was good enough to express in the memorandum under reply, and he now begs to communicate a further expression of Sir Edward Grey's views as received by telegraph. It is stated that there is no doubt whatever that automatic contact mines have been placed by Germany in the high seas where they are dangerous to merchant shipping, as a German mine-laying vessel was caught in the act. It is not alleged that they are a breach of any Convention concluded at The Hague to which Germany is a party, but that does not make them less dangerous to merchant shipping. His Majesty's Government share the reluctance of the Secretary of State to see the practice extended and the danger to neutral shipping increased. At the same time His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires is instructed to point out that if Great Britain refrains from adopting the methods of Germany the result is that Germany receives impunity unless the neutral Powers can find some means of making Germany feel that she cannot continue to preserve all facilities for receiving trade and supplies through neutral shipping while impeding British commerce by means the use of which by Great Britain is deprecated by the United States Government. BRITISH EMBASSY, Washington, August 19, 1914. Memorandum from the British Embassy. His Majesty's Ambassador presents his compliments to the Secretary of State and has the honour to communicate to him the following telegram received from the Foreign Office yesterday summarizing the Naval position of the war up to date: The Admiralty wish to draw attention to their previous warning to neutrals of the danger of traversing the North Sea. The Germans are continuing their practice of laying mines indiscriminately upon the ordinary trade routes. These mines do not conform to the conditions of The Hague convention; they do not become harmless after a certain number of hours; they are not laid in connection with any definite military scheme such as the closing of a military port or as a distinct operation against a fighting fleet, but appear to be scattered on the chance of catching individual British war or merchant vessels. In consequence of this policy neutral ships, no matter what their destination, are exposed to the gravest dangers. Two Danish vessels the S. S. Maryland and the S. S. Broberg have within the last twenty-four hours been destroyed by these deadly engines in the North Sea while traveling on the ordinary trade routes at a considerable distance from the British Coast. In addition to this, it is reported that two Dutch steamers clearing from Swedish ports were yesterday blown up by German mines in the Baltic. In these circumstances the Admiralty desire to impress not only on British but on neutral shipping the vital importance of touching at British ports before entering the North Sea in order to ascertain according to the latest information the routes and channels which the Admiralty are keeping swept and along which these dangers to neutrals and merchantmen are reduced as far as possible. The Admiralty, while reserving to themselves the utmost liberty of retaliatory action against this new form of warfare, announce that they have not so far laid any mines during the present war and that they are endeavouring to keep the sea routes open for peaceful commerce. BRITISH EMBASSY, Washington, August 23, 1914. Memorandum from the British Embassy. The British Ambassador presents his compliments to the Secretary of State and has the honour to communicate the text of a telegram received to-day from Sir E. Grey: His Majesty's Government have learnt that on or about August 26th an Iceland trawler is reported to have struck a mine 25 miles off the Tyne and sunk, and at least one foreign newspaper has stated that the mine was English. Although the German action in laying mines has forced the Admiralty to reserve to themselves the right to do likewise, the statement already made by His Majesty's Government that no British mines have been laid remains absolutely true at this moment. The mines off the Tyne were laid thirty miles to seaward, not as part of any definite military operation nor by German ships of war but by German trawlers of which a considerable number appear to have been engaged on this work; the number of one such trawler actually seen to be doing this was A. E. 24 Emden. It would be well if the conduct of those who ordered her to perform this act were carefully considered by neutral powers. BRITISH EMBASSY, Washington, August 30, 1914. The German Ambassador to the Secretary of State. MR. SECRETARY OF STATE: [Translation.] GERMAN EMBASSY, New York, September 10, 1914. By direction of my Government I have the honor respectfully to bring the following to Your Excellency's knowledge. No foundation for idea prevalent among neutrals abroad that because of the blockade of German ports sea trade with Germany is tied up. No port is blockaded and nothing stands in the way of neutral states' sea trade with Germany. The assertions from England that the North Sea has been infested with mines by Germany are wrong. Neutral vessels bound for German ports in the North Sea must steer by day for a point 10 nautical miles N.W. off Helgoland. There will German pilots be found in readiness to pilot the ships into port. Neutral vessels must sail direct for Baltic sea ports, every one of which has pilots. The prohibition of coal export does not include bunker coal and coaling is assured. Accept, etc., No. 476.] J. BERNSTORFF. Ambassador W. H. Page to the Secretary of State. AMERICAN EMBASSY, London, September 28, 1914. SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith