The more I study the reply the less I like it. It has all the elements of
the “gold brick” swindle with a decidedly insolent tone. I think that we
should take time to scrutinize the document and give no indication as to
whether it is acceptable or unacceptable until we weigh every portion
with care. The first impression is bad; the
[Page 564]
second, good; and the third unsatisfactory. At
least that is the way my mind has been impressed thus far. But my final
judgment I am not ready to give, without further study.
[Enclosure]
Memorandum on the New Orders to Submarines as
Contained in the German Note of May 4, 1916
[Washington,]
May 5, 1916.
The German Government in its note states that it has decided “to make
a further concession, adapting methods of submarine war to the
interests of neutrals.” (See page 6)55
The extent of this new concession is to be determined by comparison
of the orders which “the German submarine forces have had” (See page 3)56 and the order which the German Government
“notifies the Government of the United States that the German naval
forces have received.” (See page 12)57
| Previous Orders |
New Orders |
| To conduct the submarine warfare in accordance with the
general principles of visit and search and the destruction
of merchant vessels recognized by international law, the
sole exception being the conduct of warfare against enemy
trade carried on enemy freight ships encountered in the war
zone surrounding Great Britain. |
In accordance with the general principles of visit and
search and the destruction of merchant vessels recognized by
international law, such vessels both within and without the
area declared a naval war zone shall not be sunk without
warning and without saving human lives unless the ships
attempt to escape or offer resistance. |
First: It is noticeable that the essential difference between these
orders is that the new orders eliminate the war zone and place the
same restrictions upon submarine warfare in all parts of the high
seas as were in force previously outside the war zone.
Second: The new orders recite a portion of the established rules by
asserting that the immunity from being sunk without warning and
without saving human lives is lost if the ships attempt to escape or
offer resistance. The phrase “offer resistance” is significant since
it indicates that armed vessels possessing
power of resistance are included in the general term “merchant
vessels” covered by the order.
Third: In the previous orders the same restrictions on submarine
warfare were in force as to all merchant vessels, both within and
[Page 565]
without the war zone,
except as to “enemy freight ships encountered in the war zone.” By
these orders enemy passenger ships and all
neutral ships were entitled to be visited and searched.
Fourth: It would appear that the only additional limitation placed
upon submarine warfare beyond those previously in force is that
“enemy freight ships encountered in the war zone” will be accorded
the same treatment as that accorded to passenger ships and neutral
ships in all parts of the high seas and as that accorded to such
freighters if outside the war zone. It would appear, therefore, that
enemy freight ships are the only beneficiaries under the new orders.
It is not apparent how this is “a further concession”, as asserted
to the interests of neutrals.”
Fifth: The United States’ complaints have been chiefly directed
against the methods employed in attacking passenger vessels. If
these attacks are “in accordance with the general principles of
visit and search and the destruction of merchant vessels recognized
by international law”, as interpreted by the German Government and
applied by the German naval forces, then the new orders offer no
change in the methods which the United States demands should be
abandoned.
Sixth: Unless the German Government states frankly that the rule as
to visit and search will be applied in the customary manner and that
it will not be interpreted as it has been by the German submarine
forces under their previous orders, the new orders in no way lessen
the danger to life or restore to neutrals their just rights on the
high seas.
Seventh: In view of the similarity of the previous orders and the new
orders, and the way that the previous orders have been carried out,
the new orders do not constitute a declaration of abandonment of the
present methods of warfare.
