Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1918, Supplement 1, The World War, Volume II

File No. 763.72112/11598

The Secretary of the Navy ( Daniels) to the Secretary of State

Washington, February 20, 1919.

Sir: I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated January 30, 1919, So–763.72112/11186, in which you request to be informed whether the naval vessels of the United States cooperated with the British naval vessels in the execution of the plan of seizure and search which was contested in the note on the subject which the American Ambassador at London on October 21, 1915, was instructed to deliver to the Foreign Minister of Great Britain, copy of which you enclosed. You also ask that your Department be furnished with additional information regarding the activities of the United States Navy during the war, with special reference to the matter of search and seizure discussed in the note to the British Government mentioned above.

As is well known to you, the Navy of the United States was associated in cooperation with the British, French, and Italian Navies in order to bring about a successful conclusion to the war as far as such conclusion might be attained through lawful maritime operations.

Inasmuch as full and detailed reports of the operations of our several fleet units, major and minor, during the existing war have not yet been received, studied, and digested, it is not possible at the present time to state categorically that in no instance has a vessel of our Navy taken part, direct or indirect, in any matter of search and seizure of the character discussed in the State Department’s note of October 21, 1915, addressed to the British Government.¹

I may, however, safely reiterate the statements concerning the war operations of United States naval vessels contained in my letter to you under date of January 6, 1919, a copy of which is enclosed herewith.

As being of interest, and of possible elucidation in the matter under consideration, I give you the substance of a memorandum prepared in the Office of Naval Operations, which may furnish some explanation affecting apparent coercion of merchant vessels in relation to ports of call, travel in convoy, diversion from usual routes, points of rendezvous, and so forth.

From and after May, 1917, convoys of merchant vessels were permitted to assemble in our ports, proceeding therefrom under escort and according to convoy rules issued by the British Admiralty and approved by our Navy Department; it does not appear that any of these rules were in conflict with the principles contended for in the diplomatic note of October 21, 1915.

Vessels traveling in convoy were required to follow certain routes, and in some cases were required to put into a port of call prior to the port of ultimate destination; but the only grounds for such definition of route or for putting into a port of call in which we concurred were for the purpose of giving safe routing instructions through dangerous sea areas, or for the purpose of furnishing escort, or for modified orders concerning destination.

Concerning routing instructions: The reason for establishing definite routes for vessels was solely for the purpose of making the voyage as safe as possible from enemy activities. In order to warn vessels of dangers in their presumed or established routes we required them to speak our speaking stations along the coast. We also concurred in British Admiralty instructions requiring vessels on long voyages to stop at some outlying routing station if they had sailed from a port at which no routing officer was stationed. At times this requirement caused diversion from the direct route to destination; but the only purpose for this diversion in which we concurred was to enable the vessel concerned to pursue a safe route.

Prior to the beginning of German submarine activity along our Atlantic coast about the first of June, 1918, this Department gave no routing instructions at all except to our men of war going abroad; instructions for these vessels were in accord with advices received from the Commander of United States Naval Forces Operating in European Waters. Before that time we concurred in and indorsed the British routing instructions by allowing their routing officers to be established in our ports and by advising American vessels to obtain routing instructions from these officers. In all such cases, however, the only purpose for which we indorsed the routings was in order to furnish such vessels the safest possible course through waters rendered dangerous by the activities of the enemy. They were never indorsed for the purpose of causing vessels to be taken into port with the object of visit and search therein. Routing instructions were in all cases secret and committed to paper to the very smallest extent; no copies of such instructions are available for consultation at the present time.

In the course of study for the preparation of this reply to your letter a vague impression has been gained that some of the instructions given or concurred in by this Department may have required merchant vessels under the Spanish flag to obtain final clearance at New York upon their voyage from the West Indies to Europe; I have not, however, anything definite on this subject, and I should be glad to receive from you any specific instance of which you may possess knowledge tending to confirm this vague impression in order that if there be cause for such it may be further investigated.¹

Very respectfully,

Josephus Daniels

1. In reply to an inquiry Feb. 25, 1929, designed to complete the information on this subject, the following letter from the Secretary of the Navy was received by the Secretary of State on Apr. 1, 1929 (File No. 763.72112/12944):

   Washington, March 30, 1929.

   Sir: The receipt is acknowledged of your letter of February 25, 1929, wherein you refer to the letters of the Secretary of the Navy of July 5, 1918, and February 20, 1919, on the subject of visit and search, and request reply to the following questions:

   1. Was the belligerent right of visit and search of neutral ships ever actually exercised by vessels of the United States Navy during the war with Germany, 1917–18?

   2. Were any neutral ships or cargoes brought into port by vessels of the United States Navy during that war for adjudication as prizes?

   3. Were there any cases of search and seizure of the kind contested in the American note of October 21, 1915?

   The general policy of the United States Navy during the World War, as to visit and search, is indicated by the Instructions for the Navy of the United States Governing Maritime Warfare, June, 1917, and by Alnav No. 78, of 21 May 1918, which reads as follows:

   Commanders of all Naval vessels shall whenever possible take necessary steps to assure themselves of the character of all vessels sighted on the high seas in accordance with international law and usage.

   As an example, however, of the limitations upon visit and search which were recognized by United States naval officers during the war, the Bainbridge incident may be mentioned. On March 6, 1918, the U.S.S. Bainbridge was dispatched from Gibraltar by Senior Naval Officer (British) under secret orders to intercept the Spanish S.S. Reina Victoria Regina, search for a passenger named Otto David, alias David Grundland or Grunland, and to arrest him and bring him to Gibraltar if found. When the then Commander of the United States Patrol Squadrons based on Gibraltar, Rear Admiral A. P. Niblack, learned of these orders, he protested and requested that the orders be revoked, which was done. A few days later the British Senior Naval Officer at Gibraltar received instructions from the British Admiralty that United States vessels should not be employed in removing enemy or other persons from neutral vessels.

   Referring specifically to the three questions raised by the Secretary of State, I have the honor to state as follows:

   The answer to the first question is, yes. The right of visit and search of neutral ships was exercised by the United States Navy constantly during the war, the following cases being cited among many:

   • Danish schooner Salus, boarded by U.S.S. Rochester, May 3, 1918, in mid-Atlantic;
   • Holland-American S.S. Maartensdyk, boarded by the U.S.S. Craven, April 24, 1917, seven miles west of Nantucket;
   • Mexican schooner San Cosme, searched by U.S.S. Brutus, February 15, 1918, en route Acapulco to Manzanillo, Mexico;
   • Spanish S.S. Leon XIII, searched by U.S.S. Pittsburgh, April 22, 1918, six miles off Santa Maria light, Uruguay.

   The answer to the second question is that there is no record in the Navy Department of any neutral ship or cargoes being brought into port by vessels of the United States Navy during the World War for adjudication as prizes.

   The answer to the third question is that there is no record in the Navy Department of any case of search and seizure by vessels of the United States Navy of the kind contested in the American note of October 21, 1915, found in Foreign Relations, 1915, Supplement, pages 578–89.

   Trusting that the foregoing furnishes the information desired relative to this subject, I am [etc.]

   C. F. Adams
   Secretary of the Navy

1. See the section dealing with control of Spanish ships, post, pp. 1729 et seq.