a protest made by the British Government against the methods pursued by the German Navy in laying mines in the North Sea. This protest was inclosed to me by his Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in a communication requesting that it be forwarded to the Government of the United States. I have, etc., WALTER HINES PAGE. [Inclosure.] His Majesty's Government consider it their duty to bring before the notice of the United States Government the practice which is being pursued by the German naval authorities in laying mines on the high seas on the trade routes, not only to British but to neutral ports, and in furtherance of no definite military operation. His Majesty's Government have reason to think that fishing vessels, possibly disguised as neutral, are employed for the purpose, and lay these mines under the pretense of following the ordinary avocations of fishing. Mines have been found in several cases as much as 50 miles from the coast. This practice has already resulted, since the commencement of the war, in the destruction of eight neutral and seven British merchant and fishing vessels, so far as at present ascertained, with the loss of some sixty lives of neutral and noncombatant persons. The practice of laying mines indiscriminately and in large numbers on the high seas, entirely regardless of the dangers to peaceful shipping, is in flagrant violation of the accepted principles of international law and contrary to the primary dictates of humanity. It is also in direct contradiction with the language of Baron Marschall von Bieberstein, who, as First German delegate at the Peace Conference of 1907, spoke as follows: "We do not intend, if I may employ an expression used by the British delegate, 'to sow mines in profusion on every sea.' . . . We do not hold the opinion that everything which is not expressly forbidden is permitted." The freedom of the seas for peaceful trading is an established and universally accepted principle; this fact has never been more clearly recognized than in the words of the report of the third Committee of the Second Peace Conference, which dealt with the question of submarine contact mines: "Even apart from any written stipulation it can never fail to be present in the minds of all that the principle of the liberty of the seas, with the obligations which it implies on behalf of those who make use of this way of communication open to the nations, is the indisputable prerogative of the human race." This principle received further recognition in the 3rd article of the Convention relating to the laying of submarine contact mines: "When anchored automatic contact mines are employed, every possible precaution must be taken for the security of peaceful shipping. "The belligerents undertake to do their utmost to render these mines harmless after a limited time has elapsed, and, should the mines cease to be under observation, to notify the danger zones as soon as military exigencies permit, by a notice to mariners, which must also be communicated to the Governments through the diplomatic channel." Not only have the German Government neglected to take every possible precaution for the safety of neutral shipping, but they have, on the contrary, deliberately and successfully contrived to sow danger in its track. The mined zones have not been kept under observation nor has any notification of their locality ever been made. The provisions of this article, which the German Government are pledged to observe, have therefore been violated in three distinct ways. Article 1, Section 2, of the same Convention has equally been violated by the German Government, for the mines which they have laid have in numerous instances been found adrift from their moorings without having become harmless. Yet the German Government made no reservation respecting this article either when signing or ratifying the Convention. The degree of respect with which the German Government treat their written pledges, and the pledges given verbally in their name by their representatives, is sufficiently apparent from what is stated above. It is brought into yet higher relief in the light of the following statement made by Baron Marschall before the third Committee of the last Peace Conference, and repeated by him in full, and with added emphasis, at the 8th plenary meeting of the Conference: "A belligerent who lays mines assumes a very heavy responsibility toward neutrals and peaceful shipping. No one will resort to such means unless for military reasons of an absolutely urgent character. But military acts are not governed solely by principles of international law. There are other factors: conscience, good sense, and the sentiment of duty imposed by principles of humanity will be the surest guides for the conduct of sailors, and will constitute the most effective guarantee against abuses. The officers of the German Navy, I emphatically affirm, will always fulfil, in the strictest fashion, the duties which emanate from the unwritten law of humanity and civilisation." His Majesty's Government desire to place on record their strong protest against the illegitimate means of conducting warfare which has been resorted to by their adversaries. They feel that its manifest inhumanity must call down upon its authors the censure and reprobation of all civilised peoples. FOREIGN OFFICE, September 26, 1914. Memorandum from the British Embassy. TELEGRAM FROM SIR EDWARD GREY TO SIR CECIL SPRING RICE, The German policy of minelaying combined with their submarine activities makes it necessary on military grounds for Admiralty to |