File No. 763.72112/2026

The Ambassador in Germany ( Gerard ) to the Secretary of State

No. 1947]

Sir: With reference to the Department’s instructions of September 9, 1915 (Serial No. 1241),1 relative to reciprocity of treatment of claimants in prize court proceedings in Germany and in the United States, I have the honor to enclose herewith a copy of this Embassy’s note verbale No. 5684 to the German Foreign Office, dated October 14, 1915,2 as well as a copy and translation of the reply received from the Imperial Foreign Office in this connection, under date of November 26, 1915, No. IIIa 21552.

I have [etc.]

James W. Gerard
[Enclosure—Translation]

The German Foreign Office to the American Embassy

No. IIIa 21552/180931

Note Verbale

The Imperial Foreign Office has the honor to reply as follows to the note verbale of the American Embassy, of October 14 last, F. O. No. 5684, concerning the status of reciprocity between Germany and the United States in regard to the costs of prize court proceedings:

[Page 643]

Section 37, paragraph 3, of the German prize court ordinance of April 5, 1911 (Imperial Law Gazette 1914, sheet 301) reads as follows:

If a claim has been allowed, the costs will be to the debit of the Empire. Wherever the Imperial Chancellor declares the guarantee of reciprocity to exist, the necessary outlays of the claimants will also have to be borne by the Empire unless sufficient reasons existed for the prize measure to which the claim refers.

All the nations in regard to which, in accordance with this regulation, the guarantee of reciprocity has thus far been declared to exist, viz.: Holland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark, have furnished to the German Government the basis for the declaration by means of the assurance of each government concerned that the prize courts of the respective country would in similar cases, if any, grant German claimants the refund of costs and expenses to the same extent as has been provided for the opposite case by the above-mentioned regulation of the German prize court ordinance.

An assurance of this tenor is not contained in the esteemed note verbale. The statement in the last sentence of the note confines itself to the assurance that the same treatment will be granted by the prize courts of the United States to German subjects as is given to the nationals of any other country. In this assurance alone, no guarantee can be found to the effect that, under certain premises and to a certain extent, the refund of the necessary expenses for the prize court proceedings will be granted by the prize courts of the United States in favor of nationals of any other country in any future war to be led by the United States.

On the other hand, the investigations of the Department of Justice, contained in the note verbale, concerning the method so far employed in the administration of justice by the prize courts of the United States, make it apparent that these courts, even though a claim may be allowed, none the less refuse, as a matter of principle, the refund of costs and expenses to claimants, if in the case concerned a “probable cause” for the seizure has been produced. From this it may be inferred that in all cases of successful claims in which such a “probable cause” is not found, the prize courts of the United States make it a rule to allow claimants the refund of the necessary expenses incurred to them in the proceedings.

If, furthermore, the Department of Justice, in view of the above-mentioned practice of the American prize courts, declares it to be impracticable to assure reciprocity with regard to the refund of the necessary expenses of claimants for all cases of a successful claim, there would, presumably, be no objection against the assurance of such reciprocity being restricted to those cases of successful claims, in which a “probable cause” for the seizure cannot be found. An assurance restricted in this manner would, from the point of view of the German prize court ordinance, be considered a sufficient basis for the declaration that the reciprocity would be guaranteed in relation with the United States. For, in Germany, the legal rule does not have the effect—as the Department of Justice seems to assume—that the prize courts are under obligation, on the assumption of reciprocity, in all cases of successful claims without exception, to place the necessary expenses of claimants to the debit of the Empire. On the contrary, as is shown from the text of Section 37, paragraph 3, sentence 2, of the German prize court ordinance, those cases are also excepted in Germany, in which sufficient reasons existed under the prize law for the measure to which the claim refers. It would appear from this that the legal status as shown to exist for the United States by the practice thus far employed by its prize courts, does not, in effect, differ from the adjustment existing for Germany on the basis of the above-mentioned regulation of the prize court ordinance.

Under these circumstances, the Imperial Foreign Office requests the Embassy to draw the attention of the American Government to the fact that the presumption regarding the status of law in Germany, from which, according to the contents of the esteemed note verbale, the Department of Justice has evidently proceeded, is not correct, and to suggest whether, after renewed examination of the matter, an assurance could not be given on the part of America, similar to that of the other nations mentioned at the beginning of this note.

  1. Ante, p. 540.
  2. Not printed.