Commercial Treaty with Germany and How it Was Observed.—One of the most humane and liberal treaties in the history of nations was that entered into between the United States and Prussia in1799. It was renewed in1828 and became the treaty governing the relations between Germany and ourselves in1871 on the establishment of the German Empire. This treaty was in force in1917 when we entered the war. Some high eulogiums have been passed upon this treaty, which was signed by Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and John Quincy Adams, and, in 1828, by Henry Clay, on the part of the United States, and by the authorized representative of Frederick the Great, on the other. In his comments on this treaty, Theodore Lyman,Jr., a writer with a strong Tory tendency and chary of praise as regards Prussia, makes the following observations in his “The Diplomacy of the United States”(1828): This treaty, which has been called a beautiful abstraction, is remarkable for the provisions which it contains: Blockades of every description were abolished—the flag covered the property—contrabands were exempted from confiscation, though they might be employed for the use of the captor on payment of their full value. This, we believe, is the only treaty ever made by America in which contrabands were not subject to confiscation, nor are we aware that any other modern treaty contains this remarkable provision. We are probably indebted to Dr.Franklin for the articles. It received an even higher endorsement in a message to Congress, dated March15, 1826, by President John Quincy Adams, whosaid: They (the three American commissioners) met and resided for that purpose about one year in Paris and the only result of their negotiations at that time was the first treaty between the United States and Prussia—memorable in the diplomatic history of the world and precious as a monument of the principles, in relation to commerce and maritime warfare with which our country entered upon her career as a member of the great family of independent nations.... At that time in the infancy of their political existence, under the influence of those principles of liberty and of right so congenial to the cause in which they had just fought and triumphed, they were able to obtain the sanction of but one great and philosophical though absolute sovereign in Europe (Frederick the Great) to their liberal and enlightened principles. They could obtain nomore. The two principal provisions of the treaty of 1799-1828 follow: Article XII: And it is declared, that neither the pretense that war dissolves all treaties, nor any other whatever, shall be considered as annulling or suspending this and the next preceding article; but, on the contrary, that the state of war is precisely that for which Article XXIII provides as follows: If war should arise between the two contracting parties, the merchants of either country then residing in the other shall be allowed to remain nine months to collect their debts and settle their affairs, and may depart freely, carrying off all their effects without molestation or hindrance; and all women and children, scholars of every faculty, cultivators of the earth, artisans, manufacturers, and fishermen, unarmed and inhabiting unfortified towns, villages, or places, and in general all others whose occupations are for the common subsistence and benefit of mankind, shall be allowed to continue their respective employments and shall not be molested in their persons, nor shall their houses or goods be burnt or otherwise destroyed, nor their fields wasted by the armed force of the enemy, into whose power by the event of war they may happen to fall; but if anything is necessary to be taken from them for the use of such armed force, the same shall be paid for at a reasonable price. Under the foregoing, German citizens, merchants, corporations, companies, etc., would have the right for the period of nine months after the declaration of war to collect their debts, settle their affairs, and, if possible, to depart safely, carrying all their effects with them without any hindrance whatsoever. This would mean, for instance, that the owners of the German vessels interned in our harbors would be privileged to have full control over their property. Under date of February8, 1917, the State Department issued the following statement: It having been reported to him that there is anxiety in some quarters on the part of persons residing in this country who are the subjects of foreign states lest their bank deposits or other property should be seized in the event of war between the United States and a foreign nation, the President authorizes the statement that all such fears are entirely unfounded. The Government of the United States will under no circumstances take advantage of a state of war to take possession of property to which under international understandings and the recognized law of the land give it no just claim or title. It will scrupulously respect all private rights, alike of its own citizens and the