The New York herald., 1921-12-30
Continued from First Page.


--
nations which did not take effect until
assent had been received.
Mr.. Balfour suggested at this point
that the five Powers present could agree
between themselves to outlaw submarine
warfare against merchant vessels. even
before world assent to such a proposal
suggestion and Mr.. Balfour then pro-
posed to amend the last portion OF the
rrohibitive declaration so as to read:
"They declare their assent to such
prohibition and they agree to be bound
forthwith thereby as between them
selves. and they invite all other nations
to adhere to the present agreement"
The discussion for the day ended at
this point. those associated with Mr..
Root in the subcommittee to draft the
first declaration already accepted IN
principle. being the following: Great
Britain, Sir Auckland Geddes; France
Vicc-Admiral de Bon and M. Kammerer
Italy. Senator Ricci; Japan. Mr.. Hani-
bara.
The naval committee Of the confer
ence debated the Root resolutions
throughout the day before arriving at
its decision to turn Article /. OF the
resolutions over to a committee with in
structions to draft it's language without
notifications of the principles stated in
the original proposal.
Secretary Hughes invited the discus
sion Immediately upon the convening of
the naval committee and Mr. Balfour
for the British group declared that
providing that Article I. did In fact real
ly embody the existing rules of war"
he personally believed 1t desirable that
these should be reaffirmed in their re-
lation to submarine warfare"
Reiterating that he spoke only for
himself, Mr.. Balfour said that he be-
lieved "a formal and authoritative
statement that submarines had no
license to break the rules by which other
ships Of war were bound could do moth
ing but good
Admiral De Bon, OF the French group,
said he shared wholly Mr.. Balfour's
views and that the French delegation
gave "in principle our general adhesion
to the statement that submarines
should Of necessity be bound by the
rules of international law"
But as this law Is of a very special
nature" Admiral De Bon said. ut 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 ad-
wise US as to its opinion In regard TO
the wording to be adopted"
Sees Possible Conflict.
Senator Schanzer pointed out that the
italian delegation had already given
"our full adhesion to the aim to which
Mr.. Roots proposal tends" but added
that the Italians also thought formula
ton of the rules of war for submarines
should be examined by a committee OF
jurists. The text of the Root resolu-
tions, he said. had been cabled to Rome
and the delegation was awaiting event
ual remarks" from its Government.
Senator Schanzer pointed out that
Article I and Article Of the Root
proposals. appeared to conflict, inasmuch
as Article l admitted with certain reser-
vations of the destruction Of merchant
craft by submarines, while Article
definitely prohibits" use of submarines
for destruction Of merchant ships
Il should wish. therefore," he said
Ito know In what way the second reso
luton tallies with the first"
The italian spokesman also suggested
that "a clear definition Of merchant
craft" might throw light on the ques
ton involved. He invited an explanation
from Mr.. Root
STR Robert Borden, for Canada, said
he understands Mr.. Root to have SCI
forth existing rules which had been
or should have been. the general prac
tice in the past to govern the action o.
nations In time of war;" and had n,
doubt these rules were correctly state
and should have been followed by bel
ligerent vessels during the recent war
although in fact they had been wan
tonly violated" But Mr.. Roots pro
posal went much further. he added
and the signatory Powers were asked
to pledge themselves to recognize "th'
practical impossibility of using subma
rines as commerce destroyers' withou
violating the accepted laws of war ant
to declare their assent to prohibition Of
the use of submarines against merchan
craft and invite adherence OF othel
Powers to this declaration.
Sir Robert said he thought 1t "wis'
and indeed essential In the interests o.
humanity that this proposal should b.
accepted" but that the exact wording
might be considered by an expert body
provided that this should not proven
action by this conference" He also de
clared himself In favor of Mr.. Root.
third suggested declaration, holdint
submarine commanders personally re
sponsible and subject to penalty for act
| OF piracy for any violation Of the rules
whether by order OF their Government!
| or not.
The Japanese delegation was In accord
| s.vith thu substance of Article l." of tn,
! Root resolutions. Mr.. Hanihara said. bu
he added he believed the question shoult
! be referred to experts for drafting.
mot that we have any particular
point in mind on which we have observa
tions to offer" he said. but merely II
order to make II sure that 1t leaves
nothirs to be desired as to its precis
wording"
Mr.. Hanihara suggested that the ex
perts might be instructed mot to touci
the substance of It,"
Mr.. Roots Reply.
Replying to Senator Schanzer's in
ouiry. Mr.. Root said Il was obvious
Article III. could not be consistent will
Article l., since It proposed change II
international law.
Article L." he said, us a statement o
existing law. Article H., II adopted
would constitute n change from existing
law. and therefore II Is impossible L
! say II Is not inconsistent"
AS to Senator Schanzer's suggestion
that merchant ships be defined I'm TIL
| proposed five Power declaration MI
Root said: Nothing is more clearly o
better understood than the subject W
call merchant ship. The merchant ship