Evening star., 1915-05-12
ENGLAND REFUSES
TO ASSUME BLAME
Officials Resent Germany's
justification of the Lusi-
tania Disaster.
SAY ACTS OF TEUTONS
BROUGHT ON SITUATION
Seizure Of Food Supplies Followed
Declaration of Submarine
Blockade, Is Claim.

LONDON, May 12.-Inquiry in official
circles here has ELECTED the following
statement representing the British Off
cial view of Germany's justification for
torpedoing the Lusitania, which Ger
many transmitted to the State Depart
mon: at Washington:
The German government states that
responsibility for the loss of the Lusi-
tania rests with the British govern
ment, which through her plan of starv-
ing the civil population of Germany
has forced Germany to resort to retail
iatory measures. The reply to this Is
as follows:
"As far back as last December Ad-
miral Won Tirpitz tthe German marine
minister) In an interview foreshadowed
q submarine blockade of Great Britain,
and a merchant ship and hospital
ship were torpedoed January 80 and
February 1, respectively.
Blockade Announced.
THE German government February
declared their intention of instituting
a general submarine blockade of Great
Britain and Ireland. with the avowed
purpose of cutting off supplies for these
islands. This blockade was put into
effect February is.
ITS already stated, merchant vessels
had, as a matter Of fact, been sunk by a
German submarine at the end of
January. Before February no vessel
carrying food supplies for Germany had
been held up by his majesty's govern
ment except on the ground that there was
reason to believe the foodstuffs were in
tended for use Of the armed forces of
the enemy or the enemy government.
His majesty's government had. how
ever. informed the state department on
January % that they felt bound to place
IL prize court the foodstuffs Of the
steamer Wilhelmina, which was going to
a German port. in view of the govern
ment control Of foodstuffs in Germany,
as being destined for the enemy govern
ment and therefore, liable to capture.
Decision Due to Blockade.
THE decision Of his majestys govern
ment to carry out the measure laid down
by the order-in-council was due to the
action of the German government in in
sisting on their submarine blockade.
This, added to other infractions Of inter-
national law by Germany led to Brit
ish reprisals which differ from the Ger
man action in that his majesty's govern
ment scrupulously respect the lives of
nom n-combatants travelling in merchant
vessels and do not ever enforce the recog-
mixed penalty Of confscation for breach
Of the blockade. whereas the German
sells at sight, with total disregard for the
lives Of nom combatants and the property
of neutrals
Answers German Charge.
The Germans state that in spite of
their offer to stop their submarine war
in case the starvation plan was given
up, Great Britain has taken even more
stringent blockade measures. The an
swer to this is as follows:
1T was not understood from the reply
of the German government that they
were prepared to abandon the principle
of sinking British vessels by subma-
rines. They have refused to abandon
the use of mines for offensive purposes
on the high seas on any condition.
They have committed various other in
fractions Of International law. such as
strewing the high seas and trade
neutral vessels will continue to run
danger from this course whether Ger
many abandons her submarine blockade
or not.
Gas and Poison Used.
TT should be noted that since the
employment of submarines, contrary to
international law. the Germans also
have been guilty of the use of asphyx-
iating gas. They have even proceeded
to the poisoning of water in South AZ
rica.
The Germans represent British mer-
chant vessels generally as armed with
guns. and say that they repeatedly ram
submarines. The answer to this is as
follows:
1T is not to be wondered at that mer-
chant vessels, knowing they are liable
10 be sunk without warning and with
ivO eytx
board to save their lives, should take
measures for self-defense. With re-
gard to the Lusitania. the vessel was
not armed on her last voyage, and had
not been armed during the whole war
Contraband Carrying.
The Germans attempt to justify the
sinking OF the Lusitania by the fact
that she had arms and ammunition on
board. The presence of contraband on
board a neutral vessel does render her
liable to capture, but certainly not to
destruction with the loss of a large
portion OF her crew and passengers.
Every enemy vessel is fair prize, but
there Is no legal provision, not to speak
of the principles Of humanity, which
would justify what can only be de-
scrfbed as murder because a vessel
carries contraband.
The Germans maintain that after re-
peated omcial and unofficial warnings
his ma3estys government were re-
sponnble for the loss of life. as they
considered themselves able to declare
that the boat ran no risk, and thus
ught-heartedly assume the RESPONSE
bility for the human lives on board
steamer which. owing to its arma-
Inent and cargo, is liable to destruc-
tion.' The reply thereto is:
F1rst-His majesty's government
never declared the boat ran no risk
Held Premeditated Crime.
"second-Ths fact that the Germans
issued their warning shows that the
crime was premeditated. They had no
more right to murder passengers after
warning them than before
''Thfrd-In sDite of fheir attamnt. -