The cheering British troops made way for the gunners, as shouting

joyously they went up the ridge on a run, the infantry trailing along

after them. Arrived near the top, the gunners unlimbered and went into

action for the second phase of the fighting.

British aviators, who performed important scout work for the gunners,

were deserving of a liberal share in the honors of the day. Some of

the Royal Flying Corps seemed to have gone battle-mad in the course of

the fighting, for they engaged in such death-defying adventures as no

wholly sane person would have attempted.

There was one British aviator in particular whose reckless daring

shone conspicuously even above that of his fellows, and who on the

occasion showed an utter disregard for life. One of his major

operations was to fly over a body of German troops on the march.

Hovering at a short distance above them, he sprayed the astonished

troops with machine-gun fire until they scattered and fled. Passing

joyously on his way, the aviator encountered a convoy and flying low

poured volleys into the Germans and was gone before they had time to

recover from their astonishment and retaliate. Near Warneton a large

force of German troops was massing to attack when down among them

dashed the aviator, his machine gun crackling, when they dispersed in

all directions, leaving dead and wounded on the field.

Another daring young flyer belonging to the Royal Flying Corps

attacked and silenced four machine-gun teams in strong emplacements.

Other British aviators were active in clearing out trenches of their

German occupants, and when they ran out of ammunition for their Lewis

guns hurled down on the enemy bombs, explosives, and anything that

injures or destroys.

By the British capture of Messines Ridge the Germans lost their last

natural position that commanded the British lines. The victory came as

a fitting climax to the British achievements in France during the

preceding three months' campaign. By the capture during that period of

Bapaume, Vimy Ridge, Monchy Plateau, and now Messines Ridge, the

British had completely changed the military situation on the western

front.

The area gained in this vast operation was a front nine miles long to

an extreme depth of five miles. Owing to strong German pressure

exerted at this point the advance was checked, but the British

continued to engage and harass the enemy in minor operations.

During the night of June 8, 1917, the British resumed activities in

the neighborhood of the great mining center of Lens. An attack was

launched south of the Souchez River on a front of two miles,

penetrating to a depth of half a mile.

On the following day the Germans with strong forces delivered a

determined assault on British lines on a front of six miles east of

Messines. The attack failed. South of Lens the Canadians on the same

date pierced the German lines on a front of two miles, destroying

defensive works and taking a number of prisoners.

Artillery and heavy guns were busy on both sides during the night of

June 10, 1917, east of Epehy. The Germans assembled strong forces of

troops in this area to attack, but were scattered by the intense fire

of British guns. Southeast of La Bassee the British carried out a

dashing raid on enemy lines, during which they destroyed elaborate

trench systems and mine galleries and captured eighteen prisoners.

Successful raids were also made on German positions east of Vermelles

and south of Armentieres on the same night. The British continued

these dashing exploits on the following day on both sides of Neuve

Chapelle, east of Armentieres, and north of Ypres. In each operation

the German defenses were smashed and a considerable number of

prisoners were taken.

In the Champagne the French had to defend themselves against

persistent German assaults made to regain lost positions at Mont Blond

and Mont Carnillet. The Germans had never renounced the hope of

recovering these invaluable observation points, and sacrificed

thousands of men in the vain hope of wearing down the French

resistance. The region of the Californie Plateau was also subjected to

furious attacks and violent artillery engagements, and while the

French lost heavily the Germans were unable to gain the slightest

advantage.

Early in the morning of June 12, 1917, the British won new and

valuable positions astride the Souchez River. In the night the Germans

in force delivered a counterattack to regain the lost ground,

displaying a disregard for safety and stolid bravery as they pushed on

in spite of heavy losses. But the British were in a situation where

they could rake the German lines with their artillery and machine-gun

fire, and made the most of their advantage. The Germans could not make

any headway against this storm of fire, and at last when their ranks

were shattered they gave up hope and retired.

Owing to the British advance east of Messines, and to the continued

pressure of their troops south of the front of attack, the Germans

were forced to abandon large and important sections of their

first-line defensive system in the region between the river Lys and

St. Yves. Following closely the retreating enemy, the British made

important advances east of Ploegsteert Wood and also in the

neighborhood of Gaspard.

While their allies were gaining ground and hastening the German

retreat on their front, the French in the regions of Braye, north of

Craonne, northwest of Rheims, and on the left bank of the Meuse, near

Cumieres, were being hammered continuously by German guns. It seemed

that defenses and defenders must be destroyed by this hurricane of

fire and shell. But the soldiers of the Republic had learned many

lessons concerning German methods of warfare since the fighting began

in this region and knew how to conserve their strength, and were

prepared to out-fight the enemy whenever the odds were anything like

equal. The concentrated fire of the German guns damaged the French

defenses, but were ineffective in crushing French spirit, so that the

attacks that followed the bombardments failed in every instance to

gain any advantage.

Positions the British had captured earlier in the week south of the

Ypres-Commines Canal were attacked by the Germans on June 15, 1917,

following heavy artillery preparations. In the first dash a few

Germans succeeded in approaching the British front trenches, but they

were killed or driven out and the attack collapsed at all points.

In the night of the 15th the sorely tried French forces continued to

bear the brunt of German fury around Craonne and Mont Carnillet. Raids

they made in the region of Hill 304, on the heights of the Meuse,

broke down with heavy losses. East of Rheims the French were

successful in minor operations in which they captured a good number of

prisoners. Artillery duels were almost continuous on the following day

north and south of the Ailette River, in the Champagne, and in the

region of the heights of Carnillet and Blond. The Germans won a

section of trench in neighborhood of Courcy, but later were driven out

or destroyed by the French in a counterattack.

East of Monchy-le-Preux the Germans after a heavy bombardment of

British positions made an attack in force that was entirely successful

in gaining the first-line defenses. The British were driven back with

considerable losses to their main new position on Infantry Hill.

After the disastrous experience of the German airmen during the battle

of Messines Ridge their flying forces adopted the familiar tactics of

mass formation. The British air pilots seldom encountered in these

June days squadrons of less than fifteen machines, and occasionally

they met aerial armies of as many as sixty planes. In some battles in

the second week of June, 1917, between seventy and eighty machines

were involved. Most of these air fights took place inside German

territory, and despite superior numbers the British Royal Flying Corps

continued to prove their superiority in the air over the Teutons. In

one of these aerial battles, when a large number of planes were

engaged, the British pilots smashed ten German machines, while only

two British flyers were compelled to withdraw from the fight, one of

them making a successful landing within his own lines.

Of the reckless bravery displayed by some of the younger members of

the Royal Flying Corps many authentic stories are told. One intrepid

British pilot coolly took up a position over a German aerodrome at a

considerable distance within the enemy lines. There were seven

machines in the aerodrome when the British flyer took up his position

above, and as they issued forth first one and then two at a time he

attacked and in every instance was successful in smashing or in

driving out of control the German machine.

On the Arras battle front on June 19, 1917, the British gained some

ground south of the Cojeul River, capturing during the operation

thirty-five prisoners.

French positions between the Ailette River and Laffaux Hill in the

Champagne and northwest of Rheims were on this date the special marks

for the concentrated fire of German guns. French outposts were

attacked at Mont Teton and Mont Carnillet (an almost daily occurrence

this summer), but the Germans were unable to gain any advantage and

were driven back to their trenches with heavy losses.

The British were successful on June 20, 1917, in regaining the Monchy

position which had been lost some days before. It was of utmost value

that this point should be wrested from German hands if the advance was

to continue, and the British were correspondingly elated that they had

possession of it again.

South of La Fere the French attacked during the night following the

21st, and penetrating German lines in the region of Beauton, destroyed

large numbers of the enemy and brought back prisoners. In the

Champagne after severe artillery preparation the Germans attacked

French trenches on Teton Height and to the east of this position on a

front of 400 yards. The Germans employed strong forces in the

operation, and in a daring push in which they sacrificed large numbers

of men they succeeded in penetrating advanced positions. But they were

unable to hold them long, when the French came back in a dashing

assault that swept them out and back to their own lines. On the

following day the French in a brilliant movement made on a 600-yard

front advanced their line 600 yards nearer to Mont Carnillet.

It was in this region that a unit consisting of only sixty-two French

Grenadiers and portable machine guns occupied a position that the

Germans coveted. The Germans attacked with a strong force, but the

stout-hearted defenders, though vastly outnumbered, not only drove

them back, but pressed on in pursuit, capturing a considerable length

of German trenches and killing more than 200.

In the Chemin-des-Dames on June 22, 1917, the Germans launched a

number of attacks, which led to some desperate engagements. In the

vicinity of La Royere Farm the ground was covered with the bodies of

German dead, according to the statements of correspondents on the

field. The Germans at a heavy cost only succeeded in gaining

possession of a short section of a French front trench.

Rheims continued to be the mark on which the Germans vented their

anger when things went wrong, and on the 22d they threw 1,200 shells

into the cathedral city.

The British had made no sensational advances in France for some time,

but along the entire 120-mile front occupied they continued to

maintain strong pressure on the enemy positions. During the night of

the 24th they carried out a number of successful local operations. One

of these enterprises was of importance, as it increased the British

grip around Lens. Attacking by starlight the British troops stormed

and captured 400 yards of front-line trenches east of Riaumont Wood,

in the western outskirts of Lens, thus drawing closer the ring of iron

with which they were hemming in the French mining center.

In numerous raids carried out in the night on enemy trenches in the

vicinity of Bullecourt, Roeux, Loos, and Hooge, much damage was

wrought to German defenses and a considerable number of prisoners were

captured. One daring body of British troops remained for two hours in

German trenches, blowing up dugouts and inflicting serious casualties

on the garrison.

In the general advance on Lens the Canadians occupied the strongest

outpost in the defense of that place and had pushed forward to La

Coulotte. The object of the British command was to exert extreme

pressure on the enemy and at the same time keep down the casualties,

and this they were successful in doing.

Patrols sent out reached the crown of Reservoir Hill without meeting

opposing forces and pressed on down the eastern slope to occupy the

strong Lens outpost. South of the Souchez River the Canadians were

pressing on the very heels of the retreating Germans. Railway

embankments southeast of the Lens electric station were occupied, and

the advance was then continued toward La Coulotte.

For several days the Germans had been destroying houses in the western

part of the mining center, in order to secure a wider area of fire for

their guns. This movement suggested to the British command that they

intended to cling as long as possible to the eastern side of the city

and to prolong the fight to the bitter end by house-to-house fighting.

In the night of June 25, 1917, the French made a brilliant attack

northwest of Hurtebise on a strongly organized German position. They

gained all their objectives and the rapidity with which the attack was

carried out proved a crushing surprise to the Germans who lost in the

fight and in counterattacks ten officers and over 300 of other ranks.

Among the positions captured by the French in the operations in this

region was the "Cave of the Dragon," which was more than 100 yards

wide and 300 yards deep, and had been converted into a strong

fortress. The cavern had numerous exits and openings through which

machine guns could be fired. Here the French captured a vast amount of

war material, including nine machine guns in good condition,

ammunition depots, and a hospital relief outpost.

In the morning of June 27, 1917, the Canadians, encouraged by their

recent successes, which had been won at slight cost, decided to attack

across the open ground sloping upward to Avion and the village of

Leauvette near the Souchez River. The assaulting troops consisted of

men from British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Nova Scotia, and the

British army contained no more daring fighters. The attack was a

success, except at one point, where the Germans were strong in machine

guns, and were surrounded by barbed-wire entanglements of a peculiarly

complicated sort. Here the sturdy men from overseas were unable to

gain their objectives, but at other points they gained valuable

ground.

In the following night, during a heavy rainstorm, the British attacked

a number of the southwesterly suburbs of Lens, including the one known

as Avion. They won all their first objectives, and captured over 200

prisoners. The fighting was in and out of ruined buildings,

collieries, pit derricks, and the usual structures of a mining

settlement. It was continued on the following day, advance being made

on a total front of about four miles to a depth of over a mile. The

result of these attacks was to give the British a series of strongly

organized defensive systems on both banks of the river Souchez

covering Lens.

