صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

19. If that were really the position, it is possible that the measures taken by His Majesty's Government might be described as uncalled for, but it is not. We may well wish that it were so. Even though the military situation of the Allies has greatly improved there is still a long and bitter struggle in front of them, and one which in justice to the principles for which they are fighting imposes upon them the duty of employing every opportunity and every measure which they can legitimately use to overcome their opponents.

20. One observation which is very commonly heard is that certain belligerent acts, even though lawful, are too petty to have any influence upon a struggle of such magnitude. It is, I know, difficult for those who have no immediate contact with war to realise with what painful anxiety men and women in this country must regard even the smallest acts which tend to increase, if only by a hair's breadth, the danger in which their relatives and friends daily stand, or to prolong, if only by a minute, the period during which they are to be exposed to such perils.

21. Whatever inconvenience may be caused to neutral nations by the exercise of belligerent rights, it is not to be compared for an instant to the suffering and loss occasioned to mankind by the prolongation of the war, even for a week.

22. One other matter should be mentioned, namely, the exclusion from ships using British coal of goods belonging to firms on the statutory list. This is enforced by rendering it a condition of the supply of bunker coal. What legal objection can be taken to this course? It is British coal; why should it be used to transport the goods of those who are actively assisting our enemies? Nor is this the only point. It must be remembered that the German Government by their submarine warfare have sought to diminish the world's tonnage; they have sunk illegally and without warning hundreds of peaceful merchant ships belonging not only to Allied countries but to neutrals as well. Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, Dutch, Spanish, Greek ships have all been sunk. Between the 1st June and the 30th September, 1916, 262 vessels have been sunk by enemy submarines; 73 of these were British, 123 allied, and 66 neutrals. These totals included 10 British vessels which were sunk without warning and involved the loss of 81 lives; 2 allied, 1 of which involved the loss of 2 lives, no information being available as to the other; and 3 neutral, involving the loss of 1 life. Even so the list is incomplete. Probably other vessels were sunk without warning and more lives than those enumerated were lost. It may be added that where those on board did escape it was, as a rule, only by taking to open boats.

23. One of the first enterprises to feel the loss of tonnage has been the Commission for Relief in Belgium. Relief ships have themselves been repeatedly sunk; and in spite of all the efforts of His Majesty's Government, in spite of the special facilities given for the

supply of coal to ships engaged in the commission's service, that body is constantly unable to import into Belgium the foodstuffs absolutely necessary to preserve the life of the population. Can it then be wondered that the British Government are anxious to limit the supply of British coal in such a way as to reserve it as far as possible to ships genuinely employed in Allied or neutral trade?

24. There is, indeed, one preoccupation in regard to this use of coaling advantages by His Majesty's Government which is no doubt present in the minds of neutrals, and which I recognize. I refer to the apprehension that the potential control over means of transportation thus possessed by one nation might be used for the disruption of the trade of the world in the selfish interests of that nation. His Majesty's Government therefore take this opportunity to declare that they are not unmindful of the obligations of those who possess seapower, nor of that traditional policy pursued by the British Empire by which such power has been regarded as a trust and has been exercised in the interests of freedom. They require no representations to recall such considerations to mind, but they can not admit that, in the circumstances of the times, their present use of their coal resources, a use which only differs in extent from that exercised by the United States in the Civil War in the case of vessels proceeding to such ports as Nassau, is obnoxious to their duties or their voluntary professions.

25. In conclusion, I can not refrain from calling to mind the instructions issued by Lord Russell on the 5th July, 1862, to the merchants of Liverpool in regard to trade with the Bahamas. His Lordship there advised British subjects that their "true remedy" would be to "refrain from this species of trade" on the ground that "it exposes innocent commerce to vexatious detention and search by American cruisers."

26. His Majesty's Government do not ask the Government of the United States to take any such action as this, but they cannot believe that the United States Government will question their right to lay upon British merchants, in the interests of the safety of the British Empire, for which they are responsible, the same prohibitions as Lord Russell issued fifty years ago out of consideration for the interests and feelings of a foreign nation. Suspicions and insinuations which would construe so simple an action as an opening for secret and unavowed designs on neutral rights should have no place in the relations between two friendly countries.

27. I trust that the explanations, contained in this note will destroy such suspicions and correct the erroneous views which prevail in the United States on the subject.

I have, etc.,

GREY OF FALLODON.

Consul General Skinner to the Secretary of State.

