Evening star., 1921-12-30
FORMER CODE IRAMPLED
UNDER FOOT, SAYS ROOT
There Must Be No Recurrence of Lusitania
Horror; Attitude Of Delegates Strive
To Auiue at Common Understanding:

The following official statements
meetings of the arms conference
subcommittee:
The eighth joint meeting of the COM
mittee on the limitation of armament
and the subcommittee on naval limi-
tation. was held this morning, Decem-
Der 20, at IL o'clock in the Pan-Amer-
lean building. The chairman (Mr.
ing that if there were no objections.
the committee would take up the res
olutions proposed and read Yesterday
by Mr.. Root relative to the action OF
submarines in warfare. 1t seeEed
best to take the articles up separately.
The first article related to rules
deemed an established part Of inter-
national law. 1t summarized in
clear. concise manner the existing
rules governing the action of bellig-
erent ships of war in relation to mer-
chant craft and stated the uneQuivo-
cal position that belligerent sub
marines were not exempt from these
rules. He then invited discussion.
Mr.. Balfour said that, as he UNDER
stood the question which Mr.. Hughes
had put. it referred to the first of Mr..
Roots propositions which, as Mr..
Hughes had said. purported to be
statement in clear and explicit Ian
guage of the existing rules Of war
and their application to submarines.
So far as he was personally concerned.
he agreed that such statement
should be made. He was not lawyer
enough to say whether the existing
rules were correctly summarized, and
on this he would have to consult his
own legal advisers. Provided, how
ever. that the resolution did really
embody the existing rules of war. he
thought it most desirable that these
rules should be reaffirmed in their re-
1ation to submarine warfare. Per
haps on this matter he ought only to
speak for himself. He personally
held the view that a formal and au-
thoritative statement that submarines
had no license to break the rules by
which other ships of war were bound
could do nothing but good.
Favored by De Bon.
Admiral De Bon said:
Il share wholly the views expressed
by Mr.. Balfour. TIE French delega-
tion has repeatedly had occasion to
condemn the practices followed by
the German submarines during the
last war.
I'VE are then thoroughly imbued
with the high humanitarian motives
which have dictated tre resolutions
presented by Mr.. Root, to which we
give in principle our general adhe-
sion. But we have no juriSt in our
delegation, and we recognize that Ger
tain of these resolutions have a hear
ing on the complicated rules of in
tornational law.
"Wa can then hardly do otherwise
than to subscribe to the spirit OF
these resolutions and to repeat that
the submarine should of necessity be
bound by the rules of international
law. But as this law is Of a very spe-
cial nature it seems to us that the
most practical solution would be to
refer the consideration of the text
submitted by Mr.. Root to a. committee
of jurists which would advise us as
to it's opinion in regard to the word
ing to be adopted"
Schanzer In Accord.
Mr.. Schanzer said:
II entirely associate myself with
Mr.. Balfour's and Admiral de Bon's
remarks We gave yesterday our full
adhesion to the aim to which Mr..
think that the question of formulat-
ing rules for the use Of submarines
in war is above all. a legal question.
which ought to be examined by a
competent committee of jurists.
I'VE have forwarded the text of Mr..
and are awaiting eventual remarks
from the same.
AT any rate. it might be useful
even now to point out a few ques-
tons to which the proposal might
give rise in order to contribute to the
future discussion.
1t seems to me difficult, in the first
place, to separate the first resolution
from the second, which definitely pro-
hibits the use of submarines for the
destruction of merchant craft. The
first resolution. on the contrary, ad-
mits In determined cases the destruc-
tion of merchant craft after certain
provisions have been observed. I
should wish. therefore, to know in
what way the second resolution tall
lies with the first.
Wants Craft Defined.
''In the second place, I believe that
1t might be useful to give a clear
definition of merchant craft in order
to make them recognizable and to es-
tablish plainly in which cases a sub
marine shall abstain from attacking
chip and in which cases. on the contrary,
attack is to be permitted, as for ex-
ample, In the case of a merchantmen
regularly armed or of a privateer.
L have not made these remarks in
any spirit of opposition. as we have de-
cided to collaborate to the best of our
ability in order to attain the aim which
the American delegation has in view.
My reason for speaking was to give Mr..
Root the opportunity for such explana-
Gon as might throw light on the terms
in which his proposals are formulated"
Sir Robert Borden said that, in Offer
ing a few observations in regard to
the proposals presented, he was with
out the advantage of having heard
Mr.. Roots explanations on the pre-
vious day. Further, his views were
purely personal and must not be re-
garded as binding on any other men,
ber of the delegation to which he
belonged. AS he understood the pro-
posals, Mr.. Root had set forth exist
ing rules which had been, or should
have been. the general practice in the
in time of war In setting forth
article l. Mr.. Root had placed the
rules of submarines on a much higher
plane than had been the case with the
nations with whom we had been at
war for a period of four years. They
had wantonly violatd these rules. He
had no doubt that the statement Of
should have been followed by bellig-
erent vessels. Mr.. Roots proposal,
however. went much further. In
article 2 the signatory powers were
asked to pledge themselves to recog-
nize the practical impossibility Of
using submarines as commerce de-
stroyers without violating the re-
civilized nations for the protection Of
lives of neutrals and non-combatants,
and to the end that the prohibition Of
such use shall be universally accepted
as g. part of the law of nations they
were asked to declare their assent to
such prohibition and to invite all
other nations to adhere thereto.
Would Set Punishment.
As he understood this article. it was