On the same night the suburbs of the mining center were attacked, the

British captured German forward positions south and west of Oppy in

the Arras sector on a front of about 2,000 yards.

On the 28th and 29th of June, 1917, the Germans launched by night

powerful attacks in the Verdun sector near Hill 304 and Avocourt Wood.

They succeeded in piercing French first lines over the whole front

attacked, but were subsequently driven out, except at one point, on

the slope of Dead Man Hill, where they clung tenaciously, defying

every attempt made by the French to regain the position.

CHAPTER LX

THE GERMANS DEFEAT BRITISH ON BELGIAN COAST--INTENSE FIGHTING IN THE

CHAMPAGNE AND AT VERDUN

In the first days of July, 1917, the Verdun sector became the scene

of some of the heaviest fighting on the western front. The Germans

seemed determined to redeem their failures in this area in the

previous year and engaged in daily assaults with large numbers of

picked forces. The German High Command had circulated so many stories

regarding the declining strength of the French troops and of their

weakened morale that they must have come to believe their own

inventions. The soldiers of the Republic certainly did their best to

convince the German command that they were very much alive and in good

fighting trim. Most of the German attacks in the Verdun sector were

repulsed, but they succeeded in retaining some conquered ground on the

west slope of Dead Man Hill. On the Aisne front during the night of

June 30, 1917, the Germans attacked near Cerny and Corbeny, when their

storming detachments were almost annihilated by the devastating fire

of the French artillery. To the northeast of Cerny the Germans

succeeded in gaining a small salient which had first been leveled by

their guns.

South of Lens the British continued to make progress, capturing a good

portion of the German trench system in this area and taking a number

of prisoners. British aviators on this front maintained successfully

their supremacy of the air. In the space of twenty-four hours they

brought down five German aeroplanes, and four others were driven out

of control, while only one British machine was missing.

Heavy artillery fighting continued during July 1, 1917, in the sector

between Cerny and Ailles on the French front. At a late hour French

troops carried out a spirited attack on both sides of the

Ailles-Paissy road and ejected the Germans from the trenches they had

captured in the previous week. In the night of July 2, 1917, the

Germans made a strong counterattack in an endeavor to oust the French

from their regained position, but were repulsed. In the course of the

night several more attacks were made by the Germans, who, thrown back

in every instance, finally abandoned the effort when day was breaking.

On the left bank of the Meuse, on the Verdun front, violent artillery

fighting continued the greater part of the night on the same date

between Hill 304 and Avocourt Wood. Early in the morning following

the Germans attacked on a front of 500 yards at the southeast corner

of the wood. The assaults broke down under the devastating French fire

and no attempt was made to renew the effort.

On the British front no important actions were fought during the first

week of July, 1917, but everywhere defenses were strengthened and the

pressure on the German positions became unceasingly intense. Southwest

of Hollebeke in Belgium the British advanced their lines on a front of

about 600 yards during the night of July 4, 1917. Successful raids in

the vicinity of Wieltje and Nieuport resulted in the capture of a good

number of prisoners.

On the Verdun front the Germans renewed their offensive without

obtaining any important progress. Heavy artillery fighting continued

near Moronvilliers in the Champagne and around Hill 304.

German positions west and north of this hill were subjected to a

destructive fire of French batteries during the day of July 5, 1917,

and with such good effect that the enemy guns only feebly replied.

Near Louvemont, on the left bank of the Meuse, the French were

successful in several encounters with German patrols, which they

dispersed after sharp fighting, killing a number and taking prisoners.

In the Champagne, especially at Le Casque and Le Teton, there was

active artillery fighting throughout the day. In the region between

the Miette and the Aisne the Germans attacked three French posts, but

were driven off by the French artillery fire.

The British now took the offensive and advanced their line on a

600-yard front south of Ypres, near Hollebeke, and continued to exert

pressure on the German lines. On the 7th a further push forward was

made east of Wytschaete in Belgium.

The French sector of the Chemin-des-Dames to the south of Filain was

menaced at all times because it was dominated by the ancient fort of

Malmaison in possession of the enemy. In the early morning of July 9,

1917, the Germans began an intense bombardment of this sector and then

attempted to rush ten or twelve infantry battalions into the French

positions. A brigade of the famous Chasseurs-a-pied holding the line

were forced back by overwhelming numbers. The Germans evidently

thought that success was certain, for they had brought with them

quantities of barbed wire, boxes of grenades, and trench mortars, and

everything that was needed to organize the position whose capture

would give them the command of a considerable section of

Chemin-des-Dames.

They failed, however, to consider the indomitable French spirit. The

Chasseurs had only retreated a short distance when they gathered

together engineers and reservists who had been working on roads in the

rear and rushed back, and by a series of brilliant counterattacks

ejected or killed most of the Germans in spite of their heroic

resistance, capturing large quantities of their war material and

reoccupying the line almost to its fullest extent.

The Germans having obtained reenforcements, fought furiously to regain

the lost position, but the French elated by their success redoubled

their efforts to destroy the enemy and the shell craters, and

communication trenches were soon encumbered with German dead. The

French losses in the fighting here were severe, but as they occupied

safer positions the Germans' casualties were far greater. The fighting

was so intense throughout the action that very few prisoners were

taken by either side. A group of French soldiers who had been made

prisoners and brought to the German second line attacked their guard

and fled to their own lines, escaping without hurt the intense fire

directed against them.

On this date, July 10, 1917, the Germans delivered a smashing blow

against the British lines north of Nieuport on the Belgian coast. For

twenty-four hours the Germans had maintained an intense bombardment

which lasted from 6 o'clock in the morning of the 10th up to midnight

and was renewed again at dawn on the following day. The firing was on

such a huge scale that it could be distinctly heard as far as London.

The effect of this bombardment was to level all the British defenses

in the dune sector and to destroy their bridges over the Yser.

According to the Berlin reports 1,250 men were captured by the Germans

in this battle.

To the southward, in the region, of Lombaertzyde, the Germans only

obtained a temporary success, the British in a strong counterattack

driving them out of the positions they had won before they had time to

organize for defense.

That the Germans were enabled to succeed in this coup was largely

owing to the weather conditions. A heavy gale was blowing on the

Belgian coast and British naval support was impossible. The Germans

enjoyed the advantage of having strong coast batteries all along the

dunes which they could move about at will from one point to another.

There was, however, no blinking the fact that a weak point existed in

the British defenses. Such success as the Germans won was attributed

by some critics to their superiority in the air, the British at the

time being short of machines.

The net gains to the Germans in this battle was the capture of British

positions on a front of 1,400 yards to a depth of 600 yards. The

British losses in the shelled terrain between the river Yser and the

sea were estimated at 1,800.

During the night of July 11, 1917, British naval aeroplanes carried

out successful raids in Flanders in and near five towns, when several

tons of bombs were dropped with good results. Railway lines and an

electric power station at Zarren were attacked by gunfire from the

air, and bombs were dropped on a train near St. Denis-Westrem. The

British airmen's bombs caused a fire near Ostend, and heavy explosions

at the Varssenaere railway dump followed by an intense conflagration

which was still flaming fiercely when the British returned safely to

their own lines.

On the French front there was increasing aerial activity on July 12,

1917, on both sides from daybreak to midnight. In some cases as many

as thirty machines were actively engaged. As a result of these

encounters fourteen German aeroplanes were brought down and sixteen

others were driven out of control. Nine British machines were counted

missing.

Fighting continued daily in the Champagne and at frequent intervals.

The Germans were paying a high price for every foot of ground gained

and learned at the cost of heavy sacrifices that the French were as

strong as ever, notwithstanding a report to the contrary was

circulated by the German High Command that they were short of men and

would be unable to fight much longer.

On July 14, 1917, the French scored a double victory when they

occupied five heights among a clump of hills known as the

Moronvilliers Massif to the east of Rheims. The positions won were of

the first importance whereby the Germans lost their principal

observatories in this region. The French occupied all the crests of

the hills, but some of the slopes were held by the Germans, from which

points of vantage they were able to watch the movements of their

opponents.

The net gains to the French during the day included a network of

German trenches on a front of over 800 yards to a depth of 300 yards,

while the prisoners captured numbered 360, including nine officers.

On the left bank of the Meuse, in the Verdun sector, around Hill 304

and Dead Man Hill, artillery duels were continuous during the night of

July 13, 1917.

The loss of the strong positions on the Moronvilliers hills, the chief

observation posts in the region, spurred the Germans on to make

frequent and frenzied attempts to force the French out. In the night

of July 15, 1917, the hills were subjected to sustained and violent

bombardment. It was followed by German attacks on Mont Haut and a

height known as the Teton. At Mont Haut the Germans succeeded in

penetrating French positions, but were driven out by a brilliant

counterattack. The fighting lasted throughout the night, and was of

the most violent description. By morning the French had thrust the

Germans back and held all positions on the hills securely. The Germans

had gained only a short stretch of trench near Mont Haut, which for

the time they were able to hold possession.

On the left bank of the Meuse, in the Verdun sector, to the west of

Hill 304, the French carried out a dashing operation early in the

morning of July 17, 1917. After strong artillery preparation that had

lasted all through the previous night the French attacked, and

notwithstanding the stubborn and energetic resistance of the enemy,

recaptured in a few minutes all the positions that the Germans had

occupied since June 29, 1917. Following up the advantage thus gained

the French carried German positions beyond their objectives to a depth

of 2,000 yards on both sides of the road between Esnes and Malancourt.

All the first German line was captured, and a little later after the

most intense fighting the second line was carried. The French gained

ground in this advance to a depth of over a mile. The number of

unwounded prisoners captured reached 425, of whom eight were officers.

The loss of such important positions in the Verdun sector stimulated

the Germans to make repeated endeavors to recapture them, and during

the night of July 17, 1917, they delivered furious counterattacks

preceded by intense artillery preparations. The assaults were all

repulsed by the French, and at no point were the Germans enabled to

gain even a temporary footing.

In the evening of July 18, 1917, the Germans attacked the French lines

south of St. Quentin over a front of about half a mile. They succeeded

in penetrating the first line, and held it for a brief period, when

they were driven out. A few hours later the Germans made another

strong attack over a front of about four miles, their objective being

the same--the hillock known as Moulin-sous-Toutvent. This attack was

broken up by the French artillery and machine-gun fire.

Throughout the day of July 19, 1917, French and German artillery were

active along the whole French front, but beyond inflicting some

casualties for which they paid heavily the Germans gained no

advantage.

A general assault was launched by the Germans with important forces

during the night of July 19, 1917, on the line along the plateau

between Craonne and Vauclerc. Over the whole extent of the front there

was hand-to-hand fighting, but everywhere the French succeeded in

holding their positions. An energetic counterattack made between the

Californie and Casemates Plateaus enabled the French to regain a

trench line which the Germans had penetrated and held since the

previous day. Fighting continued in the Hill 304 region, and in the

Champagne, but the Germans failed to make any progress.

[Illustration: The Somme Battle Front, August 1, 1917.]

During these days of intense fighting on the French front the British

had not been marking time, but they had far less to contend against

than their valorous allies. The French had to bear the brunt of German

fury throughout the week. The whole French line from Verdun to St.

Quentin in this period had been subjected to almost continuous

attacks. At the cost of enormous losses that had not been exceeded

during the war, save at Verdun in the previous year, the Germans had

only gained a slight advance on a front of 2,000 feet, at the foot of

the slope leading to the Chemin-des-Dames between Vauclerc and

Craonne. The French now held all the important heights of the Aisne

which Hindenburg had declared were impregnable.

