International Notes: Naval War Notes

STRATEGY

 

THE WAR AT SEA.—By an English Naval Officer.—In some quarters there is an inclination to contrast the sea strategy of the Allies with that of Germany to the detriment of the former. It is said, for example, that while the German strategy is offensive, ours is precisely the reverse. There is no foundation for such a charge when, as Sir Eric Geddes pointed out in the House of Commons last week, the incidents of the sea warfare are beheld in proper perspective. As to the Austro-Hungarian fleet, the critics make no mention of it, although, as a matter of fact, the enemy's sea strategy in the Adriatic is a replica of Germany's in more northern waters. It is the strategy of a contained fleet, a strategy of sallies and raids. The Austro-Hungarian raid upon the drifters in the Straits of Otranto was, strategically speaking, on a par with the recent raid upon the convoy in the North Sea, the enterprise directed northward, the outcome of which was the Battle of Jutland, and the raids upon the islands in the Riga Gulf, with fitful advances in the Gulf of Finland. Opportunities for offensive operations in the nature of sallies or raids are denied to the British fleet, and, in fact, to the navies of the Allies. It is only when the enemy endeavors to carry out a raid with greater audacity and less precaution than usual that the chance of the British seaman comes, and he takes it as Beatty did at the Dogger Bank, and the lighter craft of the Harwich and Dover Patrols on other occasions.

 

There was a time, it is true, when, from certain admissions made by Mr. Balfour, it looked as if we were exchanging the traditional strategic policy for something of a different character. However, in an interview with a representative of the Associated Press of America on April 12 of this year, Sir John Jellicoe made it abundantly clear that if such was the case in his predecessor's time it was not so when Sir Edward Carson was at the Admiralty. The First Sea Lord explained that owing to the fact that the enemy's surface ships had been driven from the seas, our strategic policy was of an offensive-defensive nature, for practically the only active enemy were the underwater craft engaged in the attack upon the Mercantile fleet.

 

The critics of Admiralty strategy forget or ignore the experience of history. There were times then—long periods—when our fighting admirals were engaged in watching and waiting for the enemy's fleet to put to sea. They had not to contend with the mine and the submarine, which have not so much affected the strategy of sea warfare as its tactics. Where Cornwallis and Collingwood and Nelson could, weather permitting, maintain a close watch on the enemy's forces, our admirals are driven by modern inventions to preserve a greater distance. Yet it cannot be said that the enemy's "tip-and-run" raids have ever brought them any material success or can have afforded any substantial satisfaction to their originators. Moreover—and this is an important point—our naval offensive in days gone by was, as a rule, effected with military assistance. The enterprises were more often than not conjoint operations, such as those which in the early part of the war placed the German possessions oversea in our hands. Such operations, although the Admiralty critics choose to ignore the fact, are being carried out every day of the war. All our military undertakings can only be executed with the aid and assistance of the fleet. The battles on the French and Flanders fronts when looked at in the proper light are conjoint operations, for the bases from which they are being carried out are not on the Continent but oversea, and if the water communications were seriously menaced the armies would be hampered in their movements, and possibly their efforts might be brought to nought.

 

It may be said without contradiction that if the navy is to carry out any further offensive enterprise it can only do so with the help of a large military force to act as its spearpoint. In every thrust which we are now making, from Flanders to Mesopotamia, it is the navy which is the shaft of the spear and the military expedition its point. This the Germans know as well as ourselves, and that if they could cut asunder the shaft, the spearpoint would be blunted. Nevertheless, on not a single occasion have they attempted by any definite strategical movement to break that shaft, success in which would bring them a decisive advantage. That they should confine themselves and the use of their naval forces to practically aimless sallies is surely an indication, and a significant one, of their admitted impotence.

 

There is only one phase of the sea warfare upon which recent events appear to have suggested a fair matter for comment. It was officially reported on Monday that six British and French destroyers when patrolling the Belgian coast on Saturday afternoon sighted and attacked three German destroyers and a squadrilla of 17 aeroplanes. A skirmish ensued, in which the enemy destroyers were able to retire under the protection of their land batteries, and the aeroplane formation was broken up by the anti-aircraft gun-fire of our destroyers. The question is suggested, why were not the allied destroyers accompanied by aircraft as were those of the enemy? The same question was asked when the destroyers for the protection of a convoy in the North Sea were surprised by many cruisers and sunk. There may be excellent reasons why our patrols and convoys are unaccompanied by aircraft, but they are not obvious. Sir John Jellicoe, in the interview with the representative of the Associated Press already referred to, is reported to have said in connection with the enemy's raids: "Aircraft are used for reconnaissance, so as to gain information of the movements of the British patrol forces." What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and it is manifest that on both the occasions referred to British aircraft would have been of inestimable yalue, in the one case for advising the approach of the enemy and in the other for dealing a decisive blow at the German aeroplanes.

