Neutral rights as affected by the submarine operations of Germany and her allies–The question of armed merchant vessels–The imperiling and destruction of American lives and property–American demands and German pledges–Relations of the United States with Germany and her allies 1
1. Affidavits and other evidence bearing on particular cases dealt with in this correspondence are printed in the publications of the Department of State entitled Diplomatic Correspondence with Belligerent Governments relating to Neutral Rights and Duties (European War Nos. 3 and 4), and reprinted in the Special Supplements to the American Journal of International Law, vols. 10 and 11. See the Preface to Foreign Relations, 1914, Supplement.
Contents
- The continuance of negotiations concerning the “Lusitania” and the
“Ancona”—The sinking of the “Persia” (Documents 187–194)
- The American proposal of January 18, 1916, of a Modus Vivendi for the
observance of rules of international law and principles of humanity by
submarines and the discontinuance of armament of merchant ships—Further
negotiations concerning the “Lusitania”—The case of the
“Petrolite”—Reports of offensive operations by armed merchant ships (Documents 195–221)
- German memorandum of February 10, 1916, announcing that armed
merchant ships are to be treated as belligerents (Documents 222–231)
- The German ambassador’s note of February 16, 1916, on the “Lusitania”
and “Arabic” cases; His communication of instructions found on the
British armed merchant ship “Appam”—Austrian note of February 22, 1916,
on the “Petrolite” incident—Italian note of February 19, 1916, on the
Modus Vivendi Proposal (Documents 232–237)
- The President’s letter of February 24, 1916, asserting the right of
American citizens to travel on armed merchant ships—German memorandum of
February 28, 1916, asserting that the pledges of September 1 and October
5, 1915, do not apply to armed ships (Documents 238–248)
- Defeat in Congress of the resolution to prevent Americans from
traveling on armed merchant ships—The decision of the German government
against unlimited submarine warfare—Resolutions in the Reichstag against
restrictions (Documents 249–271)
- Replies of the Allied governments of March 23, 1916, to the proposal
for a Modus Vivendi (Documents 272–275)
- The sinking of the “Sussex,” March 24, 1916—Cases of the
“Englishman,” “Manchester Engineer”, “Berwindvale”, and “Eagle Point” (Documents 276–301)
- The German note of April 10, 1916, on the “Sussex” and other cases (Documents 302–307)
- The American note of April 18, 1916, on the “Sussex,” stating that
diplomatic relations would be severed unless the current methods of
submarine warfare were abandoned—Memorandum published on April 27, 1916,
concerning the status of armed merchant ships—Memorandum communicated to
Germany on April 28, 1916, regarding the conduct of naval vessels toward
enemy and neutral merchant ships (Documents 308–336)
- German reply of May 4, 1916, promising to observe the rules of visit
and search and to provide for the safety of persons on board destroyed
ships—Note of May 7, 1916, acknowledging responsibility in the “Sussex”
case—American note of May 8, 1916, accepting the German assurances as
unconditional (Documents 337–363)
- The American note of June 21, 1916, on the “Petrolite”
incident—Austrian replies of July 17 and September 9, 1916—The case of
the “Owego” (Documents 364–385)
- The renewed struggle in Germany for unrestricted submarine warfare
(October 1916) (Documents 386–399)
- Representations to Germany (October 30–November 18, 1916) concerning
the sinking of the “Rowanmore”, “Marina”, “Arabia”, “Sebek”, “Delto”,
“Lanao”, “Columbian”, and “Chemung” (December 2, 1916)—Replies and
correspondence on these cases—Reports on political conditions in Germany
with reference to submarine policy—Communications of instructions found
on a French armed merchant ship (Documents 400–441)