The Cordova daily times., 1916-08-10

 during the second year of the war from the German viewpoint for the Associated Press:
 "It seemed likely that the second year of the war would end without sea fight of the first magnitude. but
 May 31 brought gratifying proof that our great battleships were not
 built in vain, and that our fleet, de
 spite seeming inactivity. was quietly
 and assiduously preparing itself for blow against the strongest sea pow CT in the world. We still hear the question asked as to who was the real
 victor in the fight off Skagerrak. A comparison of the clear concise re- ports of the German admiralty staff
 with Admiral Jeliicoe's long-winded reports, which contain only few facts leaves no doubt that the German of ficial account gives thoroughly truth full description of the battle. The Eng,
 fish version with it's barenness of facts, labors in vain to conceal its improbability.
 Whatever the final judgment is of the battle in detail the loss of Brit ish prestige at sea and the pronounced success of our fleet remain indisput- able if only the British losses in men and ships are counted. The waves of the North sea swallowed 6,104 Brit ish seamen and 117,110 gross regis tered tons of shipping. while the Ger man losses were 2,414 men and 6O,720 tons. These figures were officially published on both the German and British sides.
 "Numberless authorities, both hos tile and neutral, have expressed opin- ions on the battle, but the German people will not permit themselves to be influenced by any foreign judg- UutHt. uty uuuCi ho" proud they may be of the navy whose quality and honor have stood the test of battle with the strongest sea pow CTS. They know that Chancellor von Bethman- Hollweg, rightly expressed the general sentiment in his speech in the Richstag on June 5, when he said This victory, too, shall not make us vainglorious. We know that England is not subdued or conquered by this battle.'
 Beside the battle of the Skagerrak the other events of the second year of the war, navaYly speaking, pale into insignificance. In the first year the activity of German submarines aroused general astonishment. In the second year their activity was sharp ly circumscribed, but nevertheless. the successes in war upon commerce were | considerable in comparison with those or Lne llTst ycaI'
 "On the other hand, the destruction of warships by submarines occurred but seldom. The U-27 destroyed an English protected cruiser in the North sea on August 10, 1915. Another of our boats sank the French armored 1 cruiser Admiral Charnier, in the east l ern Mediterranean on February 8, 1 1916. A number of minor war vessels also were sunk.
 English submarines did some dam age to German commerce in the Baltic and succeeded in torpedoing several of our warships, like the armored crui- ser Prince Albert, October 23; Undine. November ', and Bremen, December IT.
 | Special mention Is merited by the hold fights of our marine aircraft and their important scout work in the North sea and Baltic. Attacks were made against fortified places on Eng lands coast, and the English were able to destroy only two airships. No. 15 on April and No. ' on May 4. Within a few hours our airships are 4 able to reconnoitre the entire North sea, and they did valuable service in the battle off Skagerrak. Marine aero | planes also did excellent work, and especially distinguished themselves on the Baltic, where they were of the utmost value in various ways. On several occasions they were able even to take the offensive with success, damaging warsbips with bombs and capturing merchantmen.
 "In the Black sea and the Mediter- ranean German submarines, working with those of Austria-Hungary, oper- ated successfully in war against com merce and destroyed numerous trans
 ports laden with troops and war ma
 terial. In the Black sea the Yawuse