The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-02-26
Won EOLST ON SPANS
LIABILITY.

9TpISSSOf Won HOIST taxes issue with
ex-Minister to England Robert T. Lin
coin as to SPANS liability for the
Maine disaster. In taking issue with
Mr.. Lincoln he assumes that the disas-
ter was the result of an accident, and
an accident from an outside cause and
not one from within.
He holds that if it is really an indi-
vidual crime, Spain certainly would not
be responsible for IT, for it is a well
understood principle of international
law, he says. that nations are not re-
spOnsible for the acts of individuals.
He then proceeds to give his theory of
SPANS liability. He says:
If it be true that, as it is asserted, the
harbOr OF Havana is provided with tor
pedoeS and submarine mines, and If it
be further true that the place of an
chorage was assigned to the Maine by
Spanish officials, and the disaster has
befallen the Maine through those mines
or torpedoes, Spain, in my opinion
would have to pay damages for the loss
Of the ship, besides indemnities for the
sailors. dead or wounded. l am of the
same opinion in case those mines or
torpedoes have not exploded by acct
dent, but through the criminal act of
some individual Spaniard, whether Off
cial or not, and for this reason, if the
Spanish government laid those mines
and tOrpedoes it is in duty bound to
watch them in such a way that no
harm could be done by them, except in
legitimate warfare.
I am inclined to go even one step
farther 1 think the liability of Spain
could not be denied if neither the place
of anchorage was assigned TO the Maine
by Spanish officials nor the explosion
was due to the criminal act OF some
individual, but simply to some unac-
countable accident. For, while Spain
had unquestionably the right to provide
her fortified harbor with submarine
mines and torpedoes she was morally
bound TO warn any ship of friendly
nation-not only a man-Of-war. but the
same holds true of any merehantman-
of the danger that would be incurred by
anchOTing in that harbor except in
safe position consigned to her. Any
power that allows a ship of a friendly
nation to enter her harbor thereby i'm
plicitly declares that il is safe TO do
so, fortified or not. So in all these cases
there seems to be a clear case of re-
spcnsihility on the part of Spain.
But 1 think it highly in the interest
of the United States that in contending
for this opinion all papers not dealing
strongly emphasize that this is only
liability for dana ges-that is to say, a
purely pecuniary question. For pecun-
larry questions. however, nations do not
rush at once into war. Surprising that
the official inquiry should establish such
Il pecuniary obligation on the part of
Spain, in our opinion, and Spain should
deny it, it would still. / hold, be much
too early to speak of war We have
had many a controversy of this charac-
ter with Spain and some of them have
been of an exceedingly aggravating
character. Still we never have gone 70
war about them. Diplomatic means
have been employed, and they have I'LL
timately attained the end in view. Such
a course should be pursued now. Nor
does this mean advocating a half
hearted and dilly-dallying policy. Dip
lomatic means can be resorted to in
very energetic manner and with nine
out of ten chances of success. Even
after all diplomatic resources were eX-
hausted there would still be one course
open-short of war. that of reprisals
in one way or another
Thus far everything regarding the
Maine disaster is conjecture and must
remain so until the report of the naval
investigation board has been made to
the administration and the administra-
ton decides upon what view of the dis
aster it viii take, and what course it
will pursue. Neither American rights
nor American honor will be sacrificed,
and it is safe to say that the course of
the administration will receive the
eventual appreciation of the people.