The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1917-03-07


arose without laying down rs funda-
mental legal conception But In us
note of October 10. 1918. referring
to the Ancopa case, II reserved 10
itself the right to bring UP Tor ais
cussion at a later date difficult inter
national questions which arise In con-
nectIon with submarine warfare. IL
Il now refers to this reservation ana
now briefly discusses the question OF
sinking enemy vessels. to which that
note refers. II is guided by the des re
to show the American government
that II now. as heretofore, strictly ad-
heres TO the assurance already given
and endeavors by clearing up that
important question arising from sun
marine warfare because touched
the laws of humanity TO avoid mis-
UNDERSTANDINGS between the monarchy
and the American union.
above all the Austro Hungarian
government desires to emphasize that
il is also it's opinion that the thesis
st up by the American government
which also Ii represented in various
med records, that enemy mer'
chantmen apart from cases OF al
tempted flight and resistance, must
not be destroyed without precautions
sons aboard. forms, so to- say the
kernel of the whole subject Regard
cd from a higher standpoint, this
thesis can. Of course be ranked in
further suggestive connection. and
from that view its domain OF april
cation can be marked out more ex-
activ.
Claims General Warning Is Legal.
Prom the laws OF humanity which
the Aus'ro- Hungarian government
and the Washington cabinet take In
the same manner as Judging the lines.
the more general principle can be
derived that Then executing the right
OF destroying enemy merchantmen
the loss Of human life shout as far
as POSSIBLE be avoided. To this prin-
cipie the belligereDt can only do
Justice by issuing warning before ex-
crciFtng the right. Therein he can
choose the way which the afore-
mentioned thes'~ of the American
government indicates according to
which the commander OF the war
vessel himself gives warning so that
the crew and passengers could bring
themselves into safety In the last
moment. or the government of bel
liEerent states can " this LIS rocog-
niZcd as an Inevitable necessity OF
war issue warming of full effect also
before tho departure of the vessel
which is to he sunk or finally. IL can,
II Il establishes extensive measures
against enemy sea trade employ a
general warning FOR all enemy vessels
IN question
Neutrais On Bciligrrcnt Ships Take
Own Risk.
The principle that neutrals in war
times also should enjoy the ad-
vantages OF freedom Of the seas re-
1 fers only to neutral vessels, not to
neutral persons on board enemy YES
sells because belliHerents as is we'll
known are entitled to prevent the
enemy's sea traffic as far IS they are
bic. Being In posse ssion OF the neces-
sarv war r'ears and considering II
necessary for the attainment OF their
war ans they can prohibit sea traffc
NJ enemy merchantmen an pain OF
their destruction. provides they have
previously announced this TO be their
, intention so that everyone. whether
enemy or neutral. may be enabled to
avoid endangering life. Even II
6oubts should arise regarding the
t,,stiflablencss Of such procedure and
sf tho enemy should threaten re
prlsals then this would be an ara'F
for settlement between the bell'ger-
teuts only who, rs generally recognized
are entitled TO make the high seas
| fine scene of military operations ara
to OPPOSE any Interference with their
enterprises and to decide for them
selves what measures should be taken
| against enemyi sea trafnc
Destruction without Warning.
| THAT the principle according to
which care must be taken for the
sak zf aboard under
goes exceptions the American govern
ment recognized. But the Austro-
Hungarian government believes that
destruction without warning is, ad-
n,issible not only when vessel ices
or offers resistance. 1t appears--fo
mention only one example-~that the
character OF the vessel itself also must
be taken into consideration, Mer-
chantmen or other private vessels
which carry a military garrison or
arms aboard In ordsr to commit
hostile acts OF any kind may. accord =
ing to valid rights. be destroyed with
ont hesitation.
THE Austro- Hungarian govern
ment need not call attention TO the
fact that the belligerent Is released
of all consideration for human fe II
his opponent sinks enemy merchant
mon without previous warning, as
happened with the vessels Electra
Germany. Duhrovnik tAustr'an).
Zagrcb tAustrian). etc, which already
LAS been repeatedly censur"d, ard in
his respect the Austro- HUNGARIAN
government never returned Ike for
IKE. notwithstanding Its unconiested
right. In the course OF the c"tre war
Austro Hungarian war vesso'e have
not sunk one enemy meroha1tman
without previous. II only general,
warning.
The repeatedly mentioned thesis Of
the United States government also al
lows various Interpretation IN EAR.
namely. as II In doubtful whether. as
g asserted from various sidcs only
armed resistance Justified the dest~uc-
ton of vessel with persons aboard,
or resistance Of another kind. as is
shown Ii the crew Intentionally neg
iects to take the passengers into boats
the Ancona casn--or if the pe-$cn-
gers themselves refuse to enter noats.
According 10 the opinion of the Aus
fro-Hungarfan govern -nAnt. the de-
~truc'son Of a warned vessel without
~escuing the persons ohoard Ia al
'-''ss'h'n in css"s of the latter kind
hscaupa otherwise II would ho 'rft to
a.