[Extract.]

No. 3475.]

AMERICAN CONSULATE GENERAL,
London, January 17, 1917.

SIR: With reference to my telegram of January 13, 1917, reporting a British Order in Council amending the order of March 11, 1915, I have the honor to forward herewith the full text of the Order in Council of January 10, 1917.

It is from the London Gazette of January 12, 1917.

I have, etc.,

[Inclosure.]

ROBERT SKINNER.

ORDER IN COUNCIL.

At the Court at Buckingham Palace the 10th day of January, 1917. Present the King's Most Excellent Majesty in Council

Whereas, on the 11th day of March, 1915, an order was issued by His Majesty in Council directing that all ships which sailed from their ports of departure after the 1st day of March, 1915, might be required to discharge in a British or allied port goods which were of enemy origin or of enemy destination or which were enemy property; And whereas such Order in Council was consequent upon certain orders issued by the German Government purporting to declare, in violation of the usages of war, the waters surrounding the United Kingdom a military area, in which all British and allied merchant vessels would be destroyed, irrespective of the lives of passengers and crew, and in which neutral shipping would be exposed to similar danger, in view of the uncertainties of naval warfare;

And whereas the sinking of British, allied, and neutral merchant ships, irrespective of the lives of passengers and crews, and in violation of the usages of war, has not been confined to the waters surrounding the United Kingdom, but has taken place in large portion of the area of naval operations;

And whereas such illegal acts have been committed not only by German warships, but by warships flying the flag of each of the enemy countries;

And whereas on account of the extension of the scope of the illegal operations carried out under the said German orders, and in retaliation therefor, vessels have been required under the provisions of the Order in Council aforementioned to discharge in a British or allied port goods which were of enemy origin or of enemy destination or which were enemy property, irrespective of the enemy country from or to which such goods were going or of the enemy country in which was domiciled the persons whose property they were:

And whereas doubts have arisen as to whether the term "enemy" in articles 3 and 4 of the said Order in Council includes enemy countries other than Germany:

Now, therefore, His Majesty is pleased, by and with the advice of His Privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered, as follows:

1. In articles 3 and 4 of the said Order in Council of the 11th March, 1915, aforementioned, the terms "enemy destination" and "enemy origin" shall be deemed to apply and shall apply to goods destined for or originating in any enemy country, and the term 'enemy property" shall be deemed to apply and shall apply to goods belonging to any person domiciled in any enemy country.

[ocr errors]

2. Effect shall be given to this order in the application of the said Order in Council of the 11th March, 1915, to goods which previous to the date of this order have been discharged at a British or allied port, being goods of destination or origin or property which was enemy though not German, and all such goods shall be detained and dealt with in all respects as is provided in the said Order in Council of the 11th March, 1915.

J. C. LEDLIE.

Consul General Skinner to the Secretary of State.

[Telegram.]

AMERICAN CONSULATE GENERAL,
London, February 22, 1917.

Order in Council March 11, 1915, modified by proclamation dated 16th promulgated 21st new order after reciting that German memorandum declaring that after February 1 neutral ships will navigate certain zones at their risk and similar directions by other enemy powers are in flagrant contradiction with rules of international law and treaty obligations of enemy and therefore renders it necessary to adopt

further measures to prevent commodities from reaching or leaving enemy countries announces that from and after February 16:

1. A vessel which is encountered at sea on her way to or from a port in any neutral country afforded means of access to the enemy territory without calling at a port in British or allied territory shall until the contrary is established be deemed to be carrying goods with an enemy destination or of enemy origin and shall be brought in for examination and if necessary for adjudication before the prize court.

2. Any vessel carrying goods with an enemy destination or of enemy origin shall be liable to capture and condemnation in respect of the carriage of such goods, provided that in the case of any vessel which calls at an appointed British or allied port for the examination of her cargo no sentence of condemnation shall be pronounced in respect only of the carriage of goods of enemy origin or destination and no such presumption as is laid down in article J shall arise.

3. Goods which are found on the examination of any vessel to be goods of enemy origin or of enemy destination shall be liable to condemnation.

4. Nothing in this order shall be deemed to affect the liability of any vessel or goods to capture or condemnation independently of this order.

5. This order is supplemental to the Orders in Council of the 11th day of March, 1915, and the 10th day of January, 1917, for restricting the commerce of the enemy.

SKINNER.

« السابقةمتابعة »