subjects of foreign states. This was made public two months before we found ourselves in a state of war with Germany. Soon after, A.Mitchell Palmer was appointed Custodian of Alien Property and began to seize about one thousand million dollars’ worth of German property and securities—not the property of the Imperial German Government, with which we were at war, but the property of German private persons. Using the language of an editorial in one of the leading newspapers in America of August29, 1919, a treaty between the United States and Germany, which had never been denounced and was in full force, provided that in case of war between Germany and the United States, Germany should permit American owners of property in Germany, or Americans doing business in Germany, to have nine months in which to wind up their business affairs, to dispose of their property and to take themselves unhindered out of Germany. And the United States bound itself, of course, to give the same treatment to German aliens doing business or owning property in America. This treaty agreement was deliberately broken by the Custodian of Alien Property. Under international law the duty of such a custodian is to take possession of the property of alien citizens of an enemy country, administer that property carefully, preserve it in good faith, and hold the earnings of the property and the property itself ready for return to the owners whenever peace shall come. “We want,” declares the paper, “to keep the name and reputation of the American people so clean and honorable that no American shall ever need to apologize either to friend or foe.” (New York “American.”) As a result of the confiscation of hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of alien property, a sensational scandal developed, which was aired in the House and Senate and had a perceptible bearing on the defeat of the League of Nations treaty in the Senate. Among other things, Palmer, ultimately appointed Attorney General, was charged with having sold the great Bosch magneto works, valued at $16,000,000, for $4,000,000, giving the preference to friends; and Representative J.Hampton Moore, referring to Francis P.Garvan, Mr.Palmer’s successor as Custodian, demanded to know: “Why the same Frank P.Garvan, the distinguished criminal lawyer of New York, had recently been elected to and accepted the presidency of the Chemical Foundation, which has taken over all the German patents in the United States for the manufacture of dye stuffs through an arrangement with the Alien Property Custodian, A.Mitchell Palmer, now Attorney General?” In his speech of June21, 1919, in the House, Mr.Moore named a number of big trust operators and financiers, including Cleveland H.Dodge, as having formed the Chemical Foundation and taking over “4,500 patents which Mr.Palmer and Mr.Garvan, this distinguished criminal lawyer from New York, the successor of Mr. Palmer as Alien Property Custodian, found on file in the Patent Office, and which they seized on the ground that they belonged to certain German patentees.” (New York “Times,” June22,1919.) Hardly a pretence is made by the administration that the seizure was legal, and the death-blow to all such pretensions was delivered when, in urging the ratification of the Versailles treaty by the Senate, Senator Hitchcock, the administration’s Senate leader, declared: Through the treaty we will get very much of importance.... In violation of all international law and treaties, we have made disposition of a billion dollars of German-owned property here. The treaty validates allthat. It is important that Americans should know the facts in the case, however unpopular the narrative may be, in order that they may set themselves right before the world, or at least be prepared for the wave of prejudice which is bound to be excited by the remarkable proceedings. Quoting Walter T.Rose, a prominent Chicago exporter just returned from a tour of Europe, the New York “Sun” of November28, 1919, said: “It is an unfortunate fact that hardly anywhere in Europe does one hear good opinions of America and Americans.” Mr.Rose gathered his opinions in France and England as well as in central Europe. The course of the Custodian of Alien Property establishes a precedent that, of course, will be heeded by those associated with us in the war no less than by our late enemies. It is a warning that the filing of patents and patented processes insures no immunity from confiscation in the event of war, and a warning to foreign investors to go slow in investing their money in industries in the United States. To counteract this policy imposes a moral task upon every citizen of the United States who holds the honor of his country above a dollar. For we shall have flaunted in our faces this passage from President Wilson’s address to Congress, April2,1917: We shall, I feel confident, conduct our operations as belligerents without passion, and ourselves observe with proud punctilio the principles of right and fair play we profess to be fighting for.... It