The Secretary of State to the British Ambassador (Spring Rice)
Excellency: I have the honor to acknowledge your note of the 20th ultimo in the case of the Vinland and to state that I have not failed to give the matter set forth therein careful consideration.
Your Government ask for further information as to the precise nature and grounds of the claims made by this Government, as they are most anxious to recognize to the full extent any claims which [Page 763] are well founded in law, though unable to make a concession as to what they regard as their belligerent rights.
In reply it may be stated that the Government of the United States advances no claim that British vessels which have been and are cruising off American ports beyond the three-mile limit have not in so doing been within their strict legal rights under international law. The grounds for the objection of the Government of the United States to the continued presence of belligerent vessels of war cruising in close proximity to American ports are based, not upon the illegality of such action, but upon the irritation which it naturally causes to a neutral country. The continued presence of British ships in the offings of the great American commercial centers is, I believe your Government will agree, an inevitable source of annoyance and offense. The cases of the Vinland and Zealandia1 show how belligerent vessels may be the cause of offense, and illustrate how the presence of vessels in such close proximity to the coast of a neutral country may easily become the cause of controversy.
The irritation aroused by such a practice was, during the American Civil War, manifested by Great Britain in the cases of the warships under the command of Rear Admiral Wilkes, U. S. N., to which you have called attention, and was the subject of protest by the British Government. The circumstances in those cases, however, were very different from the present, and the practice complained of far less offensive. The cruising, against which Great Britain protested, was done in the vicinity of small islands near the American coast which, after the blockade of the southern ports had been established, were used as rendezvous for vessels notoriously engaged in running the blockade. In the present case British cruisers are patrolling off the great ports of this country from which trade routes diverge to all parts of the world, particularly to Great Britain and her allies.
In this connection, as showing that for over a century the objections of this Government to British vessels hovering about the coasts have been maintained, I take the liberty of quoting from a letter of Mr. Madison, then Secretary of State, dated May 20, 1807, to Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney:
It is much regretted that provision could not be obtained against the practice of British cruisers in hovering and taking stations for the purpose of surprising trade going in and out of our harbours; a practice which the British Government felt to be unjust to the dignity and rights of that nation at periods when it was neutral.
It is thus seen that the contention of this Government in the present war is in no way a departure from the attitude taken in the early days of the Republic, the conduct of American naval officers during the Civil War, referred to above, having at least the justification of having been carried out in proximity to the seat of naval operations.
The fact that a number of German merchant vessels are laid up in American ports during the present war is not, as your excellency would seem to suggest, sufficient cause for the strict surveillance to [Page 764] which those ports are subject by British ships of war; for, I may state to you, a considerable number of American naval vessels have been constantly engaged since the war opened—and, I think your excellency will admit, successfully engaged—in preventing the use of American ports as bases of naval operations. Furthermore, the alleged escape of vessels from American ports with supplies for German warships at sea, which has made it necessary, as you state, for His Majesty’s vessels to take a position which would enable them to intercept such supply ships, can not now be regarded as a valid excuse for such action, because it is a matter of common knowledge that German warships have for many months been driven from the seas adjoining the coasts of the United States. In fact, your excellency has not called the possibility of the escape of supply ships to my attention since March 1915. In the meantime, however, I have found it necessary to call your attention to certain instances of His Majesty’s ships’ hovering off American ports and communicating with boats coming out from shore and even coaling in American waters.
Further reasons, if necessary, may be adduced to oppose the British practice. In time of peace the mobilization of an army, particularly if near the frontier, has often been regarded as a ground for serious offense and been made the subject of protest by the government of a neighboring country. In the present war it has even been the ground for a declaration of war and the beginning of hostilities. Upon the same principle the constant and menacing presence of cruisers on the high seas near the ports of a neutral country may be regarded according to the canons of international courtesy as a just ground for offense, although it may be strictly legal.
I have shown, I believe, that this Government’s contention is supported not only by ample precedents extending through American and British relations since the early years of the Republic and by the analogy in the mobilization of armed forces near an international boundary, but also by the lack of a sufficient excuse for such an objectionable practice as I have had the unpleasant duty of bringing to your excellency’s attention. I trust, therefore, that your Government will be willing to recognize my Government’s contention to the extent of instructing His Majesty’s cruisers to withdraw from the vicinity of the territorial waters of the United States and remain at such distances from American harbors and coasts as to avoid the annoying and inquisitorial methods which have compelled this Government to complain formally to your excellency’s Government.
I have [etc.]