New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 5, August, 1915

Various

Informations

• Publié par: nethung
• Publié le: 08 décembre 2010
• Nombre de lectures: 36
• Langue: English

Extrait

The Project Gutenberg eBook, New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 5, August, 1915, by Various This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org Title: New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 5, August, 1915 Author: Various Release Date: August 30, 2007 [eBook #22460] Language: English Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 ***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NEW YORK TIMES CURRENT HISTORY; THE EUROPEAN WAR, VOL 2, NO. 5, AUGUST, 1915*** E-text prepared by Juliet Sutherland, Linda Cantoni, and the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) Transcriber's Notes Archaic spellings of place names have been retained as they appear in the original. Portrait illustrations have been moved to relevant places in the text. Because this issue is part of a bound, sequentially paginated volume containing several other issues (available separately on Project Gutenberg), page numbers have been omitted from this e-text. A table of contents has been provided for the reader's convenience. The New York Times logo CURRENT HISTORY A MONTHLY MAGAZINE THE EUROPEAN WAR AUGUST, 1915CONTENTS THE LUSITANIA CASE The American Rejoinder German and American Press Opinion Austria-Hungary's Protest Armenian, Orduna, and Others Results of Submarine Warfare In Memoriam: REGINALD WARNEFORD American Preparedness First Year of the War Inferences from Eleven Months of the European Conflict "Revenge for Elisabeth!" A Year of the War in Africa and Asia An "Insult" to War The Drive at Warsaw Naval Losses During the War Battles in the West France's "Eyewitness" Reports The Crown Prince in the Argonne Gallipoli's Shambles Italy's War on Austria The Task of Italy Two Devoted Nations Rumania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece Dr. Conybeare's Recantation The Case of Muenter Devotion to the Kaiser Scientists and the Military Hudson Maxim on Explosives Thor! "I am the Gravest Danger" THE EUROPEAN WAR AS SEEN BY CARTOONISTSThe Belligerents' Munitions The Power of the Purse Cases Reserved New Recruiting in Britain American War Supplies Magazinists of the World on the War Germany's Long-Nourished Powers "To Avenge" The Pope, the Vatican, and Italy Are the Allies Winning? Selling Arms to the Allies War and Non-Resistance "Good Natured Germany" Italy's Defection Apologies for English Words Germanic Peace Terms France's Bill of Damages A French Rejoinder Dr. Von Bode's Polemic "Carnegie and German Peace" Russia's Supply of Warriors Austria and the Balkans Italy's Publications in War-Time Sweden and the Lusitania A Threatened Despotism of Spirit "Gott Mit Uns" On the Psychology of Neutrals Chlorine Warfare Rheims Cathedral The English Falsehood Calais or Suez? Note on the Principle of Nationality Singer of "La Marseillaise"Depression—Common-Sense and the Situation The War and Racial Progress The English Word, Thought, and Life Evviva L'Italia Who Died Content! "The Germans, Destroyers of Cathedrals" Chronology of the War THE LUSITANIA CASEThe American Note to Berlin of July 21 Steps Leading Up to President Wilson’s Rejection of Germany’s Proposals HE German Admiralty on Feb. 4 proclaimed a war zone around Great Britain announcing that every enemy merchantT ship found therein would be destroyed "without its being always possible to avert the dangers threatening the crews and passengers on that account." The text of this proclamation was made known by Ambassador Gerard on Feb. 6. Four days later the United States Government sent to Germany a note of protest which has come to be known as the "strict accountability note." After pointing out that a serious infringement of American rights on the high seas was likely to occur, should Germany carry out her war-zone decree in the manner she had proclaimed, it declared: "If such a deplorable situation should arise, the Imperial German Government can readily appreciate that the Government of the United States would be constrained to hold the Imperial German Government to a strict accountability for such acts of their naval authorities and to take any steps it might be necessary to take to safeguard American lives and property and to secure to American citizens the full enjoyment of their acknowledged rights on the high seas." The war-zone decree went into effect on Feb. 18. Two days later dispatches were cabled to Ambassador Page at London and to Ambassador Gerard at Berlin suggesting that a modus vivendi be entered into by England and Germany by which submarine warfare and sowing of mines at sea might be abandoned if foodstuffs were allowed to reach the German civil population under American consular inspection. Germany replied to this on March 1, expressing her willingness to act favorably on the proposal. The same day the British Government