Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1911-06-06

ent from the case where the explosion
takes place without the vessel
The rupture is great and irregular and
is from without, the damage is not
local, the effect often being noted for
miles distant from the scene.
CAPTAIN SIGSBEE's REPORT.
In the destruction of the Maine Cap
tain Sigsbee states that there was a
bursting, rending, and crashing sound
or roar of immense volume, largely me
tallic in its character 1t was succeed
ed by a metallic sound-probably of
falling debris-a trembling and lurch-
ing motion of the vessel. The passen-
gers of the City of Washington, which
vessel was only about 300 feet distant
on the Names port quarter, declare
that few seconds after hearing the
report OF the explosion there came
forth from the center of the ship a ter
rible mass of fire and then things went
over their heads.
The terrible havoc that was wrought
to the ship could only have been caus-
ell by an internal explosion. The ship,
to all intents and purposes, was ready
for battle and its magazines were well
filled with explosives consisting of
powder and shell. 1t must not
be forgotten that the force of the new
modern powders is from four to five
times greater than that of the old pow
ders That there is always dan
ger that the presence of some foreign
agent may cause reaction that will pro-
duce explosions.
EFFECT OF SHOT FROM WITHOUT.
ut has been claimed the explosion or
shock from without produced a great
explosion within the vessel. If shock
from without will produce an expIo-
sion within. then it may be pertinent
to ask why the magazines of warships
do not explode when the war vessels
suddenly hit projecting rocks, butt
into wharves, or crush against each
other when colliding In all these
cases there is sudden and violent shock
to the frames and plates of the hull.
Wherein can the use of the ram be
justified In warfare IL shock to the
hull Of a battleship will detonate the
high explosives in the magazines. II
simple shock will produce detonation
Of the high explosives, how is it that
the blowing up of warship is not of
frequent occurrence?
"A point that will always mitigate
against the submarine theory is that
no considerable body of water was
thrown up by the explosion. II was no
moderate charge of explosive which de-
stroyed the battleship. and any exces-
sive amount exploded in a harbor
whose depth did not exceed 30 feet
could not have failed 10 have sent forth
great volumes Of water
rs il not also possible that the ex-
plosion might have occurred in this
wise? At first a small explosion or de- !
would take place in part of
the shellroom or in some corner of the I,
The conversion of a great !
mass Of solid explosive to a gaseous |
state would tend TO exert pressure in /
all directions. That part OF the pres
sure exerted downward might disrupt |
the hull and deliver the whole contents |
Of the magazine TO the opening Then, |
when the remainder of the powder and |
shell exploded. part might be exerted |
In throwing the ship up, while the 9TH |
Pr part would tear up the whole inter
or arrangement
FACT MAY BE REVEALED.
in view OF the experience Of our
OWN vessel II can be stated with /
4 good deal OF certainty that had the 4
disaster TO the Maine been caused by /
anything but an internal explosion the |
effects would have been absolutely diff !
'erent from those recorded" says the |
admiral, who then goes into a technical |