The German High Command had given orders that the French positions on

the heights must be captured at all hazards. Throughout the night of

July 21, 1917, the high plateaus north of Craonne were shelled by

German guns of the heaviest caliber. An attack was made at daybreak

from Hurtebise to the east of Craonne. The two plateaus to the north,

called the Casemates and Californie positions, are three-cornered in

shape, projecting toward the north and joined by a narrow saddle. The

approach to this is not so abrupt from the north as that to the

plateaus themselves. The French artillery fire broke up the attack

between Hurtebise and the Casemates Plateau before it could develop.

Assemblages of German troops north of Ailette were dispersed with

heavy losses by the concentrated fire from French batteries. German

attacks east of the plateaus led to violent hand-to-hand conflicts in

which the Germans fought with great courage, but were unable to make

gains. Throughout the day the battle raged, the Germans hurling great

masses of men against the French lines, and, thrown back with heavy

losses, again and again renewed the attacks. On the Californie Plateau

after repeated repulses they succeeded in gaining a foothold, but

were only able to hold it for a short time, when the French threw them

back in an assault that laid many a German low.

Since the 10th of the month the British had done little but repel

counterattacks, but they had won a little useful ground east of

Monchy, close to the coast, and around Ypres and Lens theirs and the

German batteries were busy day and night. From prisoners captured by

the British it was learned that the Germans were suffering from the

great wastage of men. Out of one division west of Lens it was stated

that between seventy and eighty men had been buried every day for some

weeks past. The British losses were also considerable, but their guns

did more shooting, and the enemy's casualties were consequently much

heavier. The British continued to hold the upper hand in air combats,

few German machines being encountered. During July 23-24, 1917,

British airmen dropped between four and five tons of bombs on enemy

aerodromes, ammunition depots, and railway junctions with good

results. North and east of Ypres the British made several raids during

the 24th, capturing 114 prisoners, including two officers.

On the French front General Petain, commander in chief of the French

armies, found time while the battle was still raging to review the

famous division whose four regiments had won the highest honors at

Verdun, Nieuport, on the Somme, and in the Champagne. The troops which

had been fighting for three years showed outwardly no sign of the

terrible ordeals they had undergone, holding themselves proudly erect

as they passed the saluting base amid the strains of military music

and flying colors. General Petain, who believed in treating his men as

if they were his own sons, commended their bravery and thanked them in

the name of the Republic for the brilliant example they had set to the

other soldiers of France.

The loss of the plateaus north of Craonne continued to rankle in the

mind of the German command, and repeated efforts were made to recover

these precious positions. In the night of July 25, 1917, a ferocious

attack was made on the French lines on a front of about two miles

from La Bovelle Farm to a point east of Hurtebise. In the face of a

murderous fire from the French artillery that wrought havoc in the

advancing masses the Germans pressed on and succeeded in occupying

portions of French first-line trenches south of Ailles. Repeated

attacks made on Hurtebise Farm broke down under French artillery fire.

Attacks on Mont Haut, following an intense bombardment that lasted all

night long, failed to make any progress. North of Auberive the French

carried out a successful operation during which they penetrated German

trenches and continued their advance.

In Flanders in the night of the 25th the town of Nieuport, which had

been in ruins since the first year of the war, was bombarded by the

Germans with guns of every caliber. The British guns replied with

equal violence, so that for miles around the air vibrated day and

night and the ground shook with tremors.

East of Monchy the Germans resumed action, 400 attacking with flame

throwers the line of British trenches that had already been smashed by

artillery fire, and succeeded in occupying some posts of no great

importance.

In the Champagne the sorely tried French troops were allowed no

respite by the Germans, who would not renounce their hope of regaining

the important positions on the heights. In the night of July 26, 1917,

no less than five attacks were made by the Germans in the vicinity of

the height south and west of Moronvilliers, but all broke down under

fire of the French artillery. East of Auberive, several groups of

Germans led by an officer tried a surprise attack which led to close

fighting and from which hardly one German soldier escaped unwounded.

The ground around the French position was strewn with dead, including

that of the officer who led the attack.

[Illustration: Barrage or curtain fire used to protect and clear the

way for an infantry advance. Here the fire is being used to protect

French troops for an advance on Fort Vaux.]

From the Flemish coast southward past Lens the great gun duel

between the British and Germans continued without ceasing. The

Germans had brought up vast stores of ammunition and poured shells

into Nieuport, Ypres, and Armentieres, and for miles around sprayed

the country at large with the hope of smashing hidden British

batteries. To this wide sweeping storm of fire the British were

replying with far greater violence, sending two shells to the

enemy's one, a rivalry of destruction that had not been surpassed on

any previous occasion since the war began. Except for occasional

raids the infantry remained quiescent under this gunnery. North of

Arras and east of Ypres the British raids netted a considerable

number of prisoners and machine guns. The fury of the British fire

was not without effect on the generally stolid and imperturbable

Germans, for at Fontaine-les-Croisilles they ran away without

firing a shot when a British raiding party rushed forward to attack.

The three weeks' bombardment in Belgium closed on the morning of July

31, 1917, when British and French troops launched an attack on a

gigantic scale along a front of nearly twenty miles from Dixmude on

the north to Warneton on the south. The Allies won a notable victory,

capturing in the first day of the battle ten towns and over 5,000

prisoners, including ninety-five officers. The attack began a little

before 4 o'clock in the morning, just when the first faint light of

dawn was breaking, German trenches had been either leveled or were

completely wiped out by the preceding bombardment. The shelling

increased in violence as the troops of the Allies left their positions

and rushed forward to attack. The first and second German lines were

carried almost without opposition, but at some points the Germans held

up the advance with machine guns from their rear positions. These the

British stormed, and lost considerable men in the operation, but they

were comforted with the thought that the German losses were much

heavier.

As a result of the day's operations the British had advanced their

line on a front of over fifteen miles from La Basse Ville, on the

river Lys, to Steenstraete on the river Yser.

The French troops on the extreme left and protecting the left flank of

the British forces captured the village of Steenstraete, and rushing

on penetrated the German defenses to a depth of nearly two miles.

Having won all their objectives at an early hour in the day, the

French continued to advance, occupying Bixschoote and capturing German

positions to the southeast and west of the village on a front of

nearly two and a half miles. In the center and on the left British

divisions swept the enemy from positions to a depth of two miles, and

secured crossings at the river Steenbeek, thus gaining all their

objectives. In carrying out this attack British troops captured two

powerful defensive systems by assault, and won against fierce

opposition the villages of Verlorenhoek, Frezenberg, St. Julien, and

Pilken, together with farms that had been transformed into fortresses

and other strongholds in neighboring woods.

The victory of the Allies was more remarkable because of unfavorable

weather conditions. The day was marked by heavy rain and the sky was

full of heavy sodden clouds, so that observation was well nigh

impossible for the airmen and kite balloons. Fortunately on the night

before the attack the rain held off and the many thousands of British

troops who occupied mudholes and shell holes close to the enemy lines

had reason to bless the dark since they had a better chance of

escaping observation. But this was not always possible, for the German

flares and rockets often revealed their position and a shell would

pass over them or smash among them, killing some and maiming others.

Those who escaped these death-dealing visitors were forced to maintain

silence, lest they betray their position. During the night the German

aviators were more active than during the day and many times their

bombs found a mark among the British soldiers crouching on the ground.

It was a terrible ordeal through which these brave fellows had to

pass, the forced inaction was maddening, and they were all the more

eager to fight when at last the welcome signal came in the early dawn

to go forward to attack.

Despite the discouraging weather conditions, which hindered

observation, large squadrons of British planes led the advance against

the German lines and not only maintained constant contact with the

infantry, but flying low carried on a destructive warfare with their

machine guns.

There were many air battles fought at a few hundred feet above the

ground, but the Germans were decidedly outclassed and had to retire

after they had lost six machines.

One British aviator doing patrol duty, and flying at a height of not

more than thirty feet, came upon a German aerodrome on which he

dropped a bomb with careful precision. As the Germans in the sheds

came tumbling out, the aviator turned his machine gun on them, and

circling around the field poured such a stream of fire into the

kaiser's men that they scattered, leaving a number of dead on the

ground.

The Germans having presently recovered, from their astonishment got a

machine gun into action and came back to attack the airman, who made a

dive, and when not more than twenty feet from the ground silenced

their gun with his own. Then he circled the field, firing through the

doors of every building he passed on the groups of men within. Leaving

this scene the British airman next came upon two German officers, and

his machine-gun working steadily put them to flight. A column of

several hundred troops encountered after this were dispersed when he

swept along the line, leaving a number of dead and wounded on the

field. It was now time to return to the British lines for more

ammunition and some slight repairs, but the gallant aviator

encountered two German war planes that engaged him in battle. One he

disabled by a well-directed shot and the other seized the opportunity

to hurry from the scene.

On the Aisne front during July 31, 1917, there was violent artillery

fighting south of La Royere; the French had won all their objectives

and more. The German advanced trenches were filled with dead and the

French captured 210 prisoners.

On the same date the Germans after heavily bombarding French lines at

Cerny and Hurtebise, attacked positions east of Cerny on a front of

1,500 meters with three regiments. French counterattacks immediately

carried out, drove the Germans back, their ranks seriously depleted,

and the French were now enabled to advance along the whole front.

The day was calm on both sides of the Meuse, but farther south, in the

right center of the French attack, after gaining Hooge village and

Sanctuary Wood, their first objectives, they fought their way forward

and carried the village of Westhoek, against very obstinate

resistance from the enemy. In this neighborhood there was stiff

fighting throughout the day, and still continued. The French had

penetrated the German defenses to a depth of about a mile. A number of

violent counterattacks were repulsed. South of the Zillebeke-Zandvoord

road, on the extreme right, French troops at an early hour in the day

had succeeded in winning all of their objectives, capturing the

villages of La Basse Ville, and Hollebeke. The French claimed to have

suffered few casualties in these important operations, and by

nightfall of July 31, 1917, over 3,500 German prisoners had been

passed behind the lines.

The German Government having industriously circulated reports that

the French armies had suffered such a wastage of men that in a short

time they would prove a negligible factor in the war, the French War

Office announced that there were a million more troops in the fighting

zone than were mustered to stem the German flood tide at the Battle of

the Marne. It was also declared that the Republic had more men under

arms than at any time in her history. Nearly 3,000,000 troops were in

France alone, exclusive of the interior and in the colonies.

PART VIII--THE UNITED STATES AND GERMANY

CHAPTER LXI

THE INTERIM

The cessation of diplomatic relations between the American and German

Governments was an inevitable consequence of the latter's submarine

decree abrogating the undertaking it gave in the _Sussex_ case. The

world knew it. Germany knew it. Her ambassador at Washington, Count

von Bernstorff, knew it best of all, and accepted his dismissal in a

fatalistic spirit. The rupture had to come. He had done his best to

avert it, and his best had availed nothing.

The long-feared break having become a reality, the American people

looked wide-eyed at the unexampled international situation. What now?

When two parties enter into a bargain and one breaks it, there is

usually a parting of the ways, a personal conflict perhaps, when there

is not also a lawsuit. But no court could settle the differences

between the United States and Germany. The nation squarely faced the

fact that the two countries were officially not on speaking terms;

they were on the dangerous ground of open enmity, when the least

provocation would be as a spark to a powder magazine. Sparks there

were in plenty; but the explosion waited. President Wilson guarded the

magazine. He waited an "overt act" before giving up his vigil and

letting events take their course.

Germany began her announced ruthless submarine warfare against neutral

shipping with caution. Apparently she was loath to precipitate matters

by acting in the letter and spirit of the new decree which warned that

any neutral vessel found in the new danger zone "perished." On

February 3, 1917, when the decree was in operation, one of her

submarines encountered an American freighter, the _Housatonic_, off

the Scilly Isles, which came within the proscribed area. It sank her,

but first gave warning, permitted the crew to take to the boats, and

actually towed the boats ninety miles toward land. A British patrol

vessel then appeared; the submarine fired a signal to attract its

attention and vanished under water, leaving the patrol vessel to

rescue the _Housatonic's_ crew. According to the new order given the

submarines the _Housatonic_ ought to have been sunk without warning.

