Kern to Count de Bismarck-Schoenhausen, chancellor of the North German Confederation at Versailles, January 23, 1871

The minister of the Swiss Confederation at Paris to Count de Bismarck-Schoenhausen, chancellor of the North German Confederation at Versailles.

Sir: I had the honor to receive the reply addressed by your excellency, the 17th instant, to the note signed on the 13th of the same month by the members of the diplomatic corps at Paris, as well as by a certain number of members of the consular corps, in the absence of their respective embassies and legations. In accordance with the wish expressed by your excellency, I immediately communicated this reply to the signers of the note of January 13. I have been charged by their unanimous resolution to call your excellency’s attention to certain errors contained in your reply.

Your excellency informs the signers that by a circular, bearing date October 4, you endeavored to show the consequences which must ensue to the civil population of Paris from a resistance prolonged to its extreme limit, and you add, “On the 29th of the same month this circular was communicated by me to the minister of the United States off America, whom I begged at the same time to communicate it to the members of the diplomatic corps.” After having made the necessary examination, Mr. Washburne declares that no communication expressing a wish of the kind has been received by him, and that this statement is erroneous. In another passage of your reply, your excellency expresses yourself as follows: “I believe myself authorized, in accordance with what I have just stated, not to admit (as far as the German authorities are concerned) the assertion contained in the letter of January 13, that the countrymen of the signers were prevented from withdrawing themselves from danger by the difficulties opposed to their departure by the belligerents.”

While acknowledging the readiness with which your excellency placed at the beginning of the siege “sauf conduits” at the disposal of persons belonging to neutral states, and not denying the fact that the French military authorities thought proper to revoke at the commencement of November permission before granted, it nevertheless results from the declaration of several members of the diplomatic and consular corps, that in the course of the same month your excellency informed them that the German military authorities had “resolved to grant to no one permission to cross the lines of the besieging troops.” The signers of the note were therefore correct in declaring that “difficulties had been put in the way of the departure of the belligerents.”

Your excellency adds that, in accordance with private communications which you have received, the French authorities opposed the departure of the diplomatic representatives of neutral states. This fact not having been brought within the knowledge of any one of the chiefs of the diplomatic corps present at Paris, it may be assumed that these private communications were founded upon erroneous information. On submittting to a fresh examination the correspondence upon this subject, you will easily convince yourself, sir, of the accuracy of the corrections which I have had the honor to submit to you. As regards the substance of their request, it appears to the signers of the “note” of January 13 that the point of view in which the German military authorities have placed themselves is too widely different from their own, and that the refusal is conceived in too positive terms to permit that any further argument upon the principles and usages of the law of nations, should reach the desired conclusion. They cannot, however, omit to observe that your excellency principally endeavors to show, invoking the authority of Vattel, that the laws of war authorize, as a last extremity, the bombardment of a fortified city. The intention of the signers of the “note” of January 13 was not to contest this extreme right. They confine themselves to affirming, and they believe that they can maintain, in accord with the best authorities on modern international law, and with the precedents of the different periods, the rule that the bombardment of a fortified city should be preceded by notice.

There remains, therefore, only to the diplomatic and consular representatives of the neutral states, in consequence of the duties which are imposed upon them by the gravity of the situation, and of the importance of the interests at stake—the duty to communicate to their respective governments the correspondence exchanged with your excellency, while always insisting upon the substantial foundation of their request.

It may be permitted me, in conclusion, to express, in the name of the signers of the “note” of January 13, as well as in my own, my lively and sincere regret that the German military authorities could not resolve to reconcile the necessities of war with the wish to diminish the sufferings of the civil population of every nationality residing in Paris.

I take this occasion to beg you to receive, sir, &c.

The minister of the Swiss Confederation.