« PředchozíPokračovat »
Wilson's address to special
PART XVI Severance of Diplomatic Relations between the United States and
Ambassador Penfield to the Feb. 1 Quotes note of Jan. 31
from the Austro-Hunga-
rian Minister for Foreign
ment as to the modifica-
Ambassador Penfield to the Mar. 2 Quotes aide memoire handed
him by Austro-Hungarian
Government in reply to
the Ancona case.
lations between the United gram).
States and Austria-Hungary.
From and to whom.
the existence of a state of
war between the Imperial
PART XVIII Severance of Diplomatic Relations between the United States and
2639 Secretary of Embassy Tar- Apr. 20 States the Imperial Ottoler to the Secretary of
man Government has in-
formed Embassy it finds
ance of relations between
the United States and
to Minister Droppers
Chargé Wheeler (tele.
DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE UNITED
STATES AND BELLIGERENT GOVERNMENTS RELAT-
DECLARATION OF LONDON.
(Continuation of correspondence printed in Special Supplement,
July, 1915, pp. 1-8, and October, 1916, pp. 1-13.)
The Secretary of State to Chargé Laughlin.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, September 18, 1916. Sir: The Department has received the Ambassador's No. 4181, of July 10, 1916, enclosing for the information of the Department a copy, in duplicate, of the text of an Order in Council, dated the 7th of July, 1916, entitled “The Maritime Rights Order in Council, 1916," which effects a change in the rules hitherto adopted by the British Government to govern its conduct of warfare at sea during the present war, and transmitting, also in duplicate, a copy of a memorandum which has been drawn up by the British and French Governments explaining the grounds for the issue of the Order in Council mentioned.
You are instructed to address a formal note to Lord Grey, with reference to the Order in Council of July 7, 1916, and the memorandum of the same date on this subject, and say that the Government of the United States, after giving these documents careful consideration, deems the rules therein set forth for the guidance of British authorities as at variance with the law and practice of nations in several respects, in regard to some of which the United States has already made known its views in prior correspondence, and that the Government of the United States reserves all of its rights in the
premises, including the right not only to question the validity of these rules, but to present demands and claims in relation to any American interests which may be unlawfully affected directly or indirectly by the application of these rules. I am, etc.,
Ambassador W. H. Page to the Secretary of State.
London, October 11, 1916. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the Department's Instruction No. 4191 of September 18, with respect to the Maritime Rights Order in Council, 1916, and in reply to enclose herewith, for the information of the Department, a copy of the Note which has been received from the Foreign Office, under date of October 10, in response to the Embassy's representations in the premises. I have, etc.,
WALTER HINES PAGE.
October 10, 1916. YOUR EXCELLENCY:
I have had the honour of receiving Mr. Laughlin's note of the 3rd instant (No. 211), in which he makes a communication under instructions from your Government with respect to the Maritime Rights Order in Council, 1916.
I would point out that if the rules cited in the Order in Council are not deemed by the United States Government to be in accordance with international law, they should be challenged in the Prize Court. I have, etc.,
(For the Secretary of State:)
MAURICE DE BUNSEN.
The Secretary of State to Ambassador W. H. Page.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, November 24, 1916. Sir: The Department has received your No. 4988 of October 11, 1916, with which, having reference to the Department's instruction No. 4191 of September 18, in relation to the Maritime Rights Order in Council of 1916, you enclose a copy of a note received from the Foreign Office in response to the Embassy's representations in the matter.
You will address to the Foreign Office a note in reply to the effect that without admitting that even individual rights when clearly violated by Orders in Council must be maintained by resort to local tribunals, this Government must announce that it, of course, has no intention to resort to British courts for the maintenance of such of its national rights as may be infringed by Orders in Council of Great Britain. I am, etc.,