The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1916-04-26

would in itself appear to be conclusive
that the agent Of destruction was 9
United States navy, attached to the
4 American embassy at Paris, who. &C
companied by Major Logan. Unitet
States army. of the embassy. went tt
Boulogne. inspected the hull Of the sus
sex and personally found beneath the
\ mass of water soaked debris of the
wreck fifteen pieces of METAL, which
they retained in their possession, as they
did not believe the pieces forIped part
| OF the vessel.
'"rhe inspection of the huh disclosed
that the vessel was wrecked by an, ex.
terrml explosion, the boilers being in.
/ tact, and that a short distance forward
that the vessel had received heavy
blow, the dint of the impact being from
abaft the beam along line at an acute
/ angle with the Keel Of the vessel. IRE.
! ID This evidence comedies with and
corroborates the statement that the YES.
sci was swinging to starbQard and away
| from the torpedo when struck.
| OF Different Size.
THE pieces Of METAL which the Amer.
lean officers had collected. were com
pared by Lieutenant Smith, Lieutenant
Commander Sayles and Major Logar
| With mines and plans of mines in pos.
session Of the French naval authorities
at Boulogne. Rochefort and Toulon, and
our naval authorities at Portsmouth
These officers are positive in their optn-
ion that these pieces of METAL were not
of a mine. tReport of Lieutenant Smith
| cahled April e.
j Among these fifteen pieces of METAL
4 were two, screw bolts showing the eff
led with q n and sc on the faces of
the head of one and X and IS on the
faces of the head of the other. On >eN-
amining torpedoes in possession of the
of the English naval authorities at
Portsmouth. the American officers found
! that Identical screws with the letter 'k
and number were employed to fasten
the :Wafss,head 'kopf' to the air cham
Der. (Lieutenant Smiths report, cabled
1ieoss Are Compared.
The screws used In French and Eng
of a slightly different size. ! (sah,e re
pOrt) Furthermore the American off
GERS were able by comEarison and close
discrimination to positively identify and
Of metal as parts of q German torpedo
Fragment three. part of inner seat
Of water felief valve Of engine valve.
fragments four and five, puntO bands
of engine room casing.
Fragments. eleven. thirteen, fourteen
twelve, parts of engine cylinders.
Fragments eleven thirteen, fourteen
eAsl fifteen, parts or steel Warhead still
ooDring the distinctive red paint COM
Iran to German torpedo Warheads. Gre
port of Lieutenant Smith. cabled April
L 5.)
an view OF these authenticated facts
there can be no reasonable doubt, but
that the Sussex was torpedoed and that
the torpedo was of German manufacture.
AS no vessel was seen by any person
on the Sussex, the conclusion Is irreSis-
tible that the torpedo was launched with
III,
was submerged at the time OF the attack
and remained beneath the surface after
the explosion
'"The conclusion thus reached from the
evidence (the affidavit being those of
American citizens, collected by the de-
partment of state. is substantiated by
| the statement in the imperial govern
ment note of April 10. 1916. According
marine torpedoed steamer one and one
half miles southeast Of Bullrock bank.
Departments comment-the point of
attack is exactly in the course which
Dungeness and about half mile from
the. place where the captain OF the Sus-
sex states he was tOrpedOed.
(BJ-The attack took place at !: :55
o'clock p M. central European time. s
Departments comment-3:55 p. m.
central European time would correspond
to 1855 p. m. western European time. The
time OF the striking of the torpedo, ac-
and the stopping Of the clocks on board
the vessel was ESQ p. M, western time.
(C)-The torpedo when it struck
caused an explosion which tore away the
! whole foreship to the bridge
Departments comment: The fore
part Of the Sussex was wrecked as far
| back as the first water tight bulkhead,
according to official reports.
O)-The German submarine was sub
merged when the torpedo was launched
and there is no statement that it came
to the suface after the attack.
DEPARTMENTS comment: The conclu-
sion was reached that the submarine was
submerged from the fact that no one on
the Sussex saw the submarine, though
1 the weather was fine
El-No warning was given nor no at
! tempt to give one.
Departments comment: The evidence
collected shows nffirmatively no warn
GA sketch by the Submarine com
mander of the steamer which he tor
pedoed does not agree with photograph
OF the Sussex in the London Graphic.
Departments comment: This sketch
apparently was made from memory OF
periscope. AS the only differences noted
by the commander who relied on his
| memory We're the positions OF the smoke
stacks and the shape Of the stern, 1t Is to
he presumed the vessels were similar in
| other respects. 50
| 5(G)2No other German submarines on
that day attacked steamers in that To-
lcality.
departments comment: AS no vessel
is reported to have been torpedoed with
out warning by a submerged submarine
other than the Sussex. 1t is beyond dis
cussion that that vessel was torpedoed
hN the submarine whose commander Is