will be easier for us to conduct ourselves as belligerents in a high spirit of right and fairness because we act, not in enmity of a people or with a desire to bring any injury or disadvantage upon them, but only in opposition to an irresponsible government. We are, let me say again, the sincere friends of the German people, and shall desire nothing so much as the early re-establishment of intimate relations of mutual advantage between us—however hard it may be for them, for the time being, to believe this is spoken from our hearts. In a hearing before a Senate committee investigating his acts as Custodian, Mr.Palmer named as his advisory committee, Otto Barnard, Cleveland H.Dodge, George L.Ingraham and Alex Griswold,Jr. He asserted that he had seized 40,000 German properties. Upon his list were the names of 32Germans and Austrian-Hungarians interned as enemy aliens, whose property was taken over by him. Their names and the value of their property follows: Carl Heynan, $487,748; Adolf Pavenstedt, $1,661,408; E.K. Victor, $274,092; Edward Lutz, $117,865; Hugo Schmidt, $89,434; F.Stallforth, $540,408; Ad.Fischer, $477,396; F.Rosenberg, $228,484; Max Breitung, Among the amounts confiscated was $3,000 left in the will of Mrs.Louisa Manada, of Wyoming, for the care of blind soldiers in Berlin, her home going to a hospital in this country. Among those mentioned as placed in charge of enemy property by the Custodian, in his report to the Senate, March1, 1919, appear the names of several prominent newspaper men and politicians: Don C.Seitz, publisher of the New York “World,” and George McAneny, publisher of the New York “Times,” two strong administration papers, both of whom were trustees of the Bridgeport Projectile Company. Mr.McAneny and Henry Morgenthau, former ambassador to Turkey, were made trustees of the American Metal Company, another enemy concern. Gavin McNab, of San Francisco, a leading Democratic politician of California, was made a trustee of the Charles E.Houson Estate Company, the Marvin Estate Company and the J.H. von Schroeder Investment Company. In the investigation Mr.Palmer denied the various charges, and others referred to, as well as the allegation, aired in the New York “World,” that his name corresponded with the initials of a certain M.P. mentioned in the captured notes of Dr.Albert, the German agent, who was referred to as friendly to Germany. He stated that “no other course than the seizure was compatible with the safety of American institutions,” to which reply was made from Germany that the $700,000,000 investments by Germans in this country did not reach “one-half of the total value, for instance, of a single American industrial company like the United States Steel Corporation, and not even approximately one per cent. of the total value of American industrial enterprises.” The immense business built up here by the Germans was, Mr.Palmer said, lost to the Germans forever, and there was absolutely no hope for the development of American chemical industries under the old conditions. He defended the Bosch seizure on the ground of a plot by the manager to promise special apparatus to the British for their aeroplanes without intending to deliver them. Millions of dollars’ worth of property belonging to women of American birth, married to German and Austrian subjects, was taken over by the Custodian. Many prominent women are in the list, including Countess Gladys Vanderbilt-Szechenyi, whose property as taken over The list includes: Baroness Augusta Louise von Alten, Budapest, Hungary, formerly Augusta L.De Haven, and Sarah E.von Camps Hanover, Welfel, Germany, formerly Sarah E.DeHaven, granddaughters of the late Louisa G.Bigelow, formerly of Chicago. Estate valued at about $1,460,000. Baroness Clara Erhart von Truchsess, Dusseldorf, Germany, formerly Clara Erhart, of New York. Life estate in trust fund of $500,000; securities valued at $600,000. Gertrude, Baroness von Bocklin, Baden, Germany, formerly Gertrude Berwind, of Philadelphia. Under the will of Charles F.Berwind, her father, she received more than $300,000 in property, which was put in trust with property received by the other heirs. Baroness Olivia Louise von Rothkirch, Schlesien, Germany, formerly Olivia Louise Brown, daughter of William John Brown, of New York. Life interest in trust, approximating $1,000,000. Baroness Matilda L.Bornemissa, Budapest, Austria; Baroness Margaret von Wucherer and Anna von Dory Johahaza, both of Steiermark, Austria, daughters of the late James Price, of Philadelphia, and Baroness Manon Dumreicher, Baron Tibor von Berg, Baron Tassilo von Berg and Baron Max von Berg, children of the deceased daughter, Baroness Sallie Mae Berg. The above enemies share an income of the trust under the will of Sarah Maria Price, valued at $275,000, and also in a trust created under the will of Samuel Harlan,Jr., valued at $75,000. Baroness Cornelia C.Zedlitz, Berlin, Germany, formerly Cornelia Carnochan Roosevelt, daughter of the late Charles Y.Roosevelt, of New York. Under a trust