 

It is well known that there are divisions of the R. N. A. S. in France, some of them engaged on the Flanders front, while others are used for long-distance bombing expeditions, and the brilliant work these airmen have done has been officially reported upon on several occasions. It is not by way of criticising the Admiralty arrangements in regard to aircraft, but merely for the enlightenment of the country, that the question is asked whether the first call upon the services of the R. N. A. S. should not be for patrol work in the North Sea and the Narrows, where there is evidently need for them.

 

Some very interesting light is thrown upon a minor operation of the sea warfare by some quotations in the Daily News from the book in which Count zu Dohna Schloiden has described the exploits of the raider Moewe. The Count states that the object of the cruise was twofold, to lay mines on the enemy coast and then to carry out commerce raiding. He tells how by the use of camouflage the Moewe was able to avoid the British patrols, and then how he dropped his mines without interference. It is not really surprising that the Moewe should have escaped the cordon of auxiliary cruisers, for all experience shows that such attempts are sometimes successful, and the Admiralty have never revealed the number of blockade-runners which have been captured or sunk for one that got through. The only explanation the Count gives of his ability to sink so many ships practically unmolested by the allied cruisers is that he destroyed the wireless installations of his victims as soon as he saw them, and this prevented them from summoning assistance.

 

The Appam escaped destruction, according to the Count's story, because the British administrators among the passengers were reported by the German prisoners to have treated their fellow-countrymen in Sierra Leone and Nigeria with consideration and kindness. The action of the captain of the Clan Mactavish in putting up a fight the Count describes as criminal recklessness, but he confesses that he liked the sturdy frankness with which the old Scotch sea-dog defended his point of view, says that he shook him by the hand and admitted that in his place he should probably have done likewise. The Count acknowledges that he was forced to return home by the vigilance of the naval scouting service in the West Indies.—Army and Navy Gazette, 3/11.

 

THE BRITISH FLEET AND THE BALTIC.—During and since the recent German offensive operations in the Baltic, the question has been asked as to why the powerful British fleet did not enter the Baltic and assist the Russians in their unequal fight against the stronger German fleet. The answer is that it is quite questionable whether any of the larger units of the British fleet would have survived the passage of the narrow straits between Denmark and Sweden, and that if they had they would have found themselves cut off from their base and unable to receive replenishment of ammunition or stores. The straits through which they would have had to force their way are narrow; they lend themselves to mining operations, and, indeed, are known to be heavily mined; the adjacent bays and islands afford good shelter for submarines and destroyers; and last, but most important of all, the passage through the straits is commanded by seacoast batteries of great strength. It was a case of estimating profit and loss; and since the Russian fleet is comparatively small, and upon the British fleet maintaining its integrity depends the winning or losing of the war, it was felt that any efforts to force the straits leading into the Baltic would have resulted in infinitely greater loss than gain. Furthermore, an attack of this kind would have involved an infringement of the neutrality of Sweden and Denmark— something which it is the policy of the Allies carefully to avoid.—Scientific American, 17/11.

 

SUBMARINE TACTICS.—It is both the opinion of naval experts and the common-sense view of the situation that the decrease in sinkings from submarine attacks is due almost altogether to the' development of defensive tactics against this novel weapon. We have the word of the First Lord of the British Admiralty for it that the Germans are building submarines faster than the warships of Great Britain or the United States are sinking them. Thus the number of weapons in Germany's hands for the conduct of piracy is greater to-day than ever. The difference is that each submarine has lost in its offensive power, because the Allies have developed better defensive tactics in the operation of their transports and merchant vessels.

 

Much of the success of the submarine at the outset was due to the novel character of the attack. The problem of defending merchant ships against submersibles had never been studied sufficiently or worked out in actual war. On the other hand, the submarine offensive had been exhaustively studied for years before the war. Thus the submarine started with the immense advantage of experience in tactical operation. Slowly but surely, however, the merchant ship improved its defence. Unquestionably this defence has now been made so effective that the submarine will henceforth find it increasingly difficult to score the same results.

 

But, by the same token, it is safe to expect that the Germans are to-day hard at work upon the development of new and better tactical plans. One of the great developments in defensive tactics has been the proper organization of the convoy system. The Germans apparently have not yet found a way to make their attack effective against the convoy. But it is not to be doubted that they are to-day at work upon this problem. Better methods of defence will beget improved methods of offence. The process is unending.