This unwonted chivalry looked promising; but it was deemed to be

merely an act of grace extended to neutral vessels on the high seas

which had left their home ports before the date (February 1, 1917)

when the new policy of ruthlessness went into effect. It was not

repeated.

No such shrift was accorded British vessels, whether Americans were on

board them or not. About the same time the merchantman _Eavestone_ was

sunk by a submarine, which also shelled the crew as they took to the

boats. The captain and three seamen--one an American--were killed by

the gunfire. This action was debated as an "overt act," but apparently

the Administration did not regard isolated fatalities of this

character as providing ground for a _casus belli_.

What came nearer to a flagrant violation of the _Sussex_ agreement was

the destruction by submarine torpedoes of the Anchor passenger liner

_California_ without warning off the Irish coast with 230 persons on

board. The vessel sailed from New York for Glasgow on January 28,

1917, and its crew and passengers included a sprinkling of Americans.

There were no American casualties; but attacks on passenger liners

without warning, regardless of the menace to American life, formed the

crux of the various crises between the United States and Germany, and

the sinking of the _California_, as an "overt act," therefore brought

the breaking point nearer and nearer. The loss of life was forty-one,

thirteen passengers and twenty-eight of the crew being drowned. The

vessel sank in nine minutes and the submarine made no effort to save

the lives of its victims.

The loss of two British steamers, the _Japanese Prince_ and the

_Mantola_, sunk without warning, added to the growing indictment

against Germany in the consequent jeopardizing of American lives.

There were thirty American cattlemen on board the _Japanese Prince_.

With the remainder of the crew they took to the boats, and after

drifting about for several hours were saved by a passing ship. An

American doctor on board the _Mantola_ was among the latter's

survivors.

The next attack on American shipping was the sinking of the _Lyman M.

Law_, a sailing vessel loaded with lumber from Maine to Italy, by a

submarine off the coast of Sardinia in the Mediterranean. The crew,

seven of whom were American, were saved. There was no warning; the

crew were ordered to debark, a bomb was placed on board, and the

vessel was blown up and sank in flames.

The destruction of the Cunard liner _Laconia_, without warning,

followed. Three American passengers were lost, two of them women,

mother and daughter, who died from exposure in one of the boats. The

vessel was torpedoed in the Irish Sea at 10.30 p. m. on February 25,

1917, and it was not until 4 o'clock the next morning that the

survivors, scantily clad, were rescued in a heavy sea.

All these outrages were readily chargeable as overt acts, any single

one of which could have constituted a cause for war, if the

Administration was looking for one. But Germany's offenses, viewed

singly, were passed over; it was their cumulative force that was

providing the momentum to hostilities.

Two American freighters, the _Orleans_ and the _Rochester_, left New

York on February 9, 1917, without guns or contraband, bound for

Bordeaux, France, and were the first craft to leave an American port

after Germany issued her terrifying order condemning all neutral

vessels found in the new danger zone.

Meantime the barometer at Washington was ominous. The _California_

sinking, then the _Laconia_, proved how slender was the thread that

held the sword of Damocles over the heads of the American people.

Tension increased. "We are hoping for the best and preparing for the

worst," came one official view early in the crisis. The President

became detached and uncommunicative.

Germany indirectly sought to avert the consequences of her conduct. A

week after the rupture in diplomatic relations Dr. Paul Ritter, the

Swiss Minister, to whom she had delegated the charge of her interests

in the United States, approached the State Department with an informal

proposal to reopen negotiations. Secretary Lansing required him to put

his request in writing, and the following memorandum was thereupon

presented by Dr. Ritter on February 11, 1917:

"The Swiss Government has been requested by the German Government to

say that the latter is now, as before, willing to negotiate, formally

or informally, with the United States, provided that the commercial

blockade against England will not be broken thereby."

Secretary Lansing's answer, made the next day, was short and to the

point. He notified Dr. Ritter, under instructions from the President,

that "the Government of the United States would gladly discuss with

the German Government any questions it might propose for discussion

were it to withdraw its proclamation of the 31st of January [1917], in

which, suddenly and without previous intimation of any kind, it

canceled the assurances which it had given this Government on the 4th

of May last [1916], but that it does not feel that it can enter into

any discussion with the German Government concerning the policy of

submarine warfare against neutrals which it is now pursuing unless and

until the German Government renews its assurances of the 4th of May

and acts upon the assurance."

No further interchanges took place on the subject. The answer

clarified the situation and disposed of doubts caused by the veil the

President had thrown about the workings of his mind. It told the

country that its Executive was not wavering and would brook no

compromise.

Little hope prevailed in Berlin that war with the United States could

be avoided, since the bait offered with a view to formulating a _modus

vivendi_ for reconciling the divergent attitudes of the two

governments had failed. It was said that behind Dr. Ritter's overtures

was a proposal that American vessels would be spared in order to avoid

actual war if the United States assented to the continuance of the

extended blockade against England. This implied that all other

vessels, neutral or belligerent, were marked for destruction. However

that might be, Berlin, finding its approaches repulsed, boldly denied

that the German Government had been a party to initiating any

overtures at all. No recession of the submarine program was thought of

or proposed; no change of policy was possible In fact, this denial

brought with it tidings that the periods of grace Germany granted to

neutral ships entering the prohibited zones had expired and that all

immunity from attack and destruction had therefore ceased. Then it

developed that Dr. Ritter's overtures had been traced to pacific

elements in the United States, represented by William J. Bryan, who

was said to have been in league with the ex-ambassador, Count von

Bernstorff, and the Washington correspondent of a Cologne newspaper,

in a plan to avert hostilities. Part of this propaganda was the

transmission of dispatches from Washington to the German press stating

that the President's message to Congress must not be construed

literally, and that there was no desire for war with Germany. The

purpose of these dispatches was to prevail on Germany to abate her

submarine warfare by way of convincing the United States that her new

policy was not so ruthless as had been described. The pacifists knew

very well that the President had no intention of yielding to half

measures, and that the only course Germany could take to obtain a

resumption of negotiations was the absolute withdrawal of her order

revoking the _Sussex_ pledge. The Administration resented the

pacifists' activities as an attempt to undermine the uncompromising

position it had taken. Their dealings with a foreign government were

actually unlawful; but no action was taken.

A subsequent announcement from Berlin stated that Dr. Ritter (inspired

by American pacifists) had telegraphed the German Government offering

to mediate, whereupon he was told that Germany was agreeable on the

terms named in the interchanges Dr. Ritter had with the State

Department. As to a belief which had arisen from Dr. Ritter's action

that the marine barrier maintained against Great Britain by submarines

and mines had been or would be weakened out of regard for the United

States or for other reasons, official Berlin (February 14, 1917) had

this to say:

"Regard for neutrals prompts the clearest declaration that

unrestricted war against all sea traffic in the announced barred zones

is now in full effect and will under no circumstances be restricted."

The United States had spoken: "Withdraw your new submarine decree

before making any proposal," it had demanded of Berlin. Germany had

spoken: "Our course cannot be changed."

The situation in Washington drifted along without any definite program

of future action being disclosed; but the President was not idle. He

decided--though he held the power himself--to ask Congress for

authority to protect American shipping on the high seas by providing

merchantmen with naval guns and gunners. There was a freight

congestion in Atlantic ports, due to the reluctance of American

shipowners to sail their vessels without defensive armament. The

President's decision was a step nearer war, for armed American

vessels, on encountering German submarines, would be bound to cause

hostilities, and war would be a reality. Berlin took this view. If the

United States armed its merchant ships, German opinion was that the

considerate submarines would be unable to save passengers and crews of

the vessels they sank. Were the vessels unarmed the submarines could

perform this kindly service. This sardonic hint was construed as an

official warning from Germany that the arming of American vessels

meant war. The Administration, however, was no longer concerned with

Germany's viewpoint. It realized that so long as it permitted American

ships to be held in port in fear of attack by submarines if they

ventured out, its inaction would in effect be viewed as acquiescing in

the German policy. Such a state of affairs, it was decided, could not

be allowed to continue indefinitely.

CHAPTER LXII

BERLIN'S TACTICS

Before the armed neutrality stage of the prewar period was reached

certain events transpired in Berlin which call for inclusion in the

record.

Immediately upon the rupture of diplomatic relations the State

Department notified Ambassador Gerard, who was requested to ask for

his passports. About the same time the German Government acceded to a

demand made by Secretary Lansing for the release of a number of

Americans captured from ships sunk by a German raider in the South

Atlantic and taken to a German port on board one of them, the British

steamer _Yarrowdale_. Germany had no right to hold these men as

prisoners at all, since they were neutrals. Yet there was an attempt

to interject their release into the international crisis as an olive

branch and a concession to American feeling. The two issues were

distinct; but Germany, by her subsequent action, managed to link them

together.

Ambassador Gerard requested his passports on February 5, 1917, while

the release of the _Yarrowdale_ prisoners was pending. Meantime

dispatches which came to Berlin from Washington via London were

blamed for misleading the German Government into thinking that the

United States was detaining Count von Bernstorff, and had seized the

German ships, with their crews, lying in American ports. Until it

received assurances regarding the "fate" of the ex-ambassador and

learned what treatment was to be meted out to the "captured" crews of

the German vessels, the kaiser's government detained Ambassador

Gerard, his staff, a number of Americans, including newspaper

correspondents, as well as the _Yarrowdale_ men. It practically held

all Americans in Germany as prisoners for a week.

In view of the readiness of the German Government to seize upon the

flimsiest excuses for its manifold disgraceful deeds, permissible

doubts arose as to whether it was willingly or willfully misled by the

dispatches. Every courtesy was shown to the departing German

Ambassador by the Washington Government; safe conduct across the ocean

was obtained for him from Great Britain; and he publicly expressed his

acknowledgments. As to the German vessels, there were no seizures, and

the only restraints imposed on the crews were those required by the

immigration laws. Whatever the motive, the detention of Ambassador

Gerard was so wanton a violation of law and usage as to constitute in

itself an act of war.

While Ambassador Gerard was held incommunicado in Berlin, his mail

intercepted, his telephone cut off, and telegraphic facilities denied

him, the German Government actually sought to parley with him by way

of revising an old treaty to apply to existing conditions. Mr. Gerard,

having ceased to hold ambassadorial powers after the breaking of

relations, could not enter into any such negotiations; but then the

German Government had never been concerned with legalities. It blandly

asked him to sign a protocol, the main purpose of which was to protect

Germans and their interests in the United States in the event of war.

The proposed protocol, besides containing a formal reratification of

the American-Prussian treaties of 1799 and 1828 regarding mutual

treatment of nationals caught in either belligerent country in case of

war, provided for some remarkable additions as a "special

arrangement" should war be declared.

Germans in the United States and Americans in Germany were to be

entitled to conduct their businesses and continue their domicile

unmolested, but could be excluded from fortified places and other

military areas. Or if they chose, they were free to leave, with their

personal property, except such as was contraband. If they remained

they were to enjoy the exercise of their private rights in common with

neutral residents. They were not to be transferred to concentration

camps nor their property sequestered except under conditions applying

to neutral property. Patent rights of the respective nationals in

either country were not to be declared void nor be transferred to

others. No contracts between Germans and Americans were to be canceled

or suspended, nor were citizens of either country to be impeded in

fulfilling their obligations arising thereunder. Finally Germany

required that enemy merchant ships in either country should not be

forced to leave port unless allowed a binding safe conduct by all the

enemy sea powers.

In short, Germany asked that in the event of war her nationals and her

ships and commercial interests in the United States be regarded as on

a neutral footing and exempt from all military law. They were to be as

free and unrestricted as in peace time.

