File No. 763.72112/3268
The Ambassador in Great Britain ( Page) to the Secretary of State
[Received January 3, 8.15 a.m.]
5404. Your 4224, December 28, 7 p.m., 4225, December 28, 8 p.m., 4232, December 29, 4 p.m.,2 and other similar instructions.
Lord Robert Cecil promises earliest answer possible in each case.
Unofficially in the course of conversation he said he was trying to prepare also a comprehensive statement which would cover as many cases of this kind as possible and explain fully the position of his Government and the principle on which it is proceeding. He went on to say in this private conversation that the whole trouble was at [Page 507] bottom a submarine trouble. European neutral shipping companies whose ships normally ply between England and continental countries are alarmed by German submarines and seek business on the American side of the Atlantic. These measures of bunker agreement and objections to chartering are meant to discourage such European neutral ships from deserting European waters.
I remarked that his purpose was obvious but that the trouble was with his methods. But I felt sure we should welcome such a comprehensive statement.
The foregoing gives the key to the British action, and they use bunker agreements and such like devices in their effort to justify their action. Their comprehensive statement, so far as I can see, can hardly be bomb proof.
I ventured to suggest that he can not charter and insure Scandinavian ships himself and thus in a practical way avoid this kind of trouble. I venture also to suggest to the Department as a purely practical measure the encouragement of American coal merchants to provide coal for American ships at some American West Indian port.
I shall insist on prompt answers to each of your instructions.
- Telegram No. 4225 of Dec. 28 not printed.↩