The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-08-05
TIRPITZPUTS U-BOAT
BLAME ON KAISER


Continued from First Page.
lions of modern warfare and COM
merce-so also could we claim the
formal right to blockade with our
U-boats," the Admiral writes.
1.-THE chief difficulty expected re-
lated to our relations with America,
especially after the two way neutral
ity soon after the outbreak developed
into an arsenal for our enemies.
Because of this consideration and
to sound sentiment In America I re-
ceived the American journalist, Karl
H. Won Wiegand, In November, 1914,
and asked him what America would
say II we answered England's I'M
scrupulous breaking Of all sea rules
with a U-boat blockade, to which we
undoubtedly had the right This In
terview had the approval Of the For
eign Offlce.
ION November Admiral Won Pohl
sumbitted a draft Of the submarine
proclamation covering a blockade of
the coasts Of Great Britain and Ire
land for discussion. I called atten-
ton to the fact that the U-boat block
ade, being new, had never been dealt
with in international law, and added
that the time for declaring such a
blockade must not be earlier than
when a sufficient number of boats
were available"
Dodsing U-Boat Responsibility.
The Admiral then says he advised
that the proclamation be issued by the
commander Of the Marine Corps in
Flanders, so as not to commit the
Kaiser and the Government, and end
ing his advice with the statement
that to blockade all England sounds
too much like bluff, and that a block
ade Of the Thames would be better
for the present"
Admiral Won Pohl, however, would
not accept this, and in December he
submitted to Admiral Won Tirpitz
copies Of letters to the Foreign Office
asking approval to begin the sub
marine warfare at the end Of January.
These letters" he adds, touched
on the utterance Of Ambassador
Gerard, from which the Admiralty
staff believed 1t could conclude that
no great opposition might be expected
from America"
Admiral Won Tirpitz gave written
reply, stating that in his opinion the
request was premature.
II also have doubts Of your Excel
lency's methods Of conducting the
war;" Admiral Tirpitz says he wrote
"A U-boat war, without declaring a
blockade, in its effect upon neutrals
will 60 much further in my judgment
than a regular blockade, and Is politi.
cally more dangerous. Our experience
SO far shows that Germany must have
more consideration for the trade in.
terests of neutrals than England.
MAY also cali to your attention
whether it is really appropriate that
a private conversation of Amba ssador
Gerard with the president Of the
Bremen Chamber Of Commerce should
be advanced as justification for sc
vigorous a procedure"
Won Pohl Insists on U-Boat War.
Admiral Won Tirpitz added that h,
believed the protests from the stand
point of international morals would b,
much greater than in the case of {
regular blockade. Admiral Won Poh
answered that he couldn't agree tina
the proposed measure was prematur,
and that the Foreign Office had decided
to adhere to the war zone declaration
Won Tirpitz says DR.. Won Bethmann
Hollweg Informed him January q
that political conditions did not permi
the delay Of a decision until sprinI
or summer.
at will be seen," he writes, "hov
extraordinarily amazed I was whel
few days later, namely, February 4
1915, Won Pohl. in agreement witt
the Chancellor. submitted the declara
ton to the Kaiser"
Admiral Won Tirpitz says the dec
laration lacked effectiveness; that /
was not clear legally, and that it wa
more provocative than the Thame
blockade which he advocated. He de
scribes the declaration as being Il
the nature of bluff, adding:
"It gave the appearance that W
aimed to spare the neutrals. and a
the same time threatened not to
Thus we aroused doubt as to our RICH
to conduct such blockade.
"In any case this war zone dec
laration, quite aside from the puristl
angle. was politically and militaril
inexpedient. What the reasons wer