The United States Seizes for the War Period 500,000 Tons of Dutch
Shipping
The April issue of CURRENT HISTORY MAGAZINE contained a brief reference
to the intention of the United States and British Governments to seize
the Dutch shipping in their ports on account of Holland's refusal to
carry food cargoes for fear of offending Germany. The two Governments
took action March 20, 1918, when all Dutch shipping in American and
British harbors was seized by the naval authorities of the two
countries. The total of shipping acquired is estimated at 750,000 tons,
500,000 being in American waters. The largest Dutch steamship, the Nieuw
Amsterdam, which was in New York Harbor at the time, was not seized, but
was permitted to return to Holland with a cargo of food, as it had been
agreed when she made her outward voyage, during the pending of the
negotiations, that, whatever the result, she would be immune; moreover,
all Dutch shipping outward bound to American waters at the date of the
seizure which had not yet reached port were also to be permitted to
return to their home ports.
President Wilson's proclamation directing the seizure stated that "the
law "and practice of nations accords to a "belligerent power the right
in times of "military exigency and for purposes "essential to the
prosecution of war, to take over and utilize neutral vessels lying
within its jurisdiction." The President also made a formal statement in
which he reviewed the negotiations with Holland for the restoration of
her merchant marine lying idle in American ports to a normal condition
of activity for the transportation of foodstuffs. He had sought to have
these Dutch ships carry food for Switzerland, for Belgian relief, and
for Holland as well. He stated that on Jan. 25, 1918, the Dutch Minister
proposed that
one hundred and fifty thousand tons of Dutch shipping should at
the discretion of the United States be employed partly in the
service of Belgian relief and partly for Switzerland on safe
conduct to Cette, France, and that for each ship sent to Holland
in the service of Belgian relief a corresponding vessel should
leave Holland for the United States. Two Dutch ships in the
United States ports with cargoes of foodstuffs were to proceed
to Holland, similar tonnage being sent in exchange from Holland
to the United States for charter as in the case of other Dutch
ships lying in the United States ports.
The President stated that shortly afterward Holland rejected her own
proposals, presumably through fear of German submarines, every
suggestion thereafter was postponed, and answers were delayed, until
finally, on March 7, it became clear that Holland was prevented by
German coercion from fulfilling any agreement to put her ships into
service; it was then concluded to exercise the sovereign rights of a
belligerent under the international law of "angary," and to place the
Dutch ships under American jurisdiction. The President concluded as
follows:
We have informed the Dutch Government that her colonial trade
will be facilitated and that she may at once send ships from
Holland to secure the bread cereals which her people require.
These ships will be freely bunkered and will be immune from
detention on our part. The liner Nieuw Amsterdam, which came
within our jurisdiction under an agreement for her return, will,
of course, be permitted at once to return to Holland. Not only
so, but she will be authorized to carry back with her the two
cargoes of foodstuffs which Holland would have secured under the
temporary chartering agreement had not Germany prevented. Ample
compensation will be paid to the Dutch owners of the ships which
will be put into our service and suitable provision will be made
to meet the possibility of ships being lost through enemy
action.
It is our earnest desire to safeguard to the fullest extent the
interests of Holland and of her nationals. By exercising in this
crisis our admitted right to control all property within our
territory we do no wrong to Holland. The manner in which we
proposed to exercise this right and our proposals made to
Holland concurrently therewith, cannot, I believe, fail to
evidence to Holland the sincerity of our friendship toward her.
The seizure of the Dutch ships was accomplished without friction on
March 20 by manning them with American naval officers, with the
co-operation of the United States Shipping Board. The Dutch crews were
released, and many of the officers and sailors returned to Holland a few
days later.
The action of the American and British authorities produced much
agitation in Holland; the Dutch newspapers bitterly denounced the action
as unwarranted. A statement appeared in the Official Gazette of the
Netherlands Government on March 30 in which the seizure was
characterized as an act of violence. The statement asserted that the act
was "indefensible from the viewpoint of international law and
unjustifiable." Denial was made that an agreement failed through German
pressure. The Dutch official statement ended as follows:
The powers in question, owing to the loss of ships, felt
constrained to replace the tonnage by obtaining the disposal of
a very large number of ships which belonged not to them but to
the Netherlands. They became aware that the Netherlands
Government could not permit the ships to sail in the interest of
the associated Governments except on the conditions imposed by
neutrality, but which were, in the judgment of the Governments,
not sufficiently in accordance with their interests. Therefore,
they decided to seize the Dutch merchant fleet in so far as it
lay within their power.
The Netherlands Government deems it its duty, especially in
serious times such as the present, to speak with complete
candor. It voices the sentiments of the entire Dutch Nation,
which sees in the seizure an act of violence which it will
oppose with all the energy of its conviction and its wounded
national feeling.
According to the Presidential statement, this procedure offers
Holland ample opportunity to obtain bread grain. This is so only
apparently; for would it not be an irresponsible act, after the
experiences of Dutch ships in American and British ports, to
permit other ships to sail to these ports without adequate
guarantees that these experiences shall not occur?
The American Government has always appealed to right and
justice, has always come forward as the champion of small
nations. That it now co-operates in an act diametrically opposed
to those principles is a proceeding which can find no
counterweight in the manifestations of friendship or assurances
of lenient application of the wrong committed.
The United States Government proceeded at once to put the commandeered
ships into service. On April 12 Secretary Lansing issued a statement
answering the Dutch protest in detail. After pointing out that the
Netherlands Government had not questioned the legality of the action
taken by the United States, Secretary Lansing showed that it had
involved no element of unfriendliness and was justified by the evidence
in the case. Events had proved that to have granted bunker coal and food
cargoes on ordinary terms would have released foodstuffs in Holland for
sale to Germany and "would in fact have been an act beneficial to the
enemy and having no relation to our friendship to the Netherlands."