Weekly journal-miner. [volume] (Prescott, Ariz.) 1908-1929, 1915-11-17
JUSTIFY SINKING OF
THE LINER LUSITANIA


BRESLAU, Germany. Nov. 13-Thc
opinions OF twenty-one of the most
prominent German authorities on in.
ternational law, with few exceptions
university professors, on the legal
questions involved in the sinking Of
the Lusitania have been collected in.
to one volume, which is published and
hailed as the concensus OF German
opinion. In differing language but
with unanimity the authorities agree
that the act OF the submarine was
justified
As representative of all twenty-one
the Koelnische Zeitung selects for
publication and approving comment
the opinion OF Prof. Max Fleischmann
OF the University of Koenigsberg, who
has written comprehensive but con
else introduction to the book, and ex
tracts from the opinion OF DR.. Kari
Strupp of Frankfort-on-the-M Main.
Dr.. Strupp begins by quotation.
from naval orders in the war of 1872
issued respectively to Lieutenant AL
Ian OF the American ship Argus, and
TO Captain Stewart, the first advising
OF the advantageousness OF attacking
the enemy's commerce, and the sec
ond directing the sinking OF English
vessels when there is any risk OF theii
being rescued while ell route to a port
as prizes.
1T cannot be expressed moro
clearly" says DR.. Strupp, that the
North American government orders
inc destruction OF enemy ships wher
hey cannot be safely brought to {
friendly port"
He then asks the question whether
t is the duty OF war vessel to save
he passengers and crew OF an enemy
ship, admitting in doing so that ex
sting rules of international law apply
0 submarines. He declares they ar,
o be regarded as suspended wher
military necessity, or even when seri
3us need, arises.
The commander Ola vessel, he says
must weigh the circumstances, anc
did in the Lusitania case, and decided
lightly that such need did exist fol
his little ship before the giant vesse
II 10000 tons, which might at any
lime ram him, and which probabl,
lad concealed cannon on board, anC
perhaps even Canadian auxiliar.
roops."
above ALL says Dr. Strupp. 1T i.
settled that the Lusitania was al
uxiliary cruiser, subsidized by the
English government and carried a:
such in the English lists, which as =;
natural consequence meant that sh,
vas no longer merchant vessel, bu
vas to be regarded and treated as {
yessel OF war"
The submarine commander, con
.inucs Dr. Strupp, did not have tc
wait until his danger became acute
In case the destruction OF the Lusi
ania was justified, he was under nc
necessity to take heed of the pres
encc OF non-combatants, not even o
| aeutrals. Whether two or 1900 were
involved is not a question OF law, bu
purely one OF quantity. The number
plays a roll only from humanitarian
not from a Judicial standpoint.
The American contention that tht
commander should have warned tht
Lusitania Dr. Strupp charactcrizcs a.
wholly devious In support of hi:
contention he again quotes from Am
erican precedent and reproduccs al
order OF Secretary OF State Bayarc
d January 6, 1888, reading:
ct is the duty OF foreigners tc
withdraw from such risks and ii they
do not do so or il they voluntarily OK
pose themselves to such risk they
must take the consequences"
Likewise the author also denie;
that any indemnity should be paid fol
lives or property lost on the Lusi
tania, and cites a prize court finding
in the Franco-Gcrman war A French
court ruled that English then neu
trail owners OF cargoes that had beer
sunk in German ships could not col
'cct damages He also quotes The
English authority OF internationa
law, Hall, who says that neueral own
ers OF cargocs destroyed by acts o.
war have no valid claim for damages
In addition to the opinions OF the
twenty-one professors, which take ur
ninety three pages, the new book con
| tains, for further reference, the an
nouncemcnt of the German admiralty
Of February 4. the American note o.
February II, the German answer O
February 10 and the note exchange
following tine Lusitania incident.
PACKING IS SLOW;
WILL BUILD ROAr