Mr. Gerard refused to sign the protocol after he had ceased to

exercise ambassadorial functions. Thereupon Count Montgelas, chief of

the American department of the Foreign Office, hinted that his refusal

to sign it might affect the status of Americans in Germany and their

privilege of departure. The reference was to American press

correspondents in Berlin, whose fate was apparently thought to weigh

with American public opinion. This threat to detain newspaper

representatives as supposedly important pieces on the diplomatic

chessboard before war was declared brought a firm refusal from Mr.

Gerard to yield to such pressure. He also expressed doubt whether the

newspaper representatives could be utilized to urge acceptance of the

protocol under pain of detention. Thenceforth nothing further was

heard of the protocol. Germany was undoubtedly exercising duress in

requiring Mr. Gerard to sign it, since his passports were withheld and

a needless guard had been placed round the American Embassy.

It appeared that the protocol had also been submitted to the State

Department by the Swiss Minister in Washington. Secretary Lansing

finally disposed of it. In a communication to Dr. Ritter he said the

United States Government refused to modernize and extend the treaties

as Germany proposed, and indicated that the Government held the

treaties null and void since Germany herself had grossly violated her

obligations under them. The treaty of 1828, for example, contained

this clause governing freedom of maritime commerce of either of the

contracting parties when the other was at war:

"The free intercourse and commerce of the subjects or citizens of the

party remaining neuter with the belligerent powers shall not be

interrupted.

"On the contrary, in that case, as in full peace, the vessels of the

neutral party may navigate freely to and from the ports and on the

coasts of the belligerent parties, free vessels making free goods,

insomuch that all things shall be adjudged free which shall be on

board any vessel belonging to the neutral party, although such things

belong to an enemy of the other.

"And the same freedom shall be extended to persons who shall be on

board a free vessel, although they should be enemies to the other

party, unless they be soldiers in actual service of such an enemy."

Secretary Lansing pointed out another clause of equal import in the

treaty of 1799, providing:

"All persons belonging to any vessels of war, public or private, who

shall molest or insult in any manner whatever the people, vessel, or

effects of the other party, shall be responsible in their persons and

property for damages and interests, sufficient security for which

shall be given by all commanders of private armed vessels before they

are commissioned."

Germany was reminded of her violations of these stipulations in strong

terms. Said Secretary Lansing:

"Disregarding these obligations, the German Government has proclaimed

certain zones of the high seas in which it declared without

reservation that all ships, including those of neutrals, will be sunk,

and in those zones German submarines have in fact, in accordance with

this declaration, ruthlessly sunk merchant vessels and jeopardized or

destroyed the lives of American citizens on board.

"Moreover, since the severance of relations between the United States

and Germany certain American citizens in Germany have been prevented

from removing from the country. While this is not a violation of the

terms of the treaties mentioned, it is a disregard of the reciprocal

liberty of intercourse between the two countries in times of peace and

cannot be taken otherwise than as an indication of the purpose on the

part of the German Government to disregard, in the event of war, the

similar liberty of action provided for in Article 23 of the treaty of

1799--the very article which it is now proposed to interpret and

supplement almost wholly in the interests of the large number of

German subjects residing in the United States and enjoying in their

persons or property the protection of the United States Government."

In addition to declining to enter into the special protocol Germany

proposed, Secretary Lansing significantly added:

"The Government is seriously considering whether or not the treaty of

1828 and the revised articles of the treaties of 1785 and 1799 have

not been in effect abrogated by the German Government's flagrant

violations of their provisions, for it would be manifestly unjust and

inequitable to require one party to an agreement to observe its

stipulations and to permit the other party to disregard them.

"It would appear that the mutuality of the undertaking has been

destroyed by the conduct of the German authorities."

The meaning of this passage was that as Germany was deemed to have

abrogated the treaties by sinking American ships, the German vessels

immured in American harbors would be under no treaty protection should

war be declared, and would be immediately seized by the American

Government. Germany had thus destroyed the protection they would have

received in case of war.

The intimidation exercised on Ambassador Gerard to obtain his

signature to the protocol and its submission by Dr. Ritter to

Secretary Lansing showed that Germany was nervously concerned about

safeguarding her interests in the United States and feared for the

safety of her nationals in the pending crisis. Ample assurances

presently came to Berlin, however, that, during the diplomatic break

at any rate, the American Government would not resort to Teutonic

methods. Count von Bernstorff was safe; no ships had been seized; no

crews arrested; no other German persons or interests molested.

Thereupon Ambassador Gerard and an entourage of some 120 Americans

received their passports and left the German capital on February 10,

1917, for the United States via Switzerland and Spain.

Germany was less ready to release the Americans known as the

_Yarrowdale_ prisoners. Her Government still appeared to fear that the

crews of German warships in American ports were in danger, and

evidently wanted hostages at hand lest any trouble befell them at the

hands of the American military authorities. Secretary Lansing demanded

their release on February 3, 1917, when relations were broken. Germany

assented, then withdrew her assent. A second request for their freedom

and for an explanation of their continued detention was made on

February 13, 1917. At this date the men had been held as prisoners of

war for forty-four days contrary to international law. After being

captured from Allied vessels sunk by the German raider, they were

taken before a prize court at Swinemunde, when their status was

determined. Neutral merchant seamen, according to Germany, must be

held as prisoners of war because they had served and taken pay on

armed enemy vessels. Germany disclosed for the first time that she was

treating armed merchantmen as ships of war and regarded neutral seamen

found on such vessels as combatants. The German raider had captured

altogether 103 subjects of neutral states. They were not imprisoned

because they had committed hostile acts, which would have justified

their detention. They were penalized for being on enemy vessels. The

American Government insisted that Germany had no right to hold any

Americans as war prisoners unless they committed hostile acts. Germany

had no answer to make to that contention. But she did not free them.

"They will be released just as soon as we learn of the fate of the

German crews in American ports," said Herr Zimmermann, Foreign

Secretary.

[Illustration: Woodrow Wilson was inaugurated President of the United

States, March 4, 1913; was reelected and began his second term March

4, 1917. He signed the Declaration of War, April 6, 1917.]

Germany had already been assured that the crews were in no danger. The

conviction grew that she meant to detain the _Yarrowdale_ seamen as

hostages pending a determination of the crisis as to peace or war. The

Administration had been inclined to subordinate all collateral issues

between the two countries to the major and vital one created by the

submarine peril; but the plight of these seamen caused their case to

become one of the chief factors in the crisis. Germany seemed to

conclude that their continued detention, in view of the indignation

roused in Washington by such a wanton violation of international law,

to say nothing of the open insult hurled at the dignity and good faith

of the United States, would only precipitate war. On February 16,

1917, came a report that the men had been released. This proved to be

a false alarm. On February 26, 1917, Berlin notified that their

release, although ordered "some time ago," had been deferred because

an infectious disease had been discovered in their concentration camp

at Brandenburg. They were consequently placed in quarantine "in the

interest of neutral countries." On March 2, 1917, Dr. Ritter informed

Secretary Lansing that the transfer of the American sailors to the

frontier had been arranged but delayed until the quarantine ended. On

March 8, 1917, they were finally released from quarantine and sent to

the Swiss frontier. Members of other neutral crews were sent home

through various frontier towns. All were said to have been penniless

and in rags. Apart from the necessary quarantine (a Spanish doctor

found typhus in the camp), the record stands as an example of

Germany's gift for unscrupulous temporizing and for using

procrastination as a club to hold the United States at bay when on the

brink of war.

The Reichstag met shortly after Germany had compulsorily disposed of

her connections with the United States. An expected address by the

kaiser's Chancellor, Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg, had been deferred until

February 27, 1917, when a tardy official recognition was made of the

American action.

The most deliberate official notice of the course the United States

would take was served on the German Government in the President's

ultimatum arising out of the torpedoing of the _Sussex_ early in 1916.

If Germany continued her ruthless sea warfare, the President warned

her, "the Government of the United States can have no choice but to

sever diplomatic relations with the German Empire altogether." Now the

time had come for the President to go even beyond that step. The day

before the Reichstag listened to the Chancellor's complaint the voice

of the American President was again heard in the Capitol at

Washington.

CHAPTER LXIII

ARMED NEUTRALITY

President Wilson addressed Congress in joint session, February 26,

1917, asking authority to use the armed forces of the United States to

protect American rights on the high seas. He desired to establish a

state of "armed neutrality." This was not a request for a declaration

of war, nor was it an act of war. It was to prepare the United States

to resist what might be warlike acts by Germany.

Reviewing the maritime conditions caused by Germany's submarine order

of January 31, 1917, which produced the diplomatic rupture, the

President disclosed an unexpected view--that Germany's misdeeds in

carrying out her new decree had not, in his opinion, so far provided

the "overt act" for which the United States was waiting.

"Our own commerce has suffered, is suffering," he said, "rather in

apprehension than in fact, rather because so many of our ships are

timidly keeping to their home ports, than because American ships have

been sunk....

"In sum, therefore, the situation we find ourselves in with regard to

the actual conduct of the German submarine warfare against commerce

and its effects upon our own ships and people is substantially the

same that it was when I addressed you on February 3, except for the

tying up of our shipping in our own ports because of the unwillingness

of our shipowners to risk their vessels at sea without insurance or

adequate protection, and the very serious congestion of our commerce,

which has eventuated, a congestion which is growing rapidly more and

more serious every day.

"This in itself might presently accomplish, in effect, what the new

German submarine orders were meant to accomplish, so far as we are

concerned. We can only say, therefore, that the overt act which I have

ventured to hope the German commanders would in fact avoid has not

occurred."

But he felt that American immunity thus far had been more a matter of

happy accident than due to any consideration of German submarine

commanders. Nevertheless, he pointed out, it would be foolish to deny

that the situation was fraught with the gravest possibilities and

dangers. Hence he sought from the Congress "full and immediate

assurance of the authority which I may need at any moment to

exercise."

"No doubt," he proceeded, "I already possess that authority without

special warrant of law, by the plain implication of my constitutional

duties and powers, but I prefer in the present circumstances not to

act upon general implication. I wish to feel that the authority and

the power of the Congress are behind me in whatever it may become

necessary for me to do. We are jointly the servants of the people and

must act together and in their spirit, so far as we can divine and

interpret it....

"I am not now proposing or contemplating war or any steps that need

lead to it. I merely request that you will accord me by your own vote

and definite bestowal the means and the authority to safeguard in

practice the right of a great people who are at peace and who are

desirous of exercising none but the rights of peace to follow the

pursuit of peace in quietness and good will--rights recognized time

out of mind by all the civilized nations of the world.

"I believe that the people will be willing to trust me to act with

restraint, with prudence, and in the true spirit of amity and good

faith that they have themselves displayed throughout these trying

months, and it is in that belief that I request that you will

authorize me to supply our merchant ships with defensive arms should

that become necessary, and with the means of using them, and to employ

any other instrumentalities or methods that may be necessary and

adequate to protect our ships and our people in their legitimate and

peaceful pursuits on the seas."

Even before the President addressed Congress the "overt act" had been

committed by Germany. News of the sinking of the _Laconia_, already

mentioned, was published synchronously with the delivery of his

message and subjected to correction his allusion to the noncommittal

of any overt act by German submarines. The President, in fact, decided

later that the destruction of the Cunarder without warning and at

night, in rough seas, with the loss of American lives, constituted a

"clear-cut" violation of the pledge the German Government gave to the

United States after the _Lusitania_ and _Sussex_ sinkings. But it was

felt that the next step in meeting the situation now rested with

Congress.

The Senate and House immediately set about framing bills conforming,

as far as the President's opponents permitted, to his request. There

was no time to be lost. Congress expired on March 4, 1917, by

constitutional limitation and the President had delayed submitting his

message until the last moment, so that Congress had only eight days to

debate and agree to a measure that excited the pacifists' bitter

animosity in both Houses, as well as the opposition of other

legislators who feared that the authority the President sought would

encroach on Congress's war-making prerogative.

