Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, The Lansing Papers, 1914–1920, Volume I

195.2/300b

The Secretary of State to President Wilson

Washington, January 23, 1915.

My Dear Mr. President: I am enclosing a personal statement from the British Ambassador which I think you will find interesting.¹¹ I was talking with him the other day and he asked me if I would like to know what the British papers were saying and I told him I would—and this letter is intended to furnish the information.

You will notice the stress that they lay upon the purchase of German ships. The fact that the bill authorizes the purchase of ships, without excepting the interned German ships, is the basis for their fears.

You will notice from a clipping which I also enclose,¹² that Lodge^12a is basing his opposition to the shipping bill—or at least making it one of his objections—upon the possibility of the purchase of these ships. Lodge, as you know, is very pro-British, and both he and Gardner¹³ have defended an increase in the army and navy on the ground that we may have war with Germany.

I have just talked with Senator Walsh of Montana and he tells me that Lodge has introduced an amendment to the shipping bill prohibiting the purchase of German ships. He says it will either be necessary to vote for that amendment or else defend the right of the Government to buy those ships. His own position is that the Government has a right to buy the ships. He thinks that even an announcement that the ships are not to be bought under the provisions of this shipping bill would hardly be sufficient because they would ask—“Why not put the prohibition in the bill if there is no intention of buying?”

The question is not logical and I think if an announcement was made that the authority would not be used to purchase ships from belligerents it would be sufficient, because the Democrats could say that it was not necessary to support the President’s word in such a matter. And they could object to the adoption of the Lodge amendment because after what he has said in regard to the belligerents his amendment would be accepted as an endorsement of his views and not merely upon its legal effect. It being unnecessary to put that provision in the bill, its adoption would naturally be attributed to other motives and the most natural motive would be that expressed by the man who introduced it, who is anything but neutral in his attitude.

I only send this to reinforce the suggestion made in the letter of yesterday in regard to the advisability of an immediate statement on the subject. Senator Walsh says they may have to vote on this amendment Monday. In view of the controversy that has arisen it might be wise to make the statement even more specifically than the one I suggested—that is, have it specifically state that the authority would not be used by us to purchase ships of belligerents.

With assurances [etc.]

W. J. Bryan

11. Ibid., p. 777.
12. Not enclosed with file copy of this letter.
13. Henry Cabot Lodge, Senator from Massachusetts.
13. Augustus Peabody Gardner, Representative from Massachusetts.