THE GERMAN DEFENSE FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE LUSITANIA
BLAMES BRITAIN FOR MISUSE OF FLAG -- INVESTIGATING CASES OF CUSHING
AND GULFLIGHT -- DECLARES SHIP CARRIED MOUNTED CANNON -- SAYS IT ACTED
IN JUSTIFIED SELF-DEFENSE -- FINAL DECISION ON DEMANDS DEFERRED --
AMERICAN OPINION OF GERMAN EXCUSES -- EVASIVE AND INSINCERE -- ATTACKS
ON AMERICAN VESSELS MUST CEASE -- SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT.
The German defense for the destruction of the Lusitania and for other
marine atrocities committed against non-combatant vessels in the famous,
or infamous, war zone was contained in a note to the American
government, transmitted May 31, in reply to President Wilson’s note of
protest. The full text of the German note is as follows:
“The undersigned has the honor to submit to Ambassador Gerard the
following answer to the communication of May 13 regarding the injury to
American interests through German submarine warfare.
“The Imperial government has subjected the communication of the American
government to a thorough investigation. It entertains also a keen wish
to co-operate in a frank and friendly way in clearing up a possible
misunderstanding which may have arisen in the relations between the two
governments through the events mentioned by the American government.
“Regarding, firstly, the cases of the American steamers Cushing and
Gulflight. The American embassy has already been informed that the
German government has no intention of submitting neutral ships in the
war zone, which are guilty of no hostile acts, to attacks by a submarine
or submarines or aviators. On the contrary, the German forces have
repeatedly been instructed most specifically to avoid attacks on such
ships.
BLAMES BRITAIN FOR MISUSE OF FLAGS
“If neutral ships in recent months have suffered through the German
submarine warfare, owing to mistakes in identification, it is a question
only of quite isolated and exceptional cases, which can be attributed to
the British government’s abuse of flags, together with the suspicious or
culpable behavior of the masters of the ships.
“The German government, in all cases in which it has been shown by its
investigations that a neutral ship, not itself at fault, was damaged by
German submarines or aviators, has expressed regret over the unfortunate
accident and, if justified by conditions, has offered indemnification.
INVESTIGATING CASES OF CUSHING AND GULFLIGHT
“The cases of the Cushing and the Gulflight will be treated on the same
principles. An investigation of both cases is in progress, the result of
which will presently be communicated to the embassy. The investigation
can, if necessary, be supplemented by an international call on the
international commission of inquiry as provided by Article III of The
Hague agreement of October 18, 1907.
“When sinking the British steamer Falaba, the commander of the German
submarine had the intention of allowing the passengers and crew a full
opportunity for a safe escape. Only when the master did not obey the
order to heave-to, but fled and summoned help by rocket signals, did the
German commander order the crew and passengers by signals and megaphone
to leave the ship within ten minutes. He actually allowed them
twenty-three minutes time and fired the torpedo only when suspicious
craft were hastening to the assistance of the Falaba.
“Regarding the loss of life by the sinking of the British passenger
steamer Lusitania, the German government has already expressed to the
neutral governments concerned its keen regret that citizens of their
states lost their lives.
“On this occasion, the Imperial government, however, cannot escape the
impression that certain important facts having a direct bearing on the
sinking of the Lusitania may have escaped the attention of the American
government.
“In the interest of a clear and complete understanding, which is the aim
of both governments, the Imperial government considers it first
necessary to convince itself that the information accessible to both
governments about the facts of the case is complete and in accord.
“The government of the United States proceeds on the assumption that
the Lusitania could be regarded as an ordinary unarmed merchantman. The
Imperial government allows itself in this connection to point out that
the Lusitania was one of the largest and fastest British merchant ships,
built with government funds as an auxiliary cruiser and carried
expressly as such in the ‘navy list’ issued by the British admiralty.
DECLARES SHIP CARRIED MOUNTED CANNON
“It is further known to the Imperial government from trustworthy reports
from its agents and neutral passengers, that for a considerable time
practically all the more valuable British merchantmen have been equipped
with cannon and ammunition and other weapons and manned with persons who
have been specially trained in serving guns. The Lusitania, too,
according to information received here, had cannon aboard, which were
mounted and concealed below decks.