stated that because of the war-zone decree of the German Government the British Government must take measures to prevent commodities of all kinds from reaching or leaving Germany. On March 15 the British Government flatly refused the modus vivendi suggestion. On April 4 Count von Bernstorff, the German Ambassador at Washington, submitted a memorandum to the United States Government regarding German-American trade and the exportation of arms. Mr. Bryan replied to the memorandum on April 21, insisting that the United States was preserving her strict status of neutrality according to the accepted laws of nations. On May 7 the Cunard steamship Lusitania was sunk by a German submarine in the war zone as decreed by Germany, and more than 100 American citizens perished, with 1,000 other persons on board. Thereupon, on May 13, the United States transmitted to the German Government a note on the subject of this loss. It said: "American citizens act within their indisputable rights in taking their ships and in traveling wherever their legitimate business calls them upon the high seas, and exercise those rights in what should be the well justified confidence that their lives will not be endangered by acts done in clear violation of universally acknowledged international obligations, and certainly in the confidence that their own Government will sustain them in the exercise of their rights." This note concluded: "The Imperial Government will not expect the Government of the United States to omit any word or any act necessary to the performance of its sacred duty of maintaining the rights of the United States and its citizens and of safeguarding their free exercise and enjoyment." Germany replied to this note on May 29. It stated that it had heard that the Lusitania was an armed naval ship which had attempted to use American passengers as a protection, and that, anyway, such passengers should not have been present. It added: "The German commanders are consequently no longer in a position to observe the rules of capture otherwise usual and with which they invariably complied before this." To the foregoing the United States maintained in a note sent to the German Government on June 9 that the Lusitania was not an armed vessel and that she had sailed in accordance with the laws of the United States, and that "only her actual resistance to capture or refusal to stop when ordered to do so ... could have afforded the commander of the submarine any justification for so much as putting the lives of those on board the ship in jeopardy." In support of this view the note cited international law and added: "It is upon this principle of humanity, as well as upon the law founded upon this principle, that the United States must stand." Exactly one month later, on July 9, came Germany's reply. Its preamble praised the United States for its humane attitude and said that Germany was fully in accord therewith. Something, it asserted, should be done, for "the case of the Lusitania shows with horrible clearness to what jeopardizing of human lives the manner of conducting war employed by our adversaries leads," and that under certain conditions which it set forth, American ships might have safe passage through the war zone, or even some enemy ships flying the American flag. It continued:"The Imperial Government, however, confidently hopes the American Government will assume to guarantee that these vessels have no contraband on board, details of arrangements for the unhampered passage of these vessels to be agreed upon by the naval authorities of both sides." It is to this reply that the note of the United States Government made public on July 24 is an answer. Germany's reply of July 8 and President Wilson's final rejoinder of July 21—which was given to the American press of July 24—are presented below, together with accounts of the recent German submarine attacks on the ships Armenian, Anglo-Californian, Normandy, and Orduna, involving American lives, and an appraisal of the German operations in the submarine "war zone" since February 18, 1915, when it was proclaimed. Also Austro-Hungary's note of June 29, protesting against American exports of arms, and an account of American and German press opinion on the Lusitania case are treated hereunder. THE GERMAN MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO THE AMERICAN AMBASSADOR AT BERLIN BERLIN, July 8, 1915. The undersigned has the honor to make the following reply to his Excellency Ambassador Gerard to the note of the 10th ultimo re the impairment of American interests by the German submarine war: The Imperial Government learned with satisfaction from the note how earnestly the Government of the United States is concerned in seeing the principles of humanity realized in the present war. Also this appeal finds ready echo in Germany, and the Imperial Government is quite willing to permit its statements and decisions in the present case to be governed by the principles of humanity just as it has done always.