The second American Lusitania Note was published on June eleventh, 1915; and its delivery was coincident with the resignation of Mr. Bryan as Secretary of State. In this last Note President Wilson (for, of course, it is an open secret that he was the author of these Notes) made the issue perfectly plain, referring to the torpedoing of enemy passenger ships. "Only her actual resistance to capture or refusal to stop when ordered to do so for the purpose of visit could have afforded the commander of the submarine any justification for so much as putting the lives of those on board the ship in jeopardy." On July eighth the German answer to this American Lusitania Note was delivered, and again stated that "we have been obliged to adopt a submarine war to meet the declared intentions of our enemies and the method of warfare adopted by them in contravention of international law". Again referring to the alleged fact of the Lusitania's carrying munitions they said: "If the Lusitania had been spared, thousands of cases of munitions would have been sent to Germany's enemies and thereby thousands of German mothers and children robbed of breadwinners." The note then contained some of Zimmermann's favourite proposals, to the effect that German submarine commanders would be instructed to permit the passage of American steamers marked in a special way and of whose sailing they had been notified in advance, provided that the American Government guaranteed that these vessels did not carry contraband of war. It was also suggested that a number of neutral vessels should be added to those sailing under the American flag, to give greater opportunity for those Americans who were compelled to travel abroad, and the Note's most important part continued: "In particular the Imperial Government is unable to admit that the American citizens can protect an enemy ship by mere fact of their presence on board."

July twenty-first, the American Government rejected the proposals of Germany saying, "The lives of noncombatants may in no case be put in jeopardy unless the vessel resists or seeks to escape after being summoned to submit to examination," and disposed of the claim that the acts of England gave Germany the right to retaliate, even though American citizens should be deprived of their lives in the course of retaliation by stating: "For a belligerent act of retaliation is per se an act beyond the law, and the defense, of an act as retaliatory, is an admission that it is illegal." Continuing it said: "If a belligerent cannot retaliate against an enemy without injuring the lives of neutrals, as well as their property, humanity, as well as justice and a due regard for the dignity of neutral powers, should dictate that the practice be discontinued."

It was also said: "The United States cannot believe that the Imperial Government will longer refrain from disavowing the wanton act of its naval commander in sinking the Lusitania or from offering reparation for the American lives lost, so far as reparation can be made for the needless destruction of human life by an illegal act." And the meat of the Note was contained in the following sentence: "Friendship itself prompts it (the United States) to say to the Imperial Government that repetition by the commanders of German naval vessels of acts in contravention of those rights must be regarded by the Government of the United States, when they affect American citizens, as being deliberately unfriendly."

There the matter has remained so far as the Lusitania was concerned until now. In the meantime, the attack of the American ship, Nebraskan, was disavowed; the German Note stating that "the torpedo was not meant for the American flag and is to be considered an unfortunate accident."

The diplomatic situation with regard to the use of the submarine and the attack on many merchant ships without notice and without putting the passengers in safety was still unsettled when on August nineteenth, 1915, the British ship Arabic, was torpedoed, without warning, not far from the place where the Lusitania had gone down. Two Americans were among the passengers killed.

The German Government, after the usual quibbling, at length, in its Note of September seventh, claimed that the Captain of the German submarine, while engaged in preparing to sink the Dunsley, became convinced that the approaching Arabic was trying to ram him and, therefore, fired his torpedo. The Imperial Government refused to admit any liability but offered to arbitrate.

There followed almost immediately the case of the Ancona, sunk by a submarine flying the Austrian flag. This case was naturally out of my jurisdiction, but formed a link in the chain, and then came the sinking of the Persia in the Mediterranean. On this boat our consul to Aden lost his life.

In the Note of Count Bernstorff to Secretary Lansing, dated September first, 1915, Count Bernstorff said that liners would not be sunk by German submarines without warning, and without putting the passengers in safety, provided that the liners did not try to escape or offer resistance; and it was further stated that this policy was in effect before the sinking of the Arabic.

There were long negotiations during this period concerning the Arabic. At one time it looked as if diplomatic relations would be broken; but finally the Imperial Government consented to acknowledge that the submarine commander had been wrong in assuming that the Arabic intended to ram his boat, offered to pay an indemnity and disavowed the act of the commander. It was stated that orders so precise had been given to the submarine commanders that a "recurrence of incidents similar to the Arabic is considered out of the question."

In the same way the Austrian Government gave way to the demands of America in the Ancona case at the end of December, 1915. Ambassador Penfield, in Austria, won great praise by his admirable handling of this case.