File No. 841.711/751
4599. I have received following note from Foreign Office:
July 20, 1916.
On May 24 the Secretary of State handed to the British and French
Ambas3sadors at Washington a note regarding the examination of mails
on neutral ships by the Allied Governments.
I have now the honour to transmit to your excellency for the
information of the Government of the United States a memorandum
examining certain specific allegations made in paragraph 8 of that
note.
As stated in the enclosed memorandum, this communication is not to be
regarded as a reply to the various arguments put forward by the
United States Government. These are being carefully considered by
the several Allied Governments in consultation. The present
communication is merely intended to dispose of certain statements
made with special reference to the conduct of the censorship by His
Majesty’s Government.
Unless your excellency has any objection, I propose to publish this
memorandum on July 24.
Memorandum
The reply of the Allied Governments to the note addressed by the
Secretary of State of the United States to His Majesty’s Ambassador
at Washington on May 24 regarding the examination of mails on
neutral ships will be communicated to the Government of the United
States as soon as the arguments contained in that note have been
fully considered by the Allied Governments in consultation. Since,
however, the note contains in paragraph 8 certain specific instances
affecting the conduct of the work of examination by the British
censorship, His Majesty’s Government desire to deal with these
instances in advance and in detail.
In that paragraph allusion is made to a large number of complaints of
which no particulars are given. Only four specific instances of
these complaints are cited and they are put forward in a form which
in the absence of any of the details which His Majesty’s Government
have repeatedly asked for as necessary to identify and trace the
occurrences complained of makes it difficult to investigate them.
The following facts have, however, been ascertained in regard to
them.
MacNiff Horticultural Company, New York. It
is stated that the shipping documents relating to perishable goods
for this firm were removed from the Nieuw
Amsterdam, Oosterdijk, and Rotterdam. The mails on these three ships were removed for
examination on February 10, February 17, and February 25
respectively. The mails from the Nieuw
Amsterdam were forwarded again, part by the Cedric on February 17, and part by the Lapland on February 25; the mails on the
Oosterdijk were forwarded by the Lapland on February 25; the mails from the
Rotterdam were forwarded part by the Cameronia sailing March 4 and part by the Cedric sailing March 8. It was not until
March 22 that a note was received from the United States Ambassador
enclosing a copy of a letter from the MacNiff Horticultural Company
and stating that the company anticipated difficulties of this kind
in regard to their shipments, the first of Which was due to arrive
about the beginning of March. The possibility of preventing such
losses to neutrals was considered by. His Majesty’s Government
immediately on receipt of the Ambassador’ note, and on April 14 a
reply was sent to his excellency offering to place a special
censorship staff at ports of call in order to examine separate mail
bags labelled “shipping documents” and to reforward such documents
by the same ship without unloading them with
[Page 614]
the rest of the mail. It will therefore be
seen that when specific complaints of this kind are made action has
been taken immediately to prevent damage to neutral interests and
the loss sustained by the MacNiff Horticultural Company which His
Majesty’s Government much regret was due to the specific complaint
not having reached His Majesty’s Government in time to enable them
to apply the new system to this firm’s shipments.
The Standard Underground Cable Company,
Pittsburg. The Government of the United States appear to
insinuate that the delay on this company’s mail to Christiania was
directly connected with the fact that a British competitor obtained
a contract for which that company had been tendering. His Majesty’s
Government are astonished that such an insinuation should be made.
They are the more surprised at it as the complaint from the
Underground Cable Company clearly appears not even to have been
adequately examined. The contracts alluded to are presumably those
recently made by the Christiania Municipal Electric Works. Out of
seven contracts placed by these works of which His Majesty’s
Government have record, five were allowed to American firms and only
two to British firms, and in spite of the extremely dangerous nature
of consignments of copper to Bcandinavia, in view of the German
attempts to obtain that article through contiguous countries, His
Majesty’s Government went out of their way to take all possible
steps to facilitate the despatch from the United States to Norway of
the goods necessary, to execute the American contracts including
205,000 kilograms of electrolytic copper wire, 10,800 kilograms of
electrolytic copper, 12,000 kilograms of copper tubes, and 10,800
kilograms of copper sheets and bars. Of the two orders placed with
British firms one small one was placed on February 2, 1916, and the
other for a larger amount on April 8, 1916. In this latter case the
call for tenders was issued on February 14, the date specified for
closing being noon on March 30, and the British firm tendered on
March 17. As the first direct inward-bound mails from the United
States for Scandinavia on ships passing round the north of Scotland
removed for examination by the British censorship were those on the
Hellig Olav, which called at Kirkwall on
March 28, it is difficult to understand the assertion made by the
United States Government that owing to the detention by the British
censorship of the Standard Underground Cable Company’s [tender, the
contract was] awarded to a British competitor, and in the absence of
further details it can only be concluded that the American company’s
tender never passed through the hands of the British censor or that
it related to a contract which was not awarded to a British
firm.
Money-order lists. This complaint must be
left for consideration in the final reply of the Allied Governments
as it involves questions of principle on which consultation between
those Governments is still in progress.
Mails from the “Medan” The facts stated in
the United States note are correct except that it is not made clear,
though it is the fact, that the neutral mail bags removed from the
Medan were all sent on by February 12 and
that the 182 bags lost in the Mecklenburg
were without exception for enemy destination. American trade or
correspondence with neutral countries was therefore not affected by
the loss of the Mecklenburg, and the loss of
the mails destined for enemy countries was due to the illegal sowing
of mines with no military object by the enemy themselves.
It will be seen that these specific complaints do not support the
general charges against the efficiency of the British censorship
which the Government of the United States have put forward in their
note. His Majesty’s Government will always be ready to explan in
detail the working of the censorship as there is nothing in regard
to it which they desire to conceal. His Majesty’s Government desire
to emphasize most strongly the fact that they have had many
instances of complaints against their censorship which on
examination proved to arise from the wrong direction of letters, the
irregular sailings of neutral mail boats such as the Dutch boats
during the week following the sinking of the Tubantia, and from other similar causes entirely outside
the control of His Majesty’s Government and often directly due to
the action of their enemies. They are obliged, therefore, to
disclaim responsibility for occurrences complained of until they
have first been given the opportunity of investigating such
occurrences in detail.
July 20.
