Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 17.pdf/384

 THE NORTH SEA INQUIRY upon Admiral Rojdestvensky or any of fired upon, according to their testimony, his subordinates. The Imperial Govern the torpedo-boats retired and subsequently ment sincerely deplores that there should disappeared. This was the testimony of have been innocent victims of the incident. men trained in naval science and accus The responsibility of the chief of the squad tomed to all kinds of craft, some of whom, ron being eliminated, the Imperial Govern at least, had served on torpedo-boats, who ment has, moreover, no intention whatever stated that they recognized the craft by to evade material compensation (réparation certain peculiarities of construction. Cap matérielle), and would be prepared to in tain Klado, of the Russian fleet, stated demnify the innocent victims of the fire that they had been warned of certain sus of her squadron, and to repair the damage picious craft, resembling trawlers. caused thereby. It proposes to submit the The British offered evidence tending to fixing and the allotment of these indem show that there were no torpedo-boats in nities to a tribunal to be chosen from the the vicinity at the time. Russia objected permanent Court of Arbitration at The to this, not without reason, as an attempt Hague. to prove a negative and not entitled to as It is plain that Russia concentrates her great weight as the positive testimony of effort in her summary upon the justifica her experts. She also raised the objection tion of Admiral Rojdestvensky. However, that those on board the trawlers were at a she never abandoned the proposition that great disadvantage in being at such a slight there were torpedo-boats approaching the elevation as to render it impossible for squadron at the time of the firing and them to see as far as could the Russian never conceded that these did not belong officers from the bridges of the war-ships. to a hostile fleet. In the observations or But it should also be borne in mind that argument on behalf of Russia, the evidence the Russian officers were, one and all, to a was ably reviewed and a strong effort greater or less degree, interested witnesses. made to show the actual presence of the The British introduced a naval expert, alleged torpedo-boats, as established by the who stated that it is impossible to recog weight of the evidence. nize a torpedo-boat at a greater distance Briefly, then, it may be said that the than one mile, even with the aid of a search four points set forth in the British sum light. The Russians testified that they had mary were negatived by Russia and the fired on the supposed torpedo-boats at a issues finally submitted to the Commission distance of about two miles. were substantially those presented in the Costelloe, mate of the Gull, one of the "Cases" at the outset. trawlers, stated that he saw a boat which he at first thought was a torpedo-boat, but CONCERNING THE EVIDENCE he afterwards concluded it was the Missioni. As to the presence of torpedo-boats ship, Alpha. G. K. Green, skipper of the The officers of the Russian fleet were unan Gull, testified that after the firing had con imous in their testimony that they saw tinued for some little time he saw a boat two torpedo-boats approaching the flag-ship, headed toward the Russian ships. Her one from either side, without lights or with lights were out. On sighting her he said lights covered. They thought they could to the chief engineer, "That's a torpedonot be mistaken, as they were observing boat"; but added immediately afterwards; the suspicious craft with the aid of glasses "That is not a torpedo-boat. It is the and search-lights. Lieutenant Ellis testified vessel which has turned in the direction of that the torpedo-boats were plainly visible the men-of-war." (The Crane.) He kept by the light of the bursting shells. When his eye on the boat and afterwards saw her