In the House of Representatives the opposition dwindled to negligible

proportions. Public sentiment had been stirred by the sinking of the

_Laconia_ and by certain revelations the Administration published

disclosing German overtures to Mexico in the event of war, the

character of which will be chronicled later. Sensitive to the public

pulse, the House was eager to receive the Armed-Ship Bill when it was

reported on February 28, 1917, by the Foreign Affairs Committee, which

had occupied a couple of days in shaping it. A stirring debate on the

bill took place the next day (March 1) under cloture rule, and before

the House adjourned that night it had passed the measure by a

substantial vote of 403 to 13. The bill was at once sent to the

Senate, and was substituted for the Senate Committee's bill, whose

provisions conferred larger powers on the President. Expecting the

Senate to pass its own bill as a substitute, it was the intention of

the House leaders to accept the Senate's measure when it came to them

for passage. The measure, however, never passed the Senate. Through

the wide latitude allowed for unlimited debate a handful of Senators

opposed to any action against Germany succeeded in effectually

blocking the bill. The Senate sat late into the night of February 28,

1917, and took up the Armed-Ship Bill the next day. Senator La

Follette, who led the successful filibuster against the bill, objected

to its consideration, and, under the rule of unanimous consent, would

only allow the bill to proceed on condition that no attempt was made

to pass it before the next day. A precious day was lost, which sealed

the fate of the measure. The bill came before the Senate for

continuous debate on March 2, 1917, when it got into a parliamentary

tangle. Debate was resumed on Saturday, March 3, 1917. Only a day and

a half of the session now remained. Senator Stone who, though in

charge of the bill, was opposed to it, found his position untenable

and surrendered its conduct to Senator Hitchcock. This course enabled

him to join the opponents of the bill openly by contending for an

amendment excluding munition ships from armed protection--a revival of

the arms embargo he had urged before. But the main obstruction to the

bill came from a group of Western senators, who balked every effort

for limiting debate or setting a time for a vote. As midnight neared

the Administration's supporters saw that its chances of passing before

Congress expired at noon the next day, Sunday, March 4, 1917, were of

the slightest, and, anxious that the country should know where they

stood, these senators, to the number of seventy-five, signed a

manifesto reading as follows:

"The undersigned, United States senators, favor the passage of Senate

bill 8322, to authorize the President of the United States to arm

American merchant vessels.

"A similar bill already has passed the House of Representatives by a

vote of 403 to 13.

"Under the rules of the Senate, allowing unlimited debate, it now

appears to be impossible to obtain a vote prior to noon March 4, 1917,

when the session of Congress expires.

"We desire the statement entered in the record to establish the fact

that the Senate favors the legislation and would pass it if a vote

could be obtained."

The Senate continued sitting until the stroke of twelve noon on March

4, 1917. The President was in the Capitol receiving reports of the

course of his opponents' tactics. A vote not having been reached, the

Armed-Ship Bill went down to defeat, having been talked to death, and

the Senate automatically adjourned with the expiration of the last

session of the Sixty-fourth Congress. The bill was assured of passage,

had a vote been permitted, by 75 to 12. The twelve obstructionists

were Senators La Follette of Wisconsin, Norris of Nebraska, Cummins of

Iowa, Stone of Missouri, Gronna of North Dakota, Kirby of Arkansas,

Vardaman of Mississippi, O'Gorman of New York, Works of California,

Jones of Washington, Clapp of Minnesota, Lane of Oregon--seven

Republicans and five Democrats.

The situation produced an indignant protest from the President, who,

in a public statement, described the termination of the session by

constitutional limitation as disclosing "a situation unparalleled in

the history of the country, perhaps unparalleled in the history of any

modern government. In the immediate presence of a crisis fraught with

more subtle and far-reaching possibilities of national danger than any

other the Government has known within the whole history of its

international relations, the Congress has been unable to act either to

safeguard the country or to vindicate the elementary rights of its

citizens."

"The Senate," he proceeded, "has no rules by which debate can be

limited or brought to an end, no rules by which dilatory tactics of

any kind can be prevented. A single member can stand in the way of

action, if he have but the physical endurance. The result in this case

is a complete paralysis alike of the legislative and of the executive

branches of the Government.

"Although, as a matter of fact, the nation and the representatives of

the nation stand back of the Executive with unprecedented unanimity

and spirit, the impression made abroad will, of course, be that it is

not so and that other governments may act as they please without fear

that this Government can do anything at all. We cannot explain. The

explanation is incredible. The Senate of the United States is the only

legislative body in the world which cannot act when its majority is

ready for action. A little group of willful men, representing no

opinion but their own, have rendered the great Government of the

United States helpless and contemptible.

"The remedy? There is but one remedy. The only remedy is that the

rules of the Senate shall be so altered that it can act. The country

can be relied upon to draw the moral. I believe that the Senate can be

relied on to supply the means of action and save the country from

disaster."

The new Senate of the Sixty-fifth Congress met in extraordinary

session at noon on March 6, 1917, when both parties took steps to

frame a revision of the rules for preventing filibustering. Both

caucuses agreed upon a cloture rule empowering the Senate to bring the

debate on any measure to an end by a two-thirds vote, limiting

speeches to one hour each, but sixteen senators must first make the

request in the form of a signed motion presented two days previously.

After several hours' discussion this rule passed the Senate on March

8, 1917. Thus the right to unlimited debate, which had been regarded

as the most characteristic prerogative of senators, was at last

restrained after enjoying a freedom of nearly one hundred and ten

years.

The recalcitrant senators who prevented the passage of the Armed-Ship

Bill were the subject of bitter criticism from the press and public

throughout the country, which echoed, but in much stronger terms, the

President's denunciation of them. There was none to do them reverence

in the United States. The only meed of praise they received came from

Germany. The essence of editorial opinion in that country regarding

their action, according to a Berlin message, was that "so long as

there are men in the American Congress who boldly refuse to have their

country involved in the European slaughter merely for the sake of

gratifying Wilson's vainglorious ambition, there is hope that the

common sense of the American people will assert itself and that they

will not permit the appalling insanity to spread to the new world that

holds the old world in a merciless grip."

The German press, like the senators whom it eulogized, was mistaken in

supposing that the President had been thwarted by the failure of the

Armed-Ship Bill. Certainly he remained in doubt as to his next course.

He had told Congress that he believed he had the power to arm merchant

ships without its authority, but did not care to act on general

implication. Now he was faced with the duty of ascertaining definitely

where his freedom of action lay, since Congress had impeded, instead

of facilitating, his conduct of the crisis with Germany. An old act,

passed in 1819, governing piracy at sea, had been unearthed, and at

first sight its terms were read as preventing the President from

arming merchant ships. The law advisers of the Government, Secretary

Lansing and Attorney General Gregory, examined this act and decided

that it was obsolete. They were of opinion that it did not apply to

the existing situation. The statute forbade American merchantmen from

defending themselves against the commissioned vessels of a nation with

which the United States was at "amity"; but they could resist by force

any attacks made on them by any other armed vessels. In short, it

legalized resistance to pirates. The word "amity" pre-supposed

friendly diplomatic relations as well as a normal condition of

traffic and commerce on the high seas in its application to the armed

vessels of other nations. The provision forbidding conflict with them

by American traders was intended primarily to prevent private citizens

from embarrassing the Government's foreign relations. Now it was held

that Germany's denial to Americans of the rights of the high seas was

inconsistent with true amity, and caused her war vessels to lose, so

far as the United States was concerned, their right to immunity from

attack, both under international law and under this municipal act,

which was viewed as superseded and void in its application to German

war craft.

This decision disposed of an obstacle which had placed the President

in a dilemma. It was true he could go to Congress again; but immediate

action was imperative. Armed neutrality, under the President's powers

as commander in chief of the army and navy, was thereupon determined.

Every merchant ship which so desired would be provided with guns and

naval gunners to operate them. Foreign governments were notified of

this action in an executive memorandum which read:

"In view of the announcement of the Imperial German Government on

January 81, 1917, that all ships, those of neutrals included, met

within certain zones of the high seas, would be sunk without any

precaution taken for the safety of the persons on board, and without

the exercise of visit and search, the Government of the United States

has determined to place upon all American merchant vessels sailing

through the barred areas an armed guard for the protection of the

vessels and the lives of the persons on board."

The President meantime was also confronted with the necessity of

calling the new Congress into extra session, not so much to gain its

assent to armed neutrality (since he had determined to act without

it), but as a war expedient to support the measures projected against

Germany. Owing to the Senate filibuster the previous Congress had been

unable to pass appropriations exceeding $500,000,000, more than half

of which was needed for the army. The new Congress was accordingly

convened, to meet on April 16, 1917.

CHAPTER LXIV

GERMANY'S BID TO MEXICO

While Congress was in the midst of its consideration of the Armed-Ship

Bill, the Administration amazed the country by revealing through the

press that Germany had made overtures to Mexico for an alliance with

that country in the event of war with the United States, and also

sought to involve Japan.

This disclosure was due to American secret service agents, who had

intercepted a communication addressed by Herr Zimmermann, the German

Foreign Secretary, to Herr von Eckhardt, the German Minister at Mexico

City, reading as follows:

"BERLIN, January 19, 1917.

"On the 1st of February we intend to begin submarine warfare

unrestricted. In spite of this, it is our intention to endeavor

to keep neutral the United States of America.

"If this attempt is not successful, we propose an alliance on the

following basis with Mexico: That we shall make war together and

together make peace. We shall give general financial support, and

it is understood that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory

in New Mexico, Texas, and Arizona. The details are left to you

for settlement.

"You are instructed to inform the President of Mexico of the

above in the greatest confidence as soon as it is certain that

there will be an outbreak of war with the United States, and

suggest that the President of Mexico, on his own initiative,

should communicate with Japan suggesting adherence at once to

this plan. At the same time, offer to mediate between Germany and

Japan.

"Please call to the attention of the President of Mexico that the

employment of ruthless submarine warfare now promises to compel

England to make peace in a few months.

"ZIMMERMAN."

The Administration was in possession of this document, and achieved a

dramatic coup in exposing its contents just as important war

legislation was pending in Congress. The immediate effect of the

revelation was that the Armed-Ship Bill passed the House of

Representatives by the overwhelming majority recorded in the previous

chapter. The Senate was no less astonished; but its attitude was one

of incredulity and produced a demand to the State Department vouching

for the document's authenticity and demanding other information.

Secretary Lansing assured it that the letter was _bona fide_, but

declined to say more.

The letter was transmitted to Von Eckhardt through Count von

Bernstorff, then German Ambassador at Washington, and now homeward

bound to Germany under a safe conduct obtained from his enemies by the

country against which he was plotting war. It came into the

President's hands a few days before it was published on March 1, 1917,

and provided a telling comment on Chancellor von Bethmann-Hollweg's

declaration that the United States had placed an interpretation on the

new submarine decree "never intended by Germany" and that Germany had

promoted and honored friendly relations with the United States "as an

heirloom from Frederick the Great." Its disclosure was viewed as a

sufficing answer to the German Chancellor's plaint that the United

States had "brusquely" broken off relations without giving "authentic"

reasons for its action.

The bearings of the proposal to Mexico were admirably stated by the

Associated Press as follows:

"The document supplies the missing link to many separate chains of

circumstances which, until now, have seemed to lead to no definite

point. It sheds new light upon the frequently reported but indefinable

movements of the Mexican Government to couple its situation with the

friction between the United States and Japan.

"It adds another chapter to the celebrated report of Jules Cambon,

French Ambassador in Berlin before the war, for Germany's world-wide

plans for stirring up strife on every continent where they might aid

her in the struggle for world domination which she dreamed was close

at hand.

