The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-02-26
RUSSIANS WHOLLY AT FAULT.
NO JUSTIFICATION FOR ATTACK
on RRITISH FISHING FLEET.
Russian Commissioners Alone Dlssents From
This View Report Says No Torpedo
Boats We're Among the Trnnlers
Admiral RoJesty ensky Criticised.
speeial cable Despa'che, TO THE Sun.

PARIS, Feb. rs. The report Of the inter-
national commission which invest gated
tho action Of the Russian Baltic feet under
admiral Rojestvensky in firing on the
Gamecock trawling feet while passing
through the North Sea on Oct. 20 last,
rinldng one Of the British vessels, killing
two men and woundinR several Others
was made public at $50 o'clock this after
noon
The opinion Of the majority of the COM
mission il that there we're no torpedo boats
among the trawlers and that Admiral
/ Rojestyensky'' action in firing upon the
fishing fleet wat therefore unjusttiable.
TIE Russian { mmissioner alone dissented
on this point, tie declares that in his opin-
ion il was the hostile action Of fishing YES
sells that caused the firing by the Russians.
Tho report reviews in detail the evidence
which was taken at the hearings held here
by the commission and approves the orders
issued bY Admiral Roiestvensky to his
cficcrs, previous TO the departure Of the
feet from Libau. for their guidance in case
OF attack.
The commission finds chat tho hattcship
kniaz SuvaroT while passing the trawlers
noticed first green Aaro and then the APP
pcarance OF a suspicious vessel which was
taken TO be a torpedo boat. Admiral
Roie-tvensky thoreupon gave orders TO
FIRE upon this doubtful craft. The report
contnIc,
The act Of firing on the fishing fleet
when no torpedo boats were present was.
in the opinion of the majority of the com
mission, unjustifable. The Russian com
missioner dissents from this opinion and
-, -. q In, 10
was responsible for what happened The
majority consider that the firing even
accepting the Russian version was unduly
prolonged. The fishing feet was in no way
guilty Of hostile action
The commissioners, while recognizing
that under the circumstances Admiral
RojestvensSy had good reason for con-
tnuing his voyage. after discovering his |
error without stopping TO render assistance /
to the fishermen, express regret that h.
did not, while he was in the English Channel. |
inform the naval authorities OF the neigh |
boring Powers that the trawlers needed (
assistance
The last paragraph Of the report points
out that it was probably the arrival OF
belated Russian vessels that caused the
to fire. and that the cessation Of
the firing was doubtless due 10 the Dmitri
Donskoi at last signalling her approach.
Finally, the commissioners declare that
there was nothing in what occurred 10
reflect upon the MARTA qualities or senti-
ments of humanity Of Admiral Rojost
vensky and his staff.
LONDON. Feb 25-The decision OF the
North Sea Commission came as a great
surprise to Europe especially England,
after the apocryphal reports of the last
ew days. Great Britain could not have
asked for a more complete Endorsement
of her case than the report signed by the
'our arbiters, including the representative
Of Russia's ally, France.
The concluding paragraph, in which the
endeavor to soften the
blow, causes more amusement than resent
nent by its obvious Inconsistency After
the Russian Admiral in all
essential points, the report adds ingen-
lously that they intend no reflection on ,
he humanity or professional skill Of the
Of the marauding fleet No ,
'ody criticises this sop TO the feelings
I Admiral Rojestvensky by his brother
ailors, notwi hstandng the crude nature
their attempt at diplomatic phrase {
logy.
The newspapers are figuring as to what a
ill be the amount OF the bill Of the Dogger r
iank Commission The data IL somewhat Z,
ague but in view Of the generous scale r
n which the case was prepared II is COM c
uted that Great Britain and Russia will h
ave to find together $50 900 for the expenses :
the Paris proceeding alone. a
LONDON. Feb. 26-The Sunday papers. n
,bila u,aloornp1 tba Favoro bio r q
ne North Sea Commission on Great Brtain's y
generally deplore its indefinite !,
nd contradictory terms. especially the y
lst paragraph. which, In holding that there @
no reflection on Admiral Rojestvensky's /
Military efficiency OF humanity precludes Z
ne likelihood Of his punishment. -
Otherwise the papers agree that since
he affair was submitted to arbitration the
nding is the most satisfactory solution b
'hich could be expected and upholds the .
ntire British contention, notwithsta ncfing ;,
ne way 1t is worded in order not TO wound p
ussian sensitiveness 81
The Observer. while recognizing the fair Z
ess Of the commissions intention, says 1t a,
innot be denied that the reference Of 81
ie matter TO arbitration has proved unsatis-
Ictory. yet It cannot be doubted for a n
oment that England acted rightly in y,
yreeing thereto The paper says: -
I'VE accept the result Loyalty, in good n
mper, for after all the whole world Is
yreed regarding the justice Of our case N
The Paris Temps, in pointing out certain
in the report, says; If no
rpedo boats were on the scene, II the m
ing was not justified and II Admiral ar
ojestvensky was In error, logicians will m
k how can his military capacity be IN bt
Iected? The finding is an equilibrst's tn
rformance, an artificial balancing; but "
nat matter II in form it Ia honorable to =.
,th opponentsH II has resulted In the s se
aintenance OF peace he
WASHINGTON, Feb. 25.-Of1cial infor1na- II
IN has reached Washington concerning %
o findings Of the international board OF W, w
quiry on the North Sea incident. The
blegram received was very brief, but it 70
iicated plainly that the decision was In N
vor Of England and that Admiral Ro- ~, ~
styensky was considered by the board an
be in the wrong. Naval officers here III
10 have followed the course Of the In an
Try closely concur with the decision.
New Zanzibar Treaty. Dc