to the policy of making a protest I am not convinced that it is expedient though my inclination is to do so, as the act appears to have been wanton and without military purpose, in fact an outrage against humanity.

In case it is decided to protest, I annex for your consideration drafts of protest based upon the two grounds mentioned. The one confined to American interests would not form a precedent for future protests in case the laws of war are violated unless the acts affected our own citizens. In that it has a decided advantage.

The other draft based on the general ground of violation of the usages of civilized warfare would undoubtedly accord with the almost universal indignation expressed by the press of this country, which I believe in this case represents general public opinion. However strong may be the inclination to express abhorrence of such deeds, if we begin to make protests general in nature as to violations of civilized and humane methods of slaughter where are we going to stop? Already the representatives of the belligerents have filed numerous charges of cruel and uncivilized practices by the military and naval forces of their enemies. If we act upon one on the [Page 30] ground of humanity, are we not in fairness bound to act upon others?

It seems to me, therefore, for the sake of our future peace of mind a limitation of a protest, if any is considered expedient, should be based upon the solicitude we feel for our own people who are endangered by the illegal acts of a belligerent, narrow as this policy may seem to be.

While, as I said, I am not convinced that any protest is expedient, silence may be misconstrued by the nations at war and cause criticism at home.

For your information I also annex a letter and memorandum2 which I have received from Dr. James Brown Scott dealing briefly with the provisions of No. 4 of The Hague Treaties.

Very sincerely yours,

Robert Lansing
[Enclosure 1]

Draft Protest on Account of American Citizens

The Government of the United States has been officially advised by its diplomatic representative in Antwerp, Belgium, that a German military dirigible balloon on the morning of August twenty-fifth proceeded over that city under cover of darkness, and, without having previously warned the local authorities, delivered several bombs of high power, which exploding in the thickly populated sections of the city killed and wounded a number of non-combatants, men, women and children, and destroyed and damaged many buildings regardless of their use.

This Government is directly concerned in the bombardment referred to in that there were at the time in Antwerp hundreds of American citizens, including diplomatic and consular officers of the United States, and other neutral non-combatants whose lives were endangered, and further because one of the buildings destroyed belonged to an American citizen.

The bombardment in the opinion of this Government was in violation of Article 26 of the Regulations annexed to No. 4 of The Hague Conventions, 1907,3 concerning the laws and customs of war on land, in that the officer in command of the attacking German force failed to warn the local authorities of Antwerp of the intended bombardment, which warning would have given opportunity for the American and other neutral non-combatants to have removed from the city or sought places of safety before the attack took place.

[Page 31]

This Government is unwilling to believe that this unnotified bombardment under cover of night was authorized by the German Government, one of the signatories to The Hague Convention No. 4, because of the possibility of indiscriminate slaughter which might result to non-combatants without regard to sex or nationality, and because an attack of this character could in no way lessen the defensive strength of the Belgian military forces in and about Antwerp or contribute to the success of the German arms.

This Government, therefore, considering that the bombardment jeopardized the lives of American officials and citizens and was unwarranted by the laws of war or by military necessity, requests the German Government to take the steps necessary to fix the responsibility for this flagrant violation of Article 26 of the Regulations referred to and to punish the offender, and this Government further expects the German Government to declare that the act was unauthorized by it and to give assurances that bombardments of a similar nature will not be permitted by the German forces in the field without full compliance with the Regulations, to which reference has been made.

[Enclosure 2]

Draft Protest on General Grounds

The Government of the United States has been officially advised by its diplomatic representatives in Antwerp, Belgium, that a German military dirigible balloon on the morning of August twenty-fifth proceeded over that city under cover of darkness, and, without having previously warned the local authorities, delivered several bombs of high power, which exploding in the thickly populated sections of the city killed and wounded a number of non-combatants, men, women and children, and destroyed and damaged many buildings regardless of their use.

The Government of the United States, believing that the Imperial German Government, as a signatory of No. 4 of The Hague Conventions of 1907 concerning the laws and customs of war on land, intends to abide strictly by the provisions of that Convention in the conduct of military operations during the present war, directs its attention to Article 26 and Article 27 of the Regulations annexed to the Convention referred to, which, it appears from the report received, were clearly violated by the officer in command of the German attacking force. Since it is manifest that the destruction of the buildings wrecked was unnecessary to the success of the military operations of the German attacking force, there appears no justification on the ground of military necessity for the sudden attack, which caused the useless loss of the lives and property of non-combatants without in [Page 32] any way lessening the military strength of the Belgian force defending the city. It would seem, therefore, that there was no valid excuse for the violation of the regulations referred to.

The Government of the United States, recognizing the fact that Antwerp is a fortified city and, therefore, subject to bombardment, insists that, if its information is correct and the fortifications are a considerable distance from the city proper, such fact does not permit the indiscriminate slaughter of non-combatants and destruction of property without warning by the officer in command of the attacking force, and, in no event, unless directed against the troops or military stores of the enemy.

In view, therefore, of the plain terms of Articles 26 and 27 of the Regulations the Government of the United States is constrained to protest earnestly against the acts of the officer in command of the German attacking force not only on the ground that they were in violation of the Regulations mentioned but, furthermore, on the ground that they were contrary to that solicitude and regard for the lives and property of non-combatants, which every belligerent is bound to have if it is inspired by those humane sentiments which should animate modern nations in the conduct of a war. The nation, which ignores or fails to respond to these sentiments invites the just condemnation of the civilized world.

  1. William M. Malloy (ed.), Treaties, Conventions, etc., Between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1776–1909 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1910), vol. II, p. 2269.
  2. Neither printed.
  3. Malloy, Treaties, 1776–1909, vol. II, p. 2286.