"It adds a climax to the operations of Count von Bernstorff and the

German Embassy in this country, which have been colored with passport

frauds, charges of dynamite plots, and intrigue, the full extent of

which never has been published.

"It gives new credence to persistent reports of submarine bases on

Mexican territory in the Gulf of Mexico. It takes cognizance of a fact

long recognized by American army chiefs, that if Japan ever undertook

to invade the United States it probably would be through Mexico, over

the border and into the Mississippi Valley to split the country in

two.

"It recalls that Count von Bernstorff, when his passports were handed

to him, was very reluctant to return to Germany, but expressed a

preference for an asylum in Cuba. It gives a new explanation to the

repeated arrests on the border of men charged by American military

authorities with being German intelligence agents.

"Last of all, it seems to show a connection with General Carranza's

recent proposal to neutrals that exports of food and munitions to the

Entente Allies be cut off, and an intimation that he might stop the

supply of oil, so vital to the British navy, which is exported from

the Tampico fields."

A series of repudiations followed. The Mexican Government, through

various officials except President-elect Carranza himself, denied all

knowledge of Germany's proposal. The German Minister at Mexico City

protested that he had never received any instructions from Secretary

Zimmermann, which appeared to be the case, since they were

intercepted. From Tokyo came the assurance of Viscount Motono,

Japanese Foreign Minister, that Japan had received no proposal from

either Germany or Mexico for an alliance against the United States. He

scouted the idea as ridiculous, since it was based on the "outrageous

presumption that Japan would abandon her allies." Secretary Lansing

did not believe Japan had any knowledge of Germany's overtures to

Mexico, nor that she would consider approaches made by any enemy, and

was likewise confident that Mexico would not be a party to any

agreement which affected her relations with the United States.

The Berlin Government impenitently admitted the transmission of the

Eckhardt letter and justified the alliance with Mexico it proposed.

The Budget Committee of the Reichstag, unequivocally and by a

unanimous vote, indorsed the initiation of the ill-starred project as

being within the legitimate scope of military precautions. Addressing

the Reichstag, Herr Zimmermann thus defended his action:

"We were looking out for all of us, in the event of there being the

prospect of war with America. It was a natural and justified

precaution. I am not sorry that, through its publication in America,

it also became known in Japan.

"For the dispatch of these instructions a secure way was chosen which

at present is at Germany's disposal. How the Americans came into

possession of the text which went to America in special secret code we

do not know. That these instructions should have fallen into American

hands is a misfortune, but that does not alter the fact that the step

was necessary for our patriotic interests.

"Least of all are they in America justified in being excited about our

action. It would be erroneous to suppose that the step made a

particularly deep impression abroad. It is regarded as what it

is--justifiable defensive action in the event of war."

The Mexican Government, despite its denials, remained under the

suspicion that it had secret dealings with Germany. Toward the close

of 1916 circumstantial rumors were afloat that German sea raiders,

who were then roaming the South Atlantic, had a base somewhere on the

coast of Mexico. The Allied Powers were persuaded that if this was

true the raiders could not obtain supplies from such a source without

the knowledge or connivance of the Mexican authorities. The British

charge at Mexico City thereupon presented a note to the Carranza

Government stating that if it was discovered that Mexican neutrality

had thus been violated, the Allies would take "drastic measures" to

end the situation. The retort of the Mexican Foreign Minister, Senor

Aquilar, almost insolent in tone, was to the effect that it was the

business of the Allies to keep German submarines out of western

waters, and that if they were not kept out Mexico would adopt whatever

course the circumstances might dictate.

An allusion has previously been made to a peace proposal submitted by

General Carranza. Its character was such as to point to the presence

of German influences in Mexico, and the impression was created that it

was made solely to embarrass the United States. Shortly after the

American severance of relations with Germany, General Carranza

circulated an identical note to the neutral powers, including the

United States, asking them to join Mexico in an international

agreement to prohibit the exportation of munitions and foodstuffs to

the belligerents in Europe. Such an embargo, General Carranza piously

pointed out in florid terms, would compel peace. The inference was

plain. Only the Central Powers would benefit by such a step. If the

note was not directly inspired by German intrigue it certainly

suggested to the other neutrals a practical union against the Entente

Allies. The proposal was contrary to international law and to the

principles of neutrality as laid down by the United States to the

German and Austro-Hungarian Governments.

The suspected complicity of Mexico as a tool of Germany, however,

faded before the inconceivable folly of the latter in gravely

proposing that Mexico should attempt to regain the "lost territories"

of New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas. The American press was almost

united in declaring that Germany had committed an act of war against

the United States. Certainly her exposed machinations brought

hostilities perceptibly nearer.

CHAPTER LXV

A STATE OF WAR

Armed neutrality proved to be a passing phase in a rapidly developing

situation. When the President on March 9, 1917, called on the new

Congress to assemble on April 16, his course was solely dictated by

existing conditions, which required legislative support, by the

passage of adequate appropriations, for carrying out the defensive

measures decided upon. But armed neutrality never became a reality. As

a certain foretoken of war it could not be sustained. Not a naval gun

had found its way on to the bow or stern of a merchant ship before the

depredations of Germany forced the United States to reconsider its

predetermined course of defensive armament.

"We make absolutely no distinction in sinking neutral ships within the

war zone," Herr Zimmermann had warned. "Our determination is

unshakable since that is the only way to end the war."

This was an intimation that American vessels, like those of other

neutrals, must comply with the U-boat rulings or take the

consequences. Hence more American vessels were sunk, Germany pursuing

her evil way regardless of the American attitude.

On March 12, 1917, the unarmed steamer _Algonquin_, with a crew of

twenty-seven, of whom ten were Americans, was shelled and sunk without

warning by a German submarine. The crew succeeded in escaping.

A few days later the sinking of three unarmed American vessels, the

_City of Memphis_, _Illinois_, and _Vigilancia_, was announced. The

first and second named ships were returning to the United States in

ballast; hence their destruction could not be justified on the ground

that they were carrying freight for the Allies. The _City of Memphis_

was first shelled and then torpedoed off the Irish coast on March 17,

1917. Her crew of fifty-seven escaped in five boats and were picked up

by a steamer. The _Illinois_ was torpedoed the next day. The

_Vigilancia_ was similarly sunk on March 16, 1917, by a submarine

which did not appear on the surface. Fifteen of the crew, including

five Americans, were lost.

These sinkings occasioned gratification in Germany. Count Reventlow, a

notable German publicist, thus welcomed them in the "Deutsche

Tageszeitung":

"It is good that American ships have been obliged to learn that the

German prohibition is effective, and that there is no question of

distinctive treatment for the United States. In view of such losses,

there is only one policy for the United States, as for the small

European maritime powers, namely, to retain their ships in their own

ports as long as the war lasts."

Another German press comment was that the sinkings were certain to

produce special satisfaction throughout the empire.

German contempt for American feeling could no further go. A cabinet

meeting held on March 20, 1917, disclosed that the President's

colleagues, even reputed pacifists like Secretaries Daniels and Baker,

were a unit in regarding a state of armed neutrality as inadequate to

meet the serious situation. The President was confronted with the

necessity of immediately taking more drastic action rather than

continuing to pursue measures of passive defense against the submarine

peril represented by arming ships. The cabinet's demand was for an

earlier convocation of Congress and a declaration that a state of war

existed between the United States and Germany. The President listened,

and that evening attended a theater supposedly to divert and prepare

his mind for coping with the gravest of problems. Events proved that

he had already determined his course.

Armed neutrality was a delusive phrase and misrepresented actual

conditions; it merely glozed over a state of undeclared hostility and

deceived no one. Yet it had its adherents; they wanted to give it a

fair trial before discarding the pretense that it existed. The

Government, they said, should wait and see how armed ships fared at

the hands of German submarines. If they proved equal to encounters

with U-boats, or, better still, if the U-boats did not dare to attack

them, there would be no occasion for further action. The proposal

would not bear scrutiny since it was now known that Germany regarded

armed merchantmen as ships of war and their crews as combatants.

The next day, March 21, 1917, the President issued a proclamation

calling upon Congress to assemble on April 2, instead of April 16, "to

receive a communication concerning grave matters of national policy."

The national emergency which had been in existence since Germany began

sinking American ships in pursuance of her unrestricted submarine

policy was now acknowledged. It would be the function of Congress, if

the President so advised, to declare that a state of war existed

between the Government of the United States and that of the German

Empire. And a waiting and willing nation was left in no doubt that war

there would be. The cabinet had become a war cabinet and the country

warlike, goaded to retaliatory action by the wanton deeds of the most

cruel government of this or any other age.

As the spokesman of an imperialistic regime preserving its accustomed

role of a wolf in sheep's clothing, the German Chancellor addressed

the Reichstag on March 29, 1917, and took cognizance of the critical

situation in the United States in these terms:

"Within the next few days the directors of the American nation will be

convened by President Wilson for an extraordinary session of Congress

in order to decide the question of war or peace between the American

and German nations.

"Germany never had the slightest intention of attacking the United

States of America, and does not have such intention now. It never

desired war against the United States of America, and does not desire

it to-day. How did these things develop?

"Why, England declined to raise her blockade, which had been called

illegal and indefensible even by President Wilson and Secretary

Lansing," said the Chancellor. "Worse than that, she had intensified

it. Worse than all, she had rejected Germany's 'peace' offers and

proclaimed her war objects, which aimed at the annihilation of the

Teutonic Powers. Hence unrestricted sea warfare followed.

"If the American nation considers this," concluded the Chancellor, "a

cause for which to declare war against the German nation, with which

it has lived in peace for more than one hundred years, if this action

warrants an increase of bloodshed, we shall not have to bear the

responsibility for it. The German nation, which feels neither hatred

nor hostility against the United States of America, shall also bear

and overcome this."

The march of events went on irresistibly. At 8.35 o'clock on the

evening of Monday, April 2, 1917, President Wilson appeared before a

joint session of the Senate and House of Representatives. He had

addressed the Congress in person several times during his terms of

office, but never under circumstances or in a setting more dramatic.

The streets leading to the Capitol were packed with vast throngs.

White searchlights etched the dome and the pillars against the sky,

revealing the Stars and Stripes waving in the breeze on the flagstaff

above the dome. Two troops of United States cavalry in dress uniform,

with sabers drawn, formed a guard round the House approaches. Hundreds

of police, in uniform and in plain clothes, were scattered along the

route followed by the President's automobile from the White House.

Inside the House, which had been in almost continuous session all day,

the members assembled to receive the President. The senators appeared

carrying little American flags. The Diplomatic Corps, the whole

Supreme Court--in fact, the entire personnel of the Government,

legislative, judicial, and executive--gathered to hear the head of the

American nation present its indictment against the Imperial Government

of Germany.

The President was visibly nervous. He was pale. His voice was neither

strong nor clear. He appeared to be deeply affected by the epochal and

awesome character of his task. His distinguished audience listened in

profound silence as he stated America's case without bluster and

without rancor. The burden of his address was a request that the House

and Senate recognize that Germany had been making war on the United

States and that they agree to his recommendations, which included a

declaration that a state of war existed, that universal military

service be instituted, that a preliminary army of 500,000 be raised,

and that the United States at once cooperate with the Allied Powers as

a belligerent in every way that would operate to effect the defeat of

Germany as a disturber of the world's peace.

In adopting ruthless submarine warfare, the President told Congress,

Germany had swept every restriction aside:

"Vessels of every kind, whatever their flag, their character, their

cargo, their destination, their errand, have been ruthlessly sent to

the bottom without warning and without thought of help or mercy for

those on board, the vessels of friendly neutrals along with those of

belligerents. Even hospital ships and ships carrying relief to the

sorely bereaved and stricken people of Belgium, though the latter were

provided with safe conduct through the proscribed areas by the German

Government itself and were distinguished by unmistakable marks of

identity, have been sunk with the same reckless lack of compassion or

of principle.

