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
"We should stand for genuine neutrality, considering the
surrounding facts of the case." He then held in that case,
because Carranza had no ports, while Huerta had them and was
able to import these materials, that "it was our duty as a
nation to treat them (Carranza and Huerta) upon an equality if
we wished to observe the true spirit of neutrality as compared
with a mere paper neutrality."
This conception of "the true spirit of neutrality," if applied to the
present case, would lead to an embargo on arms.
The American Reply
_The following note, which contains a vigorous rebuke to the German
Ambassador for the freedom of his remarks on the course taken by the
United States toward the belligerent powers, was made public at
Washington on April 21, 1916. It was then reported that the note was
finally drafted by President Wilson himself and written by him on his
own typewriter at the White House, although it is signed by Mr. Bryan as
Secretary of State:_
I have given thoughtful consideration to your Excellency's note of the
4th of April, 1915, inclosing a memorandum of the same date, in which
your Excellency discusses the action of this Government with regard to
trade between the United States and Germany, and the attitude of this
Government with regard to the exportation of arms from the United States
to the nations now at war with Germany.
I must admit that I am somewhat at a loss how to interpret your
Excellency's treatment of these matters. There are many circumstances
connected with these important subjects to which I would have expected
your Excellency to advert but of which you make no mention, and there
are other circumstances to which you do refer which I would have
supposed to be hardly appropriate for discussion between the Government
of the United States and the Government of Germany.
I shall take the liberty, therefore, of regarding your Excellency's
references to the course, pursued by the Government of the United
States, with regard to interferences with trade from this country such
as the Government of Great Britain have attempted, as intended merely to
illustrate more fully the situation to which you desire to call our
attention, and not as an invitation to discuss that course.
Your Excellency's long experience in international affairs will have
suggested to you that these relations of the two Governments with one
another cannot wisely be made a subject of discussion with a third
Government, which cannot be fully informed as to the facts, and which
cannot be fully cognizant of the reasons for the course pursued.
I believe, however, that I am justified in assuming that what you desire
to call forth is a frank statement of the position of this Government in
regard to its obligations as a neutral power.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account