New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 3, June, 1915: April-September, 1915Various
History
New York Times Current History; The European War, Vol 2, No. 3, June, 1915: April-September, 1915
Various
World War, 1914-1918
If England, after repeated official and unofficial warnings, considered
herself able to declare that that boat ran no risk and thus
light-heartedly assumed responsibility for the human life on board a
steamer which, owing to its armament and cargo, was liable to
destruction, the German Government, in spite of its heartfelt sympathy
for the loss of American lives, cannot but regret that Americans felt
more inclined to trust to English promises rather than to pay attention
to the warnings from the German side.
FOREIGN OFFICE.
ENGLAND ANSWERS GERMANY.[A]
[By The Associated Press.]
[Footnote A: In Germany's reply to the American protest against certain
features of the "war zone" order, which was received in Washington on
Feb. 14, occurred this expression:
If the United States ... should succeed at the last moment in
removing the grounds which make that procedure [submarine
warfare on merchant vessels] an obligatory duty for Germany
... and thereby make possible for Germany legitimate
importation of the necessaries of life and industrial raw
material, then the German Government ... would gladly draw
conclusions from the new situation.
In the German note to the American Government justifying the sinking of
the Lusitania presented above, appears this clause:
In spite of the German offer to stop the submarine war in case
the starvation plan was given up....
These two expressions are referred to in the British official statement,
published herewith, in these words:
It was not understood from the reply of the German Government
[of Feb. 14] that they were prepared to abandon the principle
of sinking British vessels by submarine.
Whether this may regarded as an opening for the renewal of the German
offer in explicit terms, with the implication that England might accept
it, is not explained.]
_LONDON, Wednesday, May 12.--Inquiry in official circles elicited last
night the following statement, representing the official British view of
Germany's justification for torpedoing the Lusitania which Berlin
transmitted to the State Department at Washington:_
The German Government states that responsibility for the loss of the
Lusitania rests with the British Government, which through their plan of
starving the civil population of Germany has forced Germany to resort to
retaliatory measures The reply to this is as follows:
As far back as last December Admiral von Tirpitz, (the German Marine
Minister,) in an interview, foreshadowed a submarine blockade of Great
Britain, and a merchant ship and a hospital ship were torpedoed Jan. 30
and Feb. 1, respectively.
The German Government on Feb. 4 declared their intention of instituting
a general submarine blockade of Great Britain and Ireland, with the
avowed purpose of cutting off supplies for these islands. This blockade
was put into effect Feb. 18.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account