“The Imperial government, further, has the honor to direct the
particular attention of the American government to the fact that the
British admiralty in a confidential instruction issued in February,
1915, recommended its mercantile shipping not only to seek protection
under neutral flags and disguising marks, but also, while thus
disguised, to attack German submarines by ramming. As a special
incitation to merchantmen to destroy submarines, the British government
also offered high prizes and has already paid such rewards.
“The Imperial government in view of these facts indubitably known to it,
is unable to regard British merchantmen in the zone of naval operations
specified by the admiralty staff of the German navy as ‘undefended.’
German commanders consequently are no longer able to observe the
customary regulations of the prize law, which they always followed.
“Finally the Imperial government must point out particularly that the
Lusitania on its last trip, as on earlier occasions, carried Canadian
troops and war material, including no less than 5,400 cases of
ammunition intended for the destruction of the brave German soldiers who
are fulfilling their duty with self-sacrifice and devotion in the
Fatherland’s service.
SAYS IT ACTED IN JUSTIFIED SELF-DEFENSE
“The German government believes that it was acting in justified
self-defense in seeking with all the means of warfare at its disposition
to protect the lives of its soldiers by destroying ammunition intended
for the enemy.
“The British shipping company must have been aware of the danger to
which the passengers aboard the Lusitania were exposed under these
conditions. The company, in embarking them notwithstanding this,
attempted deliberately to use the lives of American citizens as
protection for the ammunition aboard, and acted against the clear
provisions of the American law, which expressly prohibits the forwarding
of passengers on ships carrying ammunition, and provides a penalty
therefor. The company therefore is wantonly guilty of the death of so
many passengers.
“There can be no doubt according to definite report of the submarine’s
commander, which is further confirmed by all other information, that the
quick sinking of the Lusitania is primarily attributed to the explosion
of the ammunition shipment caused by a torpedo. The Lusitania’s
passengers would otherwise, in all human probability, have been saved.
“The Imperial government considers the above-mentioned facts important
enough to recommend them to the attentive examination of the American
government.
FINAL DECISION ON DEMANDS DEFERRED
“The Imperial government, while withholding its final decision on the
demands advanced in connection with the sinking of the Lusitania until
receipt of an answer from the American government, feels impelled in
conclusion to recall here and now that it took cognizance with
satisfaction of the mediatory proposals submitted by the United States
government to Berlin and London as a basis for a modus vivendi for
conducting the maritime warfare between Germany and Great Britain.
“The Imperial government by its readiness to enter upon a discussion of
these proposals, then demonstrated its good intentions in ample fashion.
The realization of these proposals was defeated, as is well known, by
the declinatory attitude of the British government.
“The undersigned takes occasion, etc.
“JAGOW.”
AMERICAN OPINION OF GERMAN EXCUSES
The effect of the German note on American opinion was to create a sense
of angry disappointment. The newspapers were a unit in calling it
evasive. It “does not meet the issue,” declared the New York World,
while the New York Times viewed it as being “not responsive to our
demand. It tends rather to becloud understanding.” The Albany
Knickerbocker Press denounced it as “an answer which purposely does not
answer. Germany evidently is playing for time.” This thought was
reiterated by the Pittsburgh Gazette-Times, which pointed out that “it
is palpable that Germany proposes to consume time by raising points
which call for further correspondence, in the meanwhile continuing in
the course to which the United States has objected.”
[Illustration: SURVIVORS OF THE LUSITANIA DISASTER.
Mr. Cowper, a Canadian journalist, holding little Helen Smith, a
six-year-old American girl, who lost both father and mother. (_C. Int.
News Service._)
“The Man Who Cannot Be Drowned.” This stoker was saved from the Titanic,
the Empress of Ireland and, lastly, from the Lusitania.]
[Illustration: SAPPING AND MINING THE ENEMY’S TRENCHES.
When the hostile trenches are near together an open zig-zag trench is
dug to a point very close to the enemy’s line, then a covered gallery is
excavated to a point almost under the hostile trench.
GAINING A FOOT OF GROUND PER HOUR.
Here a charge of explosive is placed and fired from a distance by an
electric wire. At the same instant the men charge over the ground and
occupy the ruined trench of the enemy. (_Il. L. News copr._)]
[Illustration: BELGIAN REFUGEES FIND SAFETY IN HOLLAND.
This photograph, made at Putte, a Holland frontier town, shows some of
the three hundred thousand refugees who sought safety in Holland.
