New-York tribune., 1921-12-30
!Root Opposes Referring Submarine
Curb 10 FCommiftee of Lawyers .

Associated Press - The naval com.
:Tnittee of the Washington conference
sdebated the Root resolutions through.
sout the day before arriving at it's deci
ssslon to turn Article I of the resolu.
,ssions over to committee with instruc.
lions to draft its language without
smodliications of the principles stated
in the original proposal. Secretary
rHughes invited the discussion imne-
ss0lately upon the convening of the
naval committee, and Mr.. Balfour for
sthe British group declared that, pro
.vidlng that Article l did in fact "really
sembody the existing rules of war, he
,.personally believed it desirable that
these should be reafhrmed in their re
..iat1on to submarine warfare"
s. Reiteratine that he spoke only 70,
.shlmself, Mr.. Balfour said he believed
a. formal and authoritative statement
.sthat submarines had no license tc
#break the rules by which other ships
s.tof war were bound could do nothing
s.but good"
< Admiral de Bon, of the French group
sssaid he shared wholly Mr. Balfour's
Ssyiews and that the French delegation
asgave "in principle our general adhe.
szSlon" to the statement that submarines
L should of necessity be bound by the
;srules of international law"
"BNt as this law is of a verv spe
clai nature" Admiral de Bon said, "it
/. y seems to us that the most practica
stscluticf would be to refer the con
Esideraticn of the text submitted by Mr.
ss.Eoot to 8 committee OF jurists, whicY
sswould advise Us as to it's opinion IL
.sregard to the wording to be adopted.
IL View of Rome Awaited
= Senator Sehanzer pointed out tha
The Italian delegation already hac
given "our full adhesion to the aim t.
(Which Mr.. Roots proposal tends" bu
radded that the Italians also though
tsform uiation of the rules of war fol
sssubmarines should be examined by
. ..con'lnittee Of jurists. The text of the
sresolutions, he said, had been cab.et
sso Rome and the delegation was await
tang eventual remarks" from its gov
fsernment
i. Senator schanzer pointed out tina
ssArticle l and Article IL of the Roo
s<proposals appeared to conflict, mas
sslnuch as Article | admitted with Ger
;.tain reservations OF the destruction O
{smercaant craft by submarines, whil
ssArticle II definitely prohibits" use O
sssubmarnes for destruction of mer
,sehant ships.
/: Il should wish, therefore, ne said
Ito know in what way the second 1eso
sxlutlon tallies with the first
:. The Italian spokesman also suggest
81 ed that "a clear definition of merchan
craft might throw light on the cues
uon involved. He invited an expIana
sstlon from Mr.. Root.
~ Sir Robert Borden, for Canada, sal,
Il he understood Mr.. Root to have Sc
aorth existing rules which had been
or should have been, the general prac
Il tlce IN the past TO govern the action O
IL nations In time of war; and had n
& oonnt these rules were correctly state
ss and should have been followed by bel
M ngerent vessels during the recent wal
aitnough IN fact they had been IVAN
trny violated" But Mr. Roots propc
sal went much further, he added. an
the slgnatory powers were asked t
q pieoge themselves to recognize 9Th
~ practical impossbility of using subms
fihes as commerce destroyers" withoy
ts violating the accepted laws of war, an
20 declare their assent to prohibition {
the use OF submarines against me-
II chant craft and invite adherence {
other powers to this declaration.
T. Thinks Restrictions Essential
Il The speaker said he thought it "wis
= and indeed essential in the interests {
I. humanity that this proposal should b
/: accepted" but that the exact wordin
+ might be considered by an expert bod,
i provided that this should not prever
4 action by this conference" Sir Robe,
!. also declared himself in favor Of M
= Roots third suggested declaration
i holding submarine commanders person
:: silly responsible and subject to penait
J. Tor acts OF piracy for any violation @
Is the rules, whether by order of thci
= governments or not.
The Japanese delegation was in ac
, cord with the substance of Article /
OF the Root resolutions Mr.. Hanihar
said, but he added he believed the cues
sion should be referred to experts 70
drafting.
Not that we have any particula
point in mind on which we have obser
vations to Offer" he said, "but meye]
IN order to make it sure that it leave
nothing to be desired as to its precis
wording"
Mr.. Hanihsra suggested that the ex
perts might be instructed "not to touc
the substance of it,
Replying to Senator Schanzer's in
quiry, Mr.. Root said 1t was obviou
Article 2 could not be consistent wit
Article I, since 1t proposed a chang
in international law.
article L." he ssid as a statemen
of existing law; Article 2, IL adopted
would constitute change from exist
ing law and, therefore, it Is impossibl
to say it is not Inconsistent"
Law Clear on Shipping
As to Senator .Schanzer's suggestio
that merchant ships be defined in tn
proposed five power declaration, MI
Root said:
Nothing is more clearly or bette
understood than the subject we cal
merchant ship. The merchant ship, it
treatment. its rights, its protection an
its immunities arc st the base of tn
law of nations"
He added that definitions OF merchan
ships would "only serve to weaken an
confuse" the proposed declaration. II
had hoped yesterday, Mr.. Root con
~ t,nued. that the delegations would see
expert legal oplnion on hia proposal