agreement made in1889 in contemplation of marriage, her property, valued at about $1,000,000, was put in trust, reserving to her a life interest. Personal property valued at $200,000 was also taken over. Countess Marguerite Isabelle Eugenie Victorine de Stuers Obendorff, wife of the former German Ambassador to Austria, and grandniece of the late Henry Astor, grandson of the original John Jacob Astor, and inheritor of a share in his estate. Her mother was Countess Margaret Laura Zhorowski, daughter of Alida Astor, a sister of Henry Astor, and daughter of William Astor. Trust fund $60,000, created by deed of trust by her father; cash, $949,225 and eight-fifteenths interest in New York city property. Countess von Francken, Sierstorpff, Zyrowa Leschnitz, Prussia, formerly Mary Knowlton, daughter of Edwin F.Knowlton, of New York. Life interest trust fund $1,200,000, left under the will of her Countess Gladys Vanderbilt Szechenyi, Budapest, Hungary, daughter of the late Cornelius Vanderbilt and Alice G.Vanderbilt. Nearly $4,000,000 in securities taken over; also income from $5,000,000 trust fund created under the will of her father. Countess Harriet Sigray, Ivancz Nagycsakny, Hungary, daughter of the late Marcus Daly, of Montana, a sister of Mrs.James Gerard, wife of the former Ambassador to Germany. Securities taken over, $1,000,000. Countess Gladys McMillan Cornet, Brussels, Belgium, formerly Gladys McMillan, daughter of the late James H.McMillan, of Detroit. Life interest in one-tenth of trust of $4,500,000; life interest in two-thirds of trust of $450,000; life estate one-tenth trust of $600,000 and securities valued at $149,725. Countess Elizabeth T.P. deGasquet-James, Krain, Austria, formerly Elizabeth T.Pratt James, of Esopus, N.Y. Life estate in $135,000 and bonds, $59,000. Lily Freifrau Treusch von Buttlar Brandenfees, Stettin, Germany, formerly Lilly G.Stetson, daughter of the late Isaiah Stetson, of Bangor, Me. Securities taken over valued at $250,000. Jayta Humphreys von Wolf, Munich, Germany, daughter of the late Frederic Humphreys, of New York. Life interest in a trust valued about $50,000. Rosa K.Schertel von Burtenbach, daughter of the late Frederick Schaefer, of New York. Under trust created in will of father, she has life interest of $200,000. Clara von Gontard, Berlin, Germany, daughter of the late Adolphus Busch and Lilly Busch, of St.Louis. Life interest in trust fund created under the will of Adolphus Busch, securities valued at $900,000, including stock holdings in Anheuser-Busch Brewing Company of St.Louis. Mary Trowbridge von Zepplin, Germany, formerly Mary Wilkens, Detroit, wife of Conrad von Zepplin and daughter of the late Lizzie C.Wilkens, of Detroit. Life estate trust fund, $40,000. Clara Bauer von Rosenthal, Frankfort-am-Main, Germany, formerly Clara Bauer, daughter of the late Augustus Bauer, Chicago. Life interest in trust of $35,000. Mary Grace von der Hellan, Hamburg, Germany, formerly Mary Grace Meissner, Garden City, New York. Life interest in trust created by herself just prior to her marriage, $65,000, and bank balance, $304,472. Charlotte von Gorrisen, Hamburg, Germany, formerly Charlotte Anderson, daughter of the late Elbert J.Anderson, of Newport, R.I. Small interest in the estate of her father. Alice von Buchwaldt, Bremen, Germany, and Anna Maria von Bose, Dresden, Germany, daughters of William Wilkens, deceased, of Baltimore. Each has a life interest in a trust fund under the will of her father of about $180,000. Natalie Burleigh von Ohnesorge, Provinz Posen, Germany, daughter of Sarah B.Conklin, of New York. Life estate in a trust under will of her father, $140,000. Florence Grafin von Schwerin, Munich, Germany, formerly Florence Wann, of St.Paul, Minn. Daughter of the late John Wann, deceased. Property taken over, $20,000; life interest in trust created under the will of her father, $40,000. Interest in the trust created by deed of trust of her brother, Thomas Leslie Wann, consisting of valuable real estate in St.Paul. Children of Sophie von Bohlen und Halbach, Baden, Germany, formerly Sophie Bohlen, daughter of Gen.William Henry Charles Bohlen, of Pennsylvania. She died in1915 and her children, all residing in Germany, became beneficiaries of her estate, including trust funds totaling $1,500,000. Helen H.von Stralenheim, Dresden, Germany; Louise von Trutzchler zum Falkenstein, Vogtland, Germany, and Josephine von Arnim, Dresden, Germany, daughters of David Leavitt, deceased, late of New York. Each has life estate one-fifth of $225,000 trust. Sophie von Arenstorff, Frankfort-a-Oder, Germany. Under the will of Edward G.Halls, deceased, late of Chicago, above enemy, a granddaughter, has a life interest in three-tenths of the estate, valued at $267,000. Katie von Kracker, Mecklenburg, Germany, formerly Katie Elias, daughter of the late Henry Elias, of New York, life interest in one-half of a trust valued at $300,000. Mr.Palmer’s assertion that Germany set the example by seizing American property in Germany cannot be sustained by him. |