File No. 300.115/2180 The Consul General at London (Skinner) to the Secretary of State AMERICAN CONSULATE GENERAL, SIR: Referring to the Department's instruction No. 84 dated December 16, 1914, stating that the British order in council of October 29 should not apply to shipments of copper and meats made prior to the promulgation of the order mentioned, I have the honor to remark that the legal position in these cases does not seem to affect British action in any respect. I do not know whether the point is discussed in the Department's note to the British Government, which is not being commented upon very extensively, but, if it has not been, it seems to me that particular efforts should be made to obtain an explanation from this Government respecting its attitude towards paragraph 43 of the Declaration of London. I find everywhere in American comment on these matters that the British Government is deemed not bound by the terms of the Declaration of London. While no doubt this is true in a sense, nevertheless the British Government has publicly, and on many occasions, proclaimed its adherence to the Declaration of London, except as to certain modifications, none of which apply to paragraph 43. Paragraph 43 specifically exempts goods shipped, while unaware of the outbreak of hostilities, other than contraband, from liability to condemnation, or to the costs and expenses referred to in Article 41. Notwithstanding these very plain prescriptions, hundreds of consignments brought into London at the beginning of the war are still in the hands of the prize court, and it seems to be impossible to obtain decisions without producing proofs of American ownership of a most convincing character. At the present time I am dealing, among many other cases, with lumber consigned by George W. Howe and Company of Pensacola, to J. H. Müller and Son of Hamburg. It is known in the lumber trade throughout the world that the Hamburg concern is a consignment house with large warehouses in which auction sales take place at intervals. The habit of this house is to make advances on consignments, the ownership of which vests in the consignor throughout the proceedings. Messrs. Müller and Son honored the drafts of George W. Howe and Company to the extent of 65 per cent of the value of the goods, and in the usual way, the amount being $1,254.71. As Müller and Son could not get the goods, and as the American concern had a credit at Hamburg of $814.71, the Hamburg concern simply took over this amount, and then drew for the balance of $430. In other words, the Hamburg concern has no interest whatever in the consignment under existing circumstances. Nevertheless, the procurator general intends to press this case in the prize court because Messrs. George W. Howe and Company's original draft on account was paid, the British contention being that ownership has passed into German hands. It is apparently the intention of the authorities, as revealed by their actual conduct, to weigh with minute care every element of ownership, and although I have repeatedly, 1 Ante, p. 366. and from the very beginning, claimed that non-contraband goods shipped before the war were not subject to seizure, I have been unable to obtain any practical recognition of the principles which the British Government itself publicly declares to be its guides in these matters. I have [etc.] File No. 300.115/2201 ROBERT P. SKINNER The Ambassador in Great Britain (Page) to the Secretary of State No. 730] AMERICAN EMBASSY, SIR Referring to the telegraphic instructions of the Department, No. 825 of December 24 last, with regard to the seizure and detention of the steamships Ellen, Tellus, and Sandefjord by the British authorities, I have the honor to enclose herewith to the Department a copy of my note to the Foreign Office in the premises, and a copy of Sir Edward Grey's reply thereto. I have [etc.] [Enclosure] 2 WALTER HINES PAGE The British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Grey) to the American Ambassador (Page) No. 88581/14] FOREIGN OFFICE, January 5, 1915. YOUR EXCELLENCY: I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency's note of the 30th ultimo on the subject of the detention by His Majesty's naval authorities of the steamships Ellen, Tellus, and Sandefjord at the ports of Newport, Gibraltar, and Halifax respectively during the month of December. As regards the S. S. Ellen which was on her way to Scandinavian ports, I have the honour to point out to your excellency that part of her cargo consisted of large quantities of contraband in the form of aluminium and lubricating oil. His Majesty's Government are satisfied that these supplies were destined for enemy countries and as aluminium was not in all forms on the prohibited exports list of the Norwegian Government there is little doubt but that it could have reached its destination. The vessel was allowed to proceed after discharging the said cargoes which were placed in the prize court. The S. S. Tellus was detained at Gibraltar for examination and found to be carrying large cargoes of contraband such as aluminium, copper, rubber etc., destined for neutral countries. In view of the receipt from those countries of satisfactory assurances respecting these cargoes they were subsequently allowed to proceed together with the vessel, a small consignment of rubber goods only being placed in the prize court. With regard to the S. S. Sandefjord I have the honour to point out to your excellency that she was suspected of carrying contraband and was consequently taken into Halifax for a thorough examination of her cargo, of which a large portion was deficient in identification marks. The examination, which was fully justified by the event, showed that her cargo included a consignment of rubber concealed under a false manifest as 'gum" and another of hog's casings which are believed to have been destined for the enemy. Despite the fact that this vessel carried false papers she was allowed to proceed. In conclusion I have the honour to state that the vessels in question were in no case detained longer than was necessary in order to enable the competent authorities to satisfy themselves with regard to the nature of the cargo on board. I have [etc.] [File copy not signed] 1Ante, p. 370. 