"It is a war against all nations. American ships have been sunk,

American lives taken, in ways which it has stirred us very deeply to

learn of, but the ships and people of other neutral and friendly

nations have been sunk and overwhelmed in the waters in the same way.

There has been no discrimination.

"The challenge is to all mankind. Each nation must decide for itself

how it will meet it."

Here the President referred to the short-lived expedient of armed

neutrality adopted to meet the challenge:

"When I addressed the Congress on the 26th of February last I thought

that it would suffice to assert our neutral rights with arms, our

right to use the seas against unlawful interference, our right to keep

our people safe against unlawful violence. But armed neutrality, it

now appears, is impracticable.

"The German Government denies the right of neutrals to use arms at all

within the areas of the sea which it has proscribed, even in the

defense of rights which no modern publicist has ever before questioned

their right to defend. The intimation is conveyed that the armed

guards which we have placed on our merchant ships will be treated as

beyond the pale of law and subject to be dealt with as pirates would

be. Armed neutrality is ineffectual enough at best; in such

circumstances and in the face of such pretensions it is worse than

ineffectual; it is likely only to produce what it was meant to

prevent; it is practically certain to draw us into the war without

either the rights or the effectiveness of belligerents. There is one

choice we cannot make, we are incapable of making; we will not choose

the path of submission--"

The President's audience had listened in silence up to this point.

There was more of the sentence; but Congress did not wait to hear it.

At the word "submission," Chief Justice White of the Supreme Court

raised his hands in a resounding clap, which was the signal for a

deafening roar of approval alike from congressmen, senators, and the

occupants of the crowded galleries.

"We will not choose the path of submission," repeated the President,

"and suffer the most sacred rights of our nation and our people to be

ignored or violated. The wrongs against which we now array ourselves

are no common wrongs; they cut to the very roots of human life."

Then came the presentation of the only alternate course the United

States could take:

"With a profound sense of the solemn and even tragical character of

the step I am taking and of the grave responsibilities which it

involves, but in unhesitating obedience to what I deem my

constitutional duty, I advise that the Congress declare the recent

course of the Imperial German Government to be in fact nothing less

than war against the Government and people of the United States, that

it formally accept the status of belligerent which has thus been

thrust upon it, and that it take immediate steps not only to put the

country in a more thorough state of defense, but also to exert all its

power and employ all its resources to bring the Government of the

German Empire to terms and end the war."

Now what did this involve? The President thus answered the question:

"It will involve the utmost practicable cooperation in counsel and

action with the governments now at war with Germany, and, as incident

to that, the extension to those governments of the most liberal

financial credits, in order that our resources may so far as possible

be added to theirs.

"It will involve the organization and mobilization of all the material

resources of the country to supply the materials of war and serve the

incidental needs of the nation in the most abundant and yet the most

economical and efficient way possible.

"It will involve the immediate full equipment of the navy in all

respects, but particularly in supplying it with the best means of

dealing with the enemy's submarines.

"It will involve the immediate addition to the armed forces of the

United States, already provided for by law in case of war, of at least

500,000 men, who should, in my opinion, be chosen upon the principle

of universal liability to service, and also the authorization of

subsequent additional increments of equal force so soon as they may be

needed and can be handled in training.

"It will involve also, of course, the granting of adequate credits to

the Government, sustained, I hope, so far as they can equitably be

sustained by the present generation, by well-conceived taxation."

The President asked his countrymen to undertake a herculean task. But

it was a necessary task--he deemed it an imperative one, and he knew

it would be borne by willing shoulders. Without any object of gain, it

was to vindicate the principles of peace and justice in the world as

against selfish and autocratic power.

Neutrality was no longer feasible when the menace to the world's peace

and freedom lay in the existence of autocratic governments backed by

organized force and controlled solely by their own will, not by the

will of their peoples. The United States had seen the last of

neutrality in such circumstances. The age demanded that the standards

of conduct and responsibility for wrong done which were respected by

individual citizens of civilized states should also be observed among

nations and their governments.

He acquitted the German people of blame. The United States had no

quarrel with them. They were the pawns and tools of their autocratic

rulers.

"Self-governed nations," said the President, "do not fill their

neighbor states with spies or set the course of intrigue to bring

about some critical posture of affairs which will give them an

opportunity to strike and make conquest. Such designs can be

successfully worked out only under cover and where no one has the

right to ask questions."

What hope was there of a steadfast concert of peace with an autocratic

government which could not be trusted to keep faith within it or

observe its covenants? The President pointed out the futility of

looking for any enduring concord with Germany as she was now governed:

"One of the things that have served to convince us that the Prussian

autocracy was not and could never be our friend is that from the very

outset of the present war it has filled our unsuspecting communities,

and even our offices of government, with spies and set criminal

intrigues everywhere afoot against our national unity of counsel, our

peace within and without, our industries and our commerce. Indeed, it

is now evident that its spies were here even before the war began; and

it is unhappily not a matter of conjecture, but a fact proved in our

courts of justice, that the intrigues which have more than once come

perilously near to disturbing the peace and dislocating the industries

of the country, have been carried on at the instigation, with the

support, and even under the personal direction of official agents of

the Imperial Government accredited to the Government of the United

States.

"The selfish designs of a government that did what it pleased and told

its people nothing," continued the President, "have played their part

in serving to convince us at last that that government entertains no

real friendship for us, and means to act against our peace and

security at its convenience. That it means to stir up enemies against

us at our very doors the intercepted note to the German Minister at

Mexico City is eloquent evidence."

The President then delivered the most striking passage of an oration

that will rank as one of the greatest ever addressed to a listening

world:

"We are accepting this challenge of hostile purpose because we know

that in such a Government, following such methods, we can never have a

friend; and that in the presence of its organized power, always lying

in wait to accomplish we know not what purpose, can be no assured

security for the democratic governments of the world. We are now about

to accept the gage of battle with this natural foe to liberty and

shall, if necessary, spend the whole force of the nation to check and

nullify its pretensions and its power. We are glad, now that we see

the facts with no veil of false pretense about them, to fight thus for

the ultimate peace of the world and for the liberation of its peoples,

the German peoples included; for the rights of nations, great and

small, and the privilege of men everywhere to choose their way of life

and of obedience.

"The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be planted

upon the tested foundations of political liberty. We have no selfish

ends to serve. We desire no conquest, no dominion. We seek no

indemnities for ourselves, no material compensation for the sacrifices

we shall freely make. We are but one of the champions of the rights of

mankind. We shall be satisfied when those rights have been made as

secure as the faith and the freedom of nations can make them."

The following morning, April 3, 1917, the Foreign Affairs Committees

of both houses met at 10 o'clock to consider war resolutions

introduced the previous evening in the House and Senate immediately

after the President's address. They were identical in form and were

submitted to textual alterations by the committees. That adopted by

the Senate committee, and accepted by the House leaders, read as

follows:

"_Whereas_, The Imperial German Government has committed repeated acts

of war against the Government and the people of the United States of

America, therefore be it

"_Resolved_, By the Senate and House of Representatives of the United

States of America in Congress assembled, that the state of war between

the United States and the Imperial German Government, which has thus

been thrust upon the United States, is hereby formally declared and

that the President be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to

employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and

the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial

German Government; and, to bring the conflict to a successful

termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by

the Congress of the United States."

Senator Stone, chairman of the Senate committee, alone opposed its

adoption. It was at once reported to the Senate, only to meet

objection from Senator La Follette, who demanded the "regular order,"

that is, that the resolution, under the rule any member could invoke

in order to postpone the consideration of important legislation, be

withheld for one day. His objection came when Senator Hitchcock, who

was in charge of the resolution, asked for unanimous consent to a

suspension of the rules for its immediate consideration. The Senate

was obliged to submit to the Wisconsin senator's obstructive tactics;

but Senator Martin, the Senate Democratic leader, rather than permit

any other business to be transacted, promptly obtained an adjournment

till the next day. It was determined that the Senate, on reassembling,

should sit without rest, recess or intermission, and without

considering any other matter until the war resolution was passed.

Senator La Follette and other pro-German pacifists in the chamber were

barred from interposing further obstacles, especially as the new

cloture rule was now operative.

The Senate assembled on April 4, 1917, in serious mien to carry out

its task of passing the resolution before it could adjourn. It was a

day of speechmaking and of historic utterances characterized by a

moving earnestness of conviction. Orators of patriotic fervor came

from senators who had before condemned any declaration of war as the

greatest blunder the United States could commit. Others recounted the

crimes of Germany against civilization, and, in face of these deeds,

condemned any national unwillingness and cowardice to retaliate as

showing a national degeneracy that was much worse than war.

The debate ended shortly after 11 o'clock that night, having lasted

thirteen hours. The resolution was thereupon put to the vote and

passed by 82 to 6. The actual alignment was 90 to 6, as eight absent

senators favored the resolution. The six opponents were Senators La

Follette of Wisconsin, Gronna of North Dakota, Norris of Nebraska,

Stone of Missouri, Lane of Oregon, and Vardaman of Mississippi. They

all belonged to the group of twelve who had prevented a vote on the

Armed-Ship Bill. Three of this group, Senators O'Gorman, Clapp, and

Works, had already retired into private life. The remaining three,

chastened by the contumely their attitude had occasioned, deserted the

pacifists and voted for the resolution.

The House had been waiting for the Senate's action and immediately

proceeded to debate the resolution when it came before it on April 5,

1917, at 10 o'clock a. m. Following the Senate's example, it resolved

to remain in session without any interval until a vote was taken.

There was a strong band of pacifists in the House, some with

pronounced pro-German sympathies, and they occupied much of the day

with their outgivings. The House floor leader, Representative Kitchin

of North Carolina, was one of their number. The debate extended

through the night without cessation until 3.15 the next morning, April

6, 1917, when, after a wearisome discussion exceeding seventeen hours,

the resolution passed amid resounding cheers by the overwhelming vote

of 373 to 50.

The President signed the resolution in the afternoon of the same day,

at the same time issuing a proclamation notifying the world that a

state of war existed between the United States and the Imperial

Government of Germany, and outlining regulations for the conduct of

"alien enemies" resident within American jurisdiction.

American relations with Germany's allies--Austria-Hungary, Turkey, and

Bulgaria--remained to be determined. In his war address to Congress

the President made this allusion to them:

"I have said nothing of the governments allied with the Imperial

Government of Germany, because they have not made war upon us or

challenged us to defend our right and our honor. The Austro-Hungarian

Government has, indeed, avowed its unqualified indorsement and

acceptance of the reckless and lawless submarine warfare, adopted now

without disguise by the Imperial German Government, and it has

therefore not been possible for this Government to receive Count

Tarnowski, the ambassador recently accredited to this Government by

the Imperial and Royal Government of Austria-Hungary; but that

Government has not actually engaged in warfare against citizens of the

United States on the seas, and I take the liberty, for the present at

least, of postponing a discussion of our relations with the

authorities at Vienna. We enter this war only where we are clearly

forced into it, because there are no other means of defending our

right."

Under German dictation, however, Austria-Hungary and Turkey broke

relations with the United States on April 9 and April 21, 1917,

respectively. Bulgaria took no action. The American war declaration

thus solely applied to Germany.

CHAPTER LXVI

BUILDING THE WAR MACHINE

The United States entered the war as a member of the Allied

belligerents in their fight for civilization against Germany at 1.18

on the afternoon of April 8, 1917, at which time President Wilson

signed the resolution empowering him to declare war as passed by

Congress.

The nation set about girding on its armor. A message was flashed to

the great naval radio station at Arlington, Va., which repeated it to

the extent of its carrying radius of 3,000 miles, notifying all

American ships at foreign stations and the governors and military

posts of American insular possessions in the Pacific and in the

Antilles.

Orders were issued by the Navy Department for the mobilization of the

fleet, and the Naval Reserve was called to the colors. The navy also

proceeded to seize all radio stations in the country.