File No. 763.72111/3559
The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Germany ( Gerard )
Sir: The Department acknowledges the receipt of your No. 2631 of March 7, 1916, enclosing a copy and translation of a note verbale, dated February 29, 1916, received by you from the Imperial Foreign Office covering a memorandum regarding the stand taken by the Imperial German Government in regard to the supply of munitions during the Spanish-American war of 1898 which the Foreign Office requested you to bring to the attention of this Government.
The memorandum furnished to you by the Foreign Office refers to an article said to have been published in the New York Times by Mr. Andrew D. White, former American Ambassador at Berlin, in which he asserts that during the Spanish-American war of 1898 Germany furnished arms and munitions to America as well as to Spain, and “disputes the fact that the German Government had stopped a ship with munitions intended for Spain, and only admits that the Government had replied to his question as to the character of the cargo.” The memorandum disputes the correctness of these statements, and adds that while the German Government does not know whether or not arms were supplied at that time by private parties to one of the belligerents, or to both, it had for its part hindered such deliveries on repeated occasions, and that the officials representing the United States at that time made formal request to the German Government in several cases to detain delivery of munitions for Spain.
The memorandum mentions a case of a number of torpedoes which had been manufactured for the Spanish Government by the private German firm of Schwarzkopf at Kiel, the shipment of which, in conformity with a request of the American Consul at Kiel, it is stated the local police authorities of the governmental district of Schleswig were ordered to prevent, and also the case of the Spanish steamer Pinzon which the memorandum states was stopped by the Hamburg authorities at Cuxhaven and examined with regard to contraband, but was permitted to continue on her journey as nothing suspicious was found. In conclusion the memorandum quotes a personal letter, dated May 20, 1898, to Baron von Richthofen, Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in which Mr. White asks the acceptance of his sincere thanks for Baron von Richthofen’s note of the preceding day informing Mr. White of his prompt action regarding the steamer Pinzon, for which Mr. White also tendered the sincere thanks of his Government.
Your transmitting note states that a careful search of the Embassy’s files reveals no correspondence regarding the steamer Pinzon mentioned in the memorandum, and that the Embassy had been unable to find that a copy of Mr. White’s letter of May 20, 1898, to Baron von Richthofen, quoted in the memorandum, was retained in the Embassy’s archives, in which also could be found no trace of Baron von Richthofen’s note of the previous day informing Mr. White of his action regarding the Pinzon.
An exhaustive search of the records of the Department has failed to disclose any correspondence substantiating the statements in the [Page 711] German memorandum that formal request was made to the German Government in the cases cited in the memorandum. No copies of correspondence with the German Foreign Office concerning the Pinzon were enclosed by Mr. White to the Department. The correspondence with Mr. White in this case consists of his despatch No. 429 of May 19, 1898; the Department’s instruction in reply No. 479 of June 6, 1898, and Mr. White’s despatch No. 467 of June 22, 1898, in acknowledgment of the Department’s instruction. As you state that these papers have not been found of record in the Embassy, copies of them are enclosed herewith for your information and the Embassy’s files.1
From this correspondence the facts appear to be as follows:
On May 18, 1898, Mr. White received a message by telephone from the American Consul at Hamburg that the Spanish ship Pinzon would sail within an hour for Cardiff to take on a cargo of coal for a Spanish port. A part of the message was indistinct, and it could not be clearly understood whether the ship was or was not liable to seizure on other grounds. The Ambassador therefore not desiring to incur delay by asking explanations, went immediately to the Foreign Office and asked for the arrest and search of the vessel, and it was promised that everything possible would be done. On the next morning the Ambassador received a telegram from the American Consul that the Pinzon in passing Cuxhaven the previous night was searched for war contraband by order of the German Chancellor, but that none was found. Upon receipt of this information the Department on June 6, 1898, instructed the Ambassador that:
In view of the reported action of the Imperial German Government in directing the search of the Pinzon for contraband of war, the Department desires to be informed as to whether there are any laws or regulations in force which forbid the shipment of contraband of war from Hamburg or any other German port. It is assumed that you can obtain such information without applying to the German Government for it. It is important that if any such laws or regulaions exist, this Government and its agents may be informed of them so as to avoid the embarrassments which might arise if it should appear to protest on the general principles of international law against neutral governments allowing articles regarded merely as contraband of war to be shipped from their ports.
In reply to this instruction Mr. White, on June 22, 1898, informed the Department, without application to the German Government for positive information on the subject, that he had been unable to ascertain that there had ever been any legislation upon the subject of contraband in the Empire. Mr. White added that Germany had never issued a proclamation of neutrality, and that the Reichstag had not discussed the question of contraband since 1894, and that the Embassy had no knowledge of the issuance of any regulations on the subject since the existence of war with Spain.
No further correspondence appears to have taken place on the subject.
I am [etc.]
- Not printed.↩