2 Not printed. SPECIAL CASES: THE "STURMFELS", File No. 300.115/860 "SCHNEEFELS "BIRKENFELS", AND The Consul General at London (Skinner) to the Secretary of State No. 79] AMERICAN CONSULATE GENERAL, London, October 8, 1914. SIR: I have the honor to call the attention of the Department to the fact that the German S. S. Sturmfels, from Calcutta to New York, with miscellaneous goods on board, has sought refuge in the Italian Red Sea port of Massaua. I have proposed to the Admiralty that this vessel be permitted to continue on her voyage to New York under a safe-conduct of some kind, in the interests of British and American cargo with which she is laden. I am unable to perceive how the granting of a safe-conduct under these circumstances would alter the British military position in any way, and undoubtedly the conclusion proposed would be very greatly to the advantage of innocent shippers. I am acquainting the Department with this proposal in order to suggest whether it would not be well to come to an understanding with the British Government applicable to all similar cases. If the British Government assents to this proposal, it will be necessary to obtain also the assent of the German interests involved, but upon this point I see no reason to anticipate difficulty. I have [etc.] ROBERT P. SKINNER The Acting Secretary of State to the Consul General at London No. 37] (Skinner) DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, October 31, 1914. SIR: The Department has received your despatch No. 79 of October 8 reporting that you have proposed to the British Admiralty that the S. S. Sturmfels be permitted to continue on her voyage to New York under a safe-conduct of some kind, and your action in the matter is approved. The Department awaits further information regarding the attitude of the Admiralty in this case which, should your proposal of safe-conduct be accepted, would undoubtedly establish a valuable precedent for other similar cases. You will report by telegraph regarding the action taken in this case. I am [etc.] For the Acting Secretary of State: File No. 300.115/1844 The Consul General at London (Skinner) to the Secretary of State AMERICAN CONSULATE GENERAL, SIR: Referring to the Department's instruction No. 37, dated October 31 (File No. 300.115/860), I have the honor to state that my suggestion that this vessel [the Sturmfels] be permitted to continue on her voyage to New York under a safe-conduct has not been accepted by the British Government." Secretary Harcourt, of the Colonial Office, writing under date of November 9, states: With regard to the Sturmfels which would appear from your letter to be lying in the Italian port of Massowah [Massaua], Mr. Harcourt regrets that it is not possible for him to afford any assistance. In this connection the following letter received by Lloyd's from their correspondent at Naples, and dated October 27, is of interest, as indicating the line of conduct which cargo interests should follow in order to recover property contained in German ships seeking refuge in Italian ports: The German steamer Rhenania, which left Kilindini on July 20 bound for Hamburg, put into this port on July 26. Efforts have been successfully made to obtain discharge of her cargo. A certain Italian bank, acting on behalf of receivers of cargo, entered an action against the captain and owners of the Rhenania. The receivers refused to pay a 10 per cent deposit for general average which had been demanded, and also claimed damages for detention of goods. A verdict has been given in favor of plaintiffs, and the following are the principal points in the judgment: (1) Delivery of goods against complete sets of bills of lading; (2) Proportionate freight to be paid and deposit to cover expenses, subject to adjustment; (3) The steamer to be liable for damage to the cargo by deterioration caused by detention. The Rhenania has commenced discharging into bonded warehouses, and delivery is granted. I have cabled the Department briefly respecting the above matter as directed in my instruction. I have [etc.] ROBERT P. SKINNER File No. 300.115/1876 The Consul General at Cape Town (Murphy) to the Secretary of State AMERICAN CONSULATE GENERAL, Cape Town, November 8, 1914. SIR: I have the honor to confirm the following telegram, which I purpose sending to the Department to-morrow (Monday): As cargo Birkenfels all from New York all for Australia, prolonged detention here injures American trade, suggest Department urge London send vessel with cargo Australia for adjudication there.1 In explanation of this telegram, I have the honor to report as follows: Four German freight vessels were brought into this port as prizes at the beginning of the war, namely, the steamships Hamm, Apolda, Rufidji, and Birkenfels. The first three came from Europe, and only the Birkenfels from the United States. In regard to the cargo of the three vessels from Europe, I have received only one inquiry from American owners, and that was for wares not of American but of Swedish origin, namely for steel for use in Transvaal mines brought on the Hamm for the Ingersoll Rand Company of New York and Johannesburg. The Birkenfels, on the other hand, left New York more than a week before war was declared, loaded with American cargo consigned to various Australian ports. It carried no cargo for South Africa, and it came into this harbor only for the purpose of coaling. Possibly, under the hard rules of war, the vessel is itself a fair prize. I, of course, raise no question on this point as the Birkenfels is German; but apparently the question could be settled as well in British Australia, whither the vessel was innocently bound with its American cargo, as in British South Africa, whose chief harbor it voluntarily entered because its supply of coal was exhausted. It is, however, the American cargo of this vessel in which I am especially interested, and I cannot but feel that America deserves from Great Britain fairer play than it is receiving in this matter. The South African prize court has already released such_parts of the South African cargo on the steamers from Europe, the Hamm, Apolda, and Rufidji, as has been claimed, these vessels being sent back into the bay with most of the cargo destined for Australia, for further detention. The Birkenfels, on the contrary, still lies in Table Bay with its cargo and, in spite of the fact that the Australian Government has petitioned the Imperial Government to order the 'This telegram was duly received, November 9, 7 p. m. (File No. 300.115/1168) and its substance transmitted to the Ambassador in Great Britain, November 18, with no result. The case was brought before the prize court at Cape Town and the ship adjudged good prize on November 23, the court refusing to credit the master's allegation that he had entered the port in ignorance of the state of war. Arrangements for the ship to complete its voyage under the British flag were not completed until March 1915. 2432-2825 |