 

The main fact to bear in mind is that the Germans still have the weapon. They will find new ways to use that weapon, more effective ways. The war against the submarine must be kept up ceaselessly and with the exercise of all possible power and ingenuity.—Washington Post, 13/11.

 

NO MORE FEAR OF SUBMARINES.—Premier Lloyd George's announcement in the House of Commons that five German submarines had been sunk on November 17 is notable in that it is the first official British statement regarding the destruction of U-boats. It is also important in that it is coupled with the emphatic declaration that there is now no fear of the submarine menace, which controverts the opinion of the head of the Admiralty and also that of our own naval chief. Certainly if the submarines are being destroyed as rapidly as the British premier states the menace in the waters around England and France is very greatly reduced. The ship losses have fallen to the lowest point of the record since the unrestricted submarine warfare began. Perhaps nobody outside of the German Admiralty knows whether this is due to U-boat losses, or to improved methods of ship protection, or to a change of German policy, or a shift of operations to another area. Germany has recovered ground so often since the war began that it is unsafe to accept the lessening of the ship sinkings as evidence that the program in pursuit of which the United States was brought into the war as an antagonist is to be abandoned, or that it is recognized in Berlin as a failure. Germany may be preparing for an extension of the U-boat field to other waters, possibly to the seas near our coast, or to the Mediterranean in conjunction with the campaign in Italy. It is, of course, to be hoped that the defensive and offensive measures adopted by the Allies at sea have beaten the submarines; that the Germans are unable to build new undersea craft as fast as the old ones are destroyed, or that they are meeting more and more difficulty in securing crews for these craft. Lloyd George's positive declaration that the fear of the submarine has passed is in any case the most encouraging word that has come from London in months.—Washington Star, 20/11.

 

THE GATES OF THE MEDITERRANEAN.—British grip on the great waterway from Gibraltar to Aden has been enormously strengthened during the war, and seems likely to be stronger as the war proceeds. Arabia has shaken off Turkish suzerainty .and is friendly. Egypt has become a Sultanate without any connection with the Porte, but more closely connected than ever with the British Empire. Greece, Italy, and France, the three maritime states of the Mediterranean, are, and seem likely to remain, the powerful allies of Britain.

 

In one important respect, however, it must be admitted that the most valuable key position which we hold on the Mediterranean shores has lost its supremely strong influence, for the possession of Gibraltar no longer dominates the Straits and their approaches to the same extent as it did before the appearance of the submarine and of the long-range naval gun. The possession of the Spanish or of the African shore for many miles along the coast enables a naval power to obstruct the Straits and also both to invest and to attack the fortress itself, consequently the real control over the western entrance of the Mediterranean must consist in the combined military and naval power by which Britain is able to enforce her strategy rather than in the local superiority conferred by the mere possession of Gibraltar. The Rock fortress has certainly not ceased to be important; far from it, but it has diminished in importance unless the neighboring coasts are in friendly hands. Britain will in the future have to depend on sagacious diplomacy to ensure this result, and such diplomacy in its turn must depend on the maintenance of suitable and symmetrical naval and military power to give reality to its representations. It would seem, therefore, that we are as far as ever from national disarmament if this all-important waterway is to be kept open to our ships in peace and war, a fact which should not be lost sight of by our plenipotentiaries when insidious proposals for general disarmament are made at the next European Diplomatic Conference, whenever and under whatever circumstances it may be assembled, for therein lurk great dangers to our very existence.—By Captain Battine, Fortnightly Review, November.

 

SEA PORTS NECESSARY FOR GERMAN SECURITY.—The German newspapers contain lengthy accounts of the speech of Grand Admiral von Tirpitz before the Hamburg branch of the fatherland party, in which the admiral said:

 

"Up to the present in this war Great Britain has won, rather than lost. Peace based on the status quo ante or on renunciation, therefore, is out of the question for Germany."

 

With reference to the rumor that Germany could give up Zeebrugge and Ostend if the British evacuated Calais, von Tirpitz said:

 

"The evacuation of Calais would never be equivalent to the loss of such first-class security. Moreover, the channel tunnel will become a fact after the war. For real security we should have, besides Flanders and Antwerp, Calais and Boulogne. The rumor in question is a screen behind which the question if Flanders might be permitted to disappear.

 

"The pretext that we cannot coerce Great Britain and America falls to the ground when we consider the growing scarcity of the cargo space of our ruthless arch-enemy. The time for final decision will come when real distress begins to take the place of merely threatening distress. That time will come. It is only a question of our keeping cool."—Washington Star, 17/12.

