701.6211/369½
Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation With the German Ambassador (Bernstorff), April 19, 1916, 11:30 a.m.
L Good morning, Mr. Ambassador.
B Good morning. I came to see you about a very unpleasant affair. By order of the District Attorney of New York the officers went to the office of our Military Attaché and arrested von Igel by force and by force took away and kept papers.28 I wish to ask if you will request the return of the papers and the release of von Igel.
L That we have already done. I sent a dispatch yesterday to the Attorney General that official papers should be returned immediately. The official status of von Igel is a question which I am having studied now in the Department—that is, whether immunity under his diplomatic character follows him for a charge committed before he became an attaché of your Embassy.
B That is different. I realized that and that is why I did not speak of it yesterday that I perfectly understand and am not questioning that at all. The thing is that these papers should be returned because they were taken by force and that therefore there could be no doubt but they were in the hands of an attaché and should be returned.
L The only question as to that would be whether they are official papers or private papers.
B They certainly are official papers.
L The police broke no seals. As I understand it is a question, as I have been informed, (from the fact that they evidently looked to see what the papers were,) whether they were official papers or not. Because if they are official, it might be very embarrassing to you on account of the serious character of the communications.
B Well—I don’t know exactly about that.
L They have evidently, as local police authorities would do, read the papers. The statements are very serious they say. Now the question is whether you claim that they are official papers or not on account of the statements that appeared in them.
B Well that would of course simply come to the question whether a Military Attaché—how far a Military Attaché could go, because the office of Military Attaché is for certain purposes and not under the Embassy—but I can not see how they could be anything else but official papers.
[Page 96]L I see. Of course they may be official, but I have hesitated to hold them as such because they are of a rather peculiar character. I mean by that there are serious statements of criminal intent. Would it not attach to the Embassy? That is what I am trying to avoid.
B I see the point entirely. What would you advise?
L I think that is a matter you will have to decide for yourself. Possibly, if the authorities submitted the papers to you, you would know whether they are official.
B That would be embarrassing I am afraid. I think that they should be at once returned—all of them.
L We ordered that the official papers be returned immediately, and now I understand the authorities are raising the question whether they are official papers, because of the serious nature of the statements made they did not like to assume that they were official.
B Well—of course if it is absolutely a case of criminal action——
L And if these are official papers I think it imposes a very considerable burden of responsibility on the Embassy. That is what I am calling to your attention.
B Yes, but to my mind Military Attachés are not the same as members of the Embassy.
L I do not think they should have diplomatic immunity unless the Embassy is willing to take the responsibility for their correspondence.
B Yes—but as long as Military attachés are attached to the Embassy they are members of the Embassy and papers must be regarded as official.
L If papers are official we must regard the Government as responsible. The papers contain a statement of the most serious nature and I thought it might involve the Embassy if they were considered official documents.
B It might involve the Government but not the Embassy.
L Possibly it would.
B I know perfectly well there is no document from us there, that is out of the question, but of course there are papers which——
L Would you include as a member of the Embassy a Commercial Attaché?
B As to that, taking papers from him would be taking official papers.
L It is a very difficult position and I am trying to point out the difficulties that we are placed in and the possible difficulties that you will be placed in.
B Yes, well—I would always think that the papers were immune if the Government so stated.
L We have asked them to return all the papers.
[Page 97]B They say they will hold the papers. I think they ought not to do it if they are official.
L I simply put that up to you so that you could deny they were official papers, if you thought best.
B I do not deny for one moment they are official but I only say that if they have been acting wrongly, then they are responsible. I do not think the Embassy is involved because whatever they have done has not been under orders of the Embassy. If they had acted under instructions of my Government then the Government is responsible.
L Well I trust that this will be entirely satisfactory.
B You sent word for the release?
L Yes. I have here the telegram that I spoke to you about that I sent to the Attorney General.29 He telegraphed me last night late that he had immediately communicated to the United States Attorney in New York so that I assume they will act on that.
B I think that is all right.
L There is one other thing. Here is a note that went forward to Berlin.30 I suppose it will be received there sometime today. I thought you might wish a copy.
B Anything I can do in the matter——
L I think after looking it over you will see there is probably only one thing to do. This is the note and there is an enclosure containing a full statement of the facts in the case of the Sussex.
B This all went in the telegram?
L Yes, the whole thing.
B I do not suppose there is anything in which I can help * * *31
L Nothing today. Goodbye.
- For correspondence previously printed concerning the arrest of von Igel and the seizure of his papers, see ibid., 1916, supp., pp. 807 ff.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Foreign Relations, 1916, supp., p. 232.↩
- Asterisks appear in the original.↩