The Story of the Great War, Volume 5: Battle of Jutland Bank; Russian Offensive; Kut-El-Amara; East Africa; Verdun; The Great Somme Drive; United States and Belligerents; Summary of Two Years' War
History
The Story of the Great War, Volume 5: Battle of Jutland Bank; Russian Offensive; Kut-El-Amara; East Africa; Verdun; The Great Somme Drive; United States and Belligerents; Summary of Two Years' War
World War, 1914-1918
The circumstances of the torpedoing of the _Sussex_ provoked a final
clash between the United States and Germany. This vessel plied as a
Channel ferryboat between Folkestone and Dieppe. On March 24, 1916, at
4.30 p. m., while near the latter port, with 436 persons on board,
including seventy-five Americans, she was struck by a torpedo from a
submarine. The captain observed a torpedo about 100 meters from the
side and immediately maneuvered to avoid it; but the vessel was struck
in the forward part, which was destroyed. Rescuing craft towed the
disabled boat to Boulogne, where a majority of the passengers were
landed. About fifty persons lost their lives, and three Americans were
hurt.
The State Department at once instructed the American ambassador at
Berlin to inquire whether the torpedo which almost sunk the _Sussex_
came from a German submarine, though the Government entertained little
doubt that this was the case. The American suspicions were later
confirmed by incontestable evidence; but the Government first sought
to give Germany the opportunity of having her day in court before
acting.
Unofficially came reports from Berlin scouting as impossible the
assumption that a German submarine was the culprit, the assurance
being repeated that Germany in no circumstance would violate her
pledge to the United States not to destroy enemy vessels except after
full warning to enable crews and passengers to save their lives. No
official statement was forthcoming. The German admiralty declined to
"deny or explain" until all the submarines operating off the French
coast had returned and reported.
The American procedure in the _Sussex_ case differed from that
followed in previous issues with Germany arising from submarine
warfare. There were no official representations made to Berlin;
Ambassador Gerard was merely asked to ascertain informally and
transmit to Washington any pertinent facts he could gather bearing on
Germany's culpability. The submarine issue, in fact, had reached a
stage where explanations and excuses were of minor importance.
Evidence showing whether Germany had or had not broken her pledge not
to torpedo passenger vessels without warning was alone of interest to
the President. Proof of Germany's guilt foreshadowed an unqualified
threat by the United States to break off diplomatic relations. The
United States determined to be the judge with Germany in the dock as a
defendant, instead of arguing an issue with Berlin, as in the past.
This attitude placed Germany in the position of having to prove her
innocence in the face of damaging evidence of her guilt. No discussion
was even invited with the German ambassador over the case, and Count
von Bernstorff apparently did not want to make his usual extenuatory
or defensive pleas.
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