The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-03-04
WHAT THE COURT MAY FIND.

For obvious reasons it is greatly to be
desired that the report of the naval court
of inquiry regarding the Maine disaster
should be definite and conclusive as to the
cause. but we must recognize the POSSIBLE
ity that it may not be- The Journal has
the greatest confidence in the ability and
honesty of the court, and believes it has
the courage to face and report any state
of facts the evidence before it may justify
but the evidence itself may not be conclu-
sive. The report may show one Of several
things-as that the destruction of the ship
was due to some cause impossible to as
certain; that it was certainly or probably
due to an accidental explosion from within
that it was certainly or probably due to an
explosion from the outside. None of these
findings would be entirely satisfactory or
put an end to speculation. If the cause of
the explosion cannot be ascertained the
mystery will continue and the responsible
ity will remain INDICATED. If the evidence
shows that 1t was probably or certainly
due to an accidental explosion from within,
the burden of proof will be on our ship
builders and naval officers to show that it
was not their fault. If the report shall be
that the disaster was certainly or probably
due to an explosion from the outside, there
will still remain the difficulty of discover
ing the guilty parties and locating the re-
sponsibility. Only the last of these findings
would involve the possibility of war, and
that would depend on Il later investigation
as to the actual perpetrators of the crime
and an inquiry, under the rules of interna-
tional law, as TO the extent of the respon-
sibility of the Spanish government for the
outrage. In this speculation we treat as
having been "eliminated' from the case all
questions as to Spanish official participa-
ton in the explosion The Spanish officials
are not barbarians and they are entitled
to the benefit of the doubt that they could
be guilty of so atrocious crime as con-
niving at or participating in the destruction
of u friendly ship, anchored in their own
waters anG with whose officers they had
exchanged numerous civilities. The Span
iards are treacherous, but they are not
savages, and they would not be likely to
take the risk of bringing their government
under the ban of civilization for all time
to come. The theory of Spanish official par
ticipation in the affair must be left out
of the question, as not only too horrible
to contemplate but too improbable.
While there is not yet particle of Off
cial evidence pointing to any particular
conclusion the drift of intelligent spec
ulation and newspaper correspondence from
the scene of the disaster justifies the be-
lief that the report of the court will be
that the ship was destroyed by an explo-
sion from the outside, probably by a float
ing submarine mine. II the court should
find that the havoc was aided and the
destruction of the ship made more complete
by the explosion of a magazine inside,
caused by the first explosion, the entire
disaster would still be justly attributable
TO the original cause. if ii should appear
that this mine was part of the defenses of
Havana harbor, placed there by the Span
plosion from any cause whatever would
make a clear case for n demand for dam
ages and PREPARATION from the Spanish gov
ernment. If, OH the other hand, there was
no way of accounting for the presence of
the submarine mine. or IL ii should appear
certain or probable TINT 1t was manipu-
lated and exploded by some person or per-
sons not officially connected with the Span
ish government. the casse would not be so
clear. In this case Spain might take the