 

TILE SOUTH AMERICAN REPUBLICS AND THE WAR AT SEA.—With the entry of Brazil and other South American states into the war a new naval situation has been created in the South Atlantic just as there was when the United States joined the Allies. Then the work of patrolling these waters, which had been performed by the British Navy, was taken over by the American Navy. But there is no reason why it, in its turn, should not be relieved of the duty, in part, at least, by South American ships. Many of them are new and suited to patrol work, but, unfortunately, like the great naval powers in similar case, our latest allies lack sufficient small craft, which will have to be improvised. Energy on their part is important, as the United States needs every vessel afloat she owns for service in the North Atlantic, and so vast will be the expansion of her requirements later on that, however fast she turns out new ships, they will be none too many for the duties they will have to perform. In these circumstances the South American republics can render valuable aid to the allied cause by patrolling their own waters across which a big volume of trade passes. It is estimated that the Seeadler alone destroyed commerce to the value of £6,000,000, so that if the super-submarine is being constructed in large numbers the patrol of South American waters will be an onerous duty. With Brazil and her sister republics Entente Allies, however, the enemy will find fewer facilities for gaining information as to the movements of allied shipping, and still fewer facilities for enabling his submarines to keep the sea.—Army and Navy Gazette, 10/11.

 

ATLANTIC

 

BRITISH NARRATIVE OF U-BOAT FIGHT.—As further illustrating the methods of combating the U-boat, the following details are disclosed by the British Admiralty, which also tells of the superb courage of a R. N. V. R. officer, who swam to and tethered a derelict mine:

 

One of the coastal airships, of a type familiar to visitors at seaside resorts, was recently on patrol, and sighted a steamer in distress. On descending to investigate closer, it was found that she had been torpedoed by an enemy submarine, but was capable of being towed into harbor. The airship summoned assistance by wireless, and until it arrived hovered protectingly round the crippled merchantman. No signs of her late assailant were visible, and in due course the steamer was taken in tow by tugs and headed for harbor. The aerial escort accompanied the tow, and about an hour later sighted the conning-tower of a submarine about five miles southeast of the convoy, apparently maneuvering for another shot. The airship instantly signalled by wireless the position of the submarine to all men-of-war in the vicinity, and swooped down to attack. The submarine saw her coming and dived, but too late to avoid this glittering Nemesis from the skies. Two bombs were dropped simultaneously in front of the swirl of his descent. A violent explosion ensued, followed by oil and air bubbles in ominous quantities. Shortly afterwards a destroyer arrived and investigated with sweeps. The airship, returning to her base for a further supply of bombs and petrol, was overtaken by the following aerial signal: "You've undoubtedly bagged him."

 

On a subsequent occasion this same airship, while flying in company with a west-bound convoy of merchantmen, sighted the track of a torpedo, and a moment later observed a great column of water shoot up alongside one of the steamers. A submarine, relying on the state of the sea for concealment, had with great daring dived beneath the armed escort and torpedoed her victim under their noses. The weather at the time was bad and rapidly getting worse; the airship shot down and along the residual track of the torpedo at a speed of 90 miles an hour, and at the end of the track sighted the outline of a submerged submarine, which, her deadly work done, was leisurely proceeding westward. The airship turned and released her bombs while she hovered above the sinister green, cigar-shaped shadow, and the explosion was followed by a vast evulsion of air bubbles. A calcium flare was dropped to mark the spot, and armed patrol vessels, summoned by signal, made assurance doubly sure with explosive charges. The airship returned to her base in the teeth of a head gale, and landed with the wind blowing 45 miles per hour.

 

A British "oiler" was torpedoed by a submarine at dawn in very thick weather. A patrol ship which was in company at once circled round at high speed in an endeavor to sight the enemy, who had not been seen by either ship. After proceeding for two miles on what the commanding officer of the patrol ship judged to be the most likely course for the submarine, the man-of-war returned to the "oiler," and found her still making way slowly and in no danger of sinking. When about a quarter of a mile from their charge an object was sighted though the thick mist on the starboard beam. Altering course promptly, the patrol ship headed for the object at full speed, and the next moment realized that it was a large submarine on the surface. She was rammed abaft the conning-tower, rolled completely over with a very violent explosion and vanished. The sea was boiling with foam, in the midst of which immense air bubbles rushed to the surface for some minutes. Two men were seen struggling in the water, and life-belts were flung to them. Only one of the men had strength to cling to the life-buoy. He was brought back into harbor, and is now a prisoner. The other sank before a boat could reach him. The patrol ship then took the "oiler" in tow and returned with her to harbor.

 

The spirit of unostentatious gallantry pervading the mine-sweeping