(_Copyright by Underwood and Underwood._)]
United States’ Note of Protest and Germany’s Reply Compared
_President Wilson Demanded_:
Practical cessation of submarine attacks on non-combatant vessels.
Observance of the rule of visit and search in the case of all
suspected merchantmen before any such ship shall be subjected to
capture or destruction.
Protection of non-combatants who may be on suspected merchantmen.
Disavowal of official German responsibility for injury to Americans in
the Cushing, Gulflight and Lusitania cases.
Reparation, so far as reparation is possible, for irreparable damage.
Immediate steps by Germany to prevent the recurrence of incidents “so
obviously subversive of the principles of warfare.”
The first three items, as noted above, were stated not as actual
demands, but as assumptions of what Germany would agree to in view of
previous communications from this country in the matter of what is
allowable in maritime warfare according to previously acknowledged
international law and the dictates of humanity.
_Germany Conceded_:
No intention of attacking neutral ships not guilty of hostile acts in
“war zone.”
Regrets and indemnity where neutral ship, not itself at fault, is
damaged.
Attacks on the American ships Gulflight and Cushing unintentional, the
circumstances being rigidly investigated.
Keen regret at loss of lives of neutral citizens on Lusitania.
_Germany Evaded_:
Issue as to humanitarian aspect and facts in Lusitania case.
Giving of any direct promise to abandon submarine warfare.
Any attempt to justify such warfare, except as “self-defense.”
_Germany Countered_:
By raising question as to Lusitania being an “auxiliary armed
cruiser,” and not of the “undefended merchantmen” class.
By accusing Cunard company of using American citizens to protect the
“ammunition” carried by Lusitania, and of being guilty of their death.
The Chicago Herald more specifically pointed out the evasiveness of the
German reply, claiming that it “fails wholly to meet the main points at
issue, both the specific point of the slaughter of American citizens on
the Lusitania and the general point of the impossibility of employing
submarines in the destruction of commerce without disregarding rules of
fairness, reason, justice and humanity--established principles of
international law.”
EVASIVE AND INSINCERE
The Philadelphia Public Ledger also criticized it for ignoring
altogether “the protest in the name of humanity against submarine
warfare upon non-combatants,” and the Cincinnati Commercial Tribune laid
bare the “absolute ignoring of the vital principles set forth in the
Wilson letter,” adding that “there is a half contemptuous, albeit
entirely courteous, suggestion of ‘Well, they are still dead; now, what
do you propose to do about it?’”
[Illustration: NO USE.]
The German claim that the Lusitania was in effect a warship, with
mounted guns, and carried ammunition and Canadian soldiers, was
emphatically denied in a public statement by Dudley Field Malone,
collector of the port of New York, and the New York World vehemently
answered the German claim by declaring that “the Lusitania was a warship
in the same way that Belgium was an aggressor against Germany; in the
same way that the University of Louvain and Rheims Cathedral were
‘fortifications’; in the same way that various seaside resorts in
England, raided by Germans, were ‘defended.’”
ATTACKS ON AMERICAN VESSELS MUST CEASE
Many newspapers joined in calling for more drastic action on the part of
the United States government. “We have but one thing in mind,” announced
the New York Tribune, “that these crimes shall cease. Any answer,
therefore, which fails to guarantee their stoppage as a condition
precedent to diplomatic rectification cannot be expected to satisfy the
just expectation of the United States.” The Washington Herald followed
this by saying: “The patience of the American people in the face of
contemptuous disregard of their rights and a series of outrages against
their countrymen has been sublime, but surely it has a limit. Surely a
way will be found, without much longer delay, to compel Germany to cease
her attacks on American vessels engaged in neutral commerce and to
guarantee the safety of American lives and property.”
SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT
On the other hand there was a strong element that counseled coolness and
restraint. “This is not a time,” declared the Albany Knickerbocker
Press, “to suggest to President Wilson what ought to be done. It is not
a time to become impatient. It is a time for restraint. Nothing can be
gained now by playing upon the strings of excitable public opinion in
America. The President must find his way out and every true American
must support him loyally.” Echoing this sentiment, the Springfield
Republican added, “but the German government may fairly be required to
give definite assurances that during the period of the negotiations no
more torpedo attacks on passenger ships which may be carrying American
citizens will be permitted.”