Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1922-01-10

garding the bombardment of unde-
Tended towns to the action Of air
craft. OF course, when the rule limit
ed bombardment to defended towns.
of undefended towns. 1t had reference
to military or naval operations
against towns that afforded military
obstacles to those operations, and as
10 those towns the provision was
That the commander should notify the
might have an onDGrfunitv to with
draw. AS to the undefended towns, he
must not bt rlbartl t1rm at all
Now, those distinctions did not seem
to TIT bombardments from the sky. No
town was defended against such bonn
applied. 1t did not prohibit the bonn
bardment of Paris, because of the forti-
ncations surrounding Paris. 1t was a
defended town. Most Of the cities in
Europe had some sort of defense He
fully sympathized with the view which
Senator Schanzer took. If the commit
tee were going to act. he wished Senator
Schanzer would apply his very acute
intellect towards making this rule more
definitely applicable to the existing cir
cumstances of aircraft and towns de-
Tended as against land attacks but
wholly undefended as against air at
tacks. and resolve the uncertainty that
resulted from the fact that the rules
were not made for air attacks. He
thought the committee would render
very useful service if it could do that,
laf beyond merely repeating a rule and
leaving this uncertainty.
Rules Have Restrictions.
When one considered these two rules.
that a defended town must not be
bombarded without notice sufficient
to enable the innocent-the women
and the children and non com batants
ITO withdraw, and that an undefend-
ed town must not be bombarded at
all. when one considered these two
rules. the spirit of them could pre-
vent aircraft from bombarding any
town whatever. Bombard railroad
junction. station crossing? Yes.
lombard a munitions factory? Yes.
But the center OF an innocent popula-
ton: No, not under any circum-
stances at all. For that reason, Mr..
Root concluded, the rule was made
quate. and ii the committee were go
ing to speak. 1t ought to make 1t ade-
quatc.
be general acceptance Of the spirit
and purpose of the proposal made by
Senator Schanzer 1t was obvious
from the discussion that in detail the
matter was one which. like other
rules relating to war, would require
the most careful and probably pro-
tracted consideration of a commits
sion of jurists, in order that the new
situation which had been developed
should be carefully considered, and
rules framed with precision to meet
them.
Warfare Rules Progress.
The chairman said that the COM
mittee was now considering the
recommendation of the subcommittee
that rules of warfare should be con-
sidered by further conference. He
suggested for the consideration of
the committee that instead of taking
that course, provision should be made
for the creation through the action or
the powers here represented. OF a
commissions Of jurists. which should.
at an early date, take into considera-
ton the question of rules of war
which seemed to be demanded by new
exigencies and revelations on the
adaptation of new instruments OF
warfare, to the end that reeomme nda-
tions might be presented to the pow
ers for their acceptance. The chalr-
man feared that future conference.
for example. dealing with question
of this technical character-technica
in the sense that it would require
very close study by jurists-wouid
find itself much in the same position
that the committee was in; 1t "ouid
have to wait until IL Was dusiSeo ~
Perhaps the best form that this
could be put in. and the most prac-
teal action. would be for the powers
here to agree to designate members
of a commission Of jurists. who
should make a report ana recon-
mendation.
View of Sir Robert Borden.
Sir Robert Borden said that at the
previous meeting he had made a sug-
gestion on this subject. He was.
however, quite content that what he
had said then should be LETT Tor the
consideration of the proposed future
conference or commission; f Even "a
treme difficulty in dealing with a
question so complicated in its nature.
1t was obvious that the present con-
ference could not deal with IT satls,
factorily. Senator Root had observed
ton factory might properly be SUD
jected to bombardment. But, mas
much as modern warfare by its very
nature involved all the energies OF
each nation engaged. It would pc
found that railway tnnct Innh n man
of attack were everywhere scattered
among the habitations OF the inno-
cent population. Accordingly. 1t
would be necessary to CONSIDER now
far and by WndL TestTicIiohS ~
bombardment of such points couia pc
prevented: and. on the other HAND, 20
consider whether it would be feasible
to prohibit absolutely any attacks on
such war ebjectives. The subject was
an entirely proper one for some ~.
ture commission or triounai. Dut III
the establishment of such commls,
sion could be appropriately connneo
to the five powers here represented.
The chairman replied that 1t was
his idea that it should not be so con-
fined, but that the representatives
of the five nations should initiate the
nroiect. He said that he supposed
that a resolution for the constitution
of such a commission of turists would
have to be considered most carefully
in order that it should De framed
with precision and that 1t might
well be committed to the committee
on drafting, with Instructions to
bring in an appropriate resolution to
the end sought 1t might be suffi-
Gent now to declare the adherence OF
the committee in principle to this.
that the nations here represented
should provide for the appointment
of a commission of turists to con-
slider the rules. of war which were
affected by the events of the late
war, and also require Investigation
in the light of the development Of
new agencies of warfare; and he
would ask If there was any objec-
ton to adherence to that principle,
leaving the precise resolution to be
formulated by the committee on
drafting.