The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-01-01

from survivors were extremely conflict
ing, they agreed on the statement that
tho vessel was sunk while passengers
were still on board. Consequently II
was on this fact alone-and not on any
charge that the submarine did not give
w~arning-that the demands were sent TO
Austria, officials explained to-day. The
complaint OF the American Government.
they said, was principally against the
method Of attack.
4 Practical DisavowsI.
From those portions Of the note which
have been examined. Department cni-
cials say that while II does not appear
that Austria has denounced the attack
itself AS illegal and indefensible' her
acquiescence in the demand OF the Amer
lean Government for punishment OF the
commander is practical admission OF the
illeeality and indefensibility Of the
method Of attack. especially when
coupled with an agreement to max.
reparation for the lives Of the Ameri-
cans who were left on board when the
vessel sank.
A TO her refusal 10 make reparation
for any lives lost because OF the cap
Sizing Of tho improperly launched ire
boats officials of the Department did not
care tonight 90 comment.
Satisfaction is taken in the expression
In the note hal Austria "can positively
concur In the principle that enemy prl-
vate vessels. 50 far a. they do not nee
or offer resistance, shall no: be destroyed
before the persons aboard are secured"
This principle. say officials. Is funda-
mental TO the position taken by the
American Government throughout the
Lusftania and other submarine warfare
correspondence with Germany. Austrias
acceptance OF it not only amounts. they
say to the assurances given by Ger
many after the sinking q the Arabic
but go even further for whereas. II Is
pointed out. Germany's assurances were
limited to liners, those from Austria in
ciude all enemy private vessels"
whether freish' or passenger.
Because OF these concessions. the
friendly and conciliatory tone Of the
Austrian reply and what officials regard
as the manifestations u good faith
throughout the doctrine the prediction
u held out In responsible am,rters to-
night that the United States Government
10 not likely to stand on the precise let
ters OF its demands.
II Is regarded as likely shat the next
note to Austria will be decidedly friendly
in tor and will not hesitate TO express
qualification over the willingness OF the
Austrian Government TO subscribe TO
the principles commended for by the
United States for the safeguarding of
innocent non-cornbatants on the high
seas.
Whether this Government will make
. point of its demand for an express dis
avowal remains of course TO he decided.
but from the atmosphere In State De-
partment circles 1t IL not the present in
tention 10 do this, but rather to let the
correspondence resolve itself into AMIGA
bile negotiations similar to those with
Germany In the Lusitania case following
the settlement of the Arabic case.
Ever since the last Ancona note was
sent TO Austria by the American Gov
ernment 1t has been consistently pre-
dicted in these dispatches that " Aus
tria's reply was a partial concession.
with assurances for the future. the
United states would not refuse to dis
cuss any statement of fact which Aus
tria might present tending 10 repudiate
or qualify nor Admiralty standpoint