Honduras, on 17 May 1917, severed diplo matic relations with Germany, as a protest against the submarine campaign. In the de cree of that date we find the declarations that the republic at Honduras makes common cause with the United States, approving fully the principles that the latter's government defends; and that "it is incumbent upon Honduras to de clare its attitude in the conflict between the United States and Germany on account of the submarine warfare, in violation of the princi ples of international law, the rights of neutral property, and commerce on the high seas.° The government of Honduras offered to the United States its resolute co-operation in all possible ways and declared war on Germany, 19 July 1918.
Nicaragua, on 18 May 1917, broke off diplo matic relations with Germany. In the note of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to the resi dent American Minister full sympathy with the policy of the United States was expressed "by instruction of the President of the Republic, and Nicaragua was truthfully represented as being in accord with the attitude the United States had taken for the safety of all the Latin American continent and its measure of defense of the high ideals and principles of civiliza tion. The use of the Nicaraguan ports, ter ritorial waters and means of communication was offered to the government of the United States. Nicaragua's declaration of war on Germany was dated 8 May 1918.
Peru sent a strong note of protest to the German government upon the sinking of a Peruvian vessel, the bark Lorton, 5 Feb. 1917. Later she refused to submit the case to German prize court and sent a second note, demanding a reply to the first — but without avail. On 28 July 1917 the President of Peru in his mes sage to the Congress expressed agreement with President Wilson's war-message. "The sufferings of humanity,* said President Pardo, "will not have been in vain if, through these efforts there is raised the new edifice of in ternational society upon the immutable foun dation of justice.° On 7 Sept. 1917 Peru's House of Representatives, by resolution unani mously adopted, declared its adhesion to the es tablished principles of justice and international ethics as proclaimed by President Wilson; and on the following day the Senate declared: "The international policy of Peru must be in spired by the principles of the solidarity of the nations of the American continents with the United States, in harmony with ideals of inter national justice proclaimed by President Wil son and with the declaration formulated . . . in the House of Representatives.° The Peru vian Congress, by a vote of 105 to 6, passed a resolution severing relations with Germany on 5 Oct. 1917, and on the same day passports were handed to Dr. Perl. (See above, Ecuador). On 4 June 1918 the Peruvian gov ernment took possession of eight German ves sels interned at Callao. This was not, how ever, regarded as an act of war.
Uruguay manifested cordial approbation of the cause defended by the American govern ment. In a note dated 14 April 1917 and ad dressed to the American Minister in Monte video the Uruguayan Minister of Foreign Af fairs stated that his government, while still maintaining neutrality, recognized the justice of the position taken by the United States of America. Thus, the offer of "moral sympathy and solidarity,° as the Minister of Foreign Af fairs expressed it, was extended without delay; and on 18 June 1917 the Uruguayan govern ment issued its memorable decree, in which the general principle was laid down "that no Amer ican country, which in defense of its own rights should find itself in a state of war with nations of other continents, will be treated as a belligerent." On 7 Oct. 1917 Uruguay sev ered diplomatic relations with Germany. The rupture was announced in a presidential de cree, after the Chamber of Representatives, by a vote of 74 to 23, had declared itself in favor of such action. In his message to Congress President Viera observed that although Uru guay had not received direct offense from Ger many, it was necessary to espouse the cause of the defenders of justice, of democracy and of small nations; and popular acceptance of this view was emphasized at a great public meeting. Eight German ships were seized at Uruguayan ports and subsequently leased to the Emergency Fleet Corporation of the United States.
Summarizing our observations up to this point, we may say that nearly two-thirds of all Latin-American republics made known, by vig orous governmental action, their adhesion to the cause of the United States and her Allies before the end of the year 1917 and were found standing firmly for the right when the year 1918 had half run its course. We owe to John
Barrett, Director-General of the Pan-American Union (see Bibliography), the observation (in 1917) that "the sober public sentiment of [the people of] practically all the twenty Latin American Republics is overwhelmingly pro United States and pro-Ally in this struggle of democracy against autocracy. It would seem, in consequence, to be only a question of time when all the Latin American countries must follow the dictates and demands of this pub lic sentiment and align themselves with the United States and the Allies.° Let us now turn our attention to the remaining seven — to those whose governments maintained interesting vari ants of neutrality. "Argentina, Chile, Colom bia, Mexico, Paraguay and Venezuela,° accord ing to a special memorandum issued in 1919, "either by the statements of their Executives or by resolutions passed by their Congresses, or again by the pro-Ally tone of their most repre sentative statesmen also expressed themselves in favor of Pan American solidarity." As for Salvador, her declaration of benevolent neu trality toward the United States "permitted the use of her territorial waters by the war-ships of the United States and the Allies.° Argentina, on 7 Feb. 1917, made answer to Germany's notification concerning the subma, rine blockade: IThe Argentine Government regrets that His Imperial Majesty has thought necessary to adopt such extreme measures and declares that it will adjust its conduct, as al ways, to the fundamental rules and principles of international law.° In accordance with that declaration, the Argentine Foreign Office en tered a strong protest when information was secured in regard to the sinking of the Monte Protegido, 4 April 1917; and in its note of 4 July 1917 demanded satisfaction for the sink ing of the sailing vessel Oriana on 6 June and the steamer Toro on 22 June,, both without loss of life. More specifically, it required in demnity, together with assurances that no more Argentine vessels would be attacked. In the Monte Protegido case Germany accepted the suggestion in regard to indemnity. On the other hand an effort was made to justify the sinking of the Toro. Argentina reiterated her demand 4 Aug. 1917. Next, into the heated controversy a new element was projected. On 8 Sept. 1917 the Department of State of the United States published several cablegrams; dated 19 May and 3 and 9 July of the same year, sent by the German chargi-d'affaires at Buenos Aires through Baron Lowen, Sweden's Minister at the same capital, to the Secretary of Foreign Affairs in Stockholm, to be delivered to the Minister for Foreign Affairs in Berlin. These dispatches contained an insolent refer ence to Argentina's Minister of Foreign Af fairs and recommended the sinking of Argen tine vessels without leaving a trace. On 12 Sept. 1917 riots occurred in Buenos Aires, in the course of which the people expressed their resentment by wrecking the German Club, the offices of the German newspaper, La Union, and important German business houses. The offending chargé-d'affaires, Count Luxburg, and the German legation were protected by the police. The Argentine government immediately asked Germany to disapprove Luxburg's con duct and to apologize for his discourteous lan guage; and on 19 Sept. 1917 the Argentine Sen ate voted almost unanimously (23 to 1) in favor of breaking off diplomatic relations with Ger many. This resolution was sent to the Cham ber of Deputies for approval. On 23 Sept. 1917 the Argentine government received a note of apology from Berlin, expressing disapproval of Luxburg's utterances; but the Chamber held this to be Inadequate, and on 25 Sept. 1917 by a vote of 53 to 18 upheld the Senate's course. On the next day 100,000 persons paraded through the streets of Buenos Aires; and this was but a part of a great popular demonstration in favor of war. Nevertheless the executive, it was said, did not consider it advisable to ter minate diplomatic relations with Germany after the promise of discrimination in favor of Ar gentme ships and the apology for the Luxburg incident. This seems to have been a clear case of unrepresentative inaction: the determination of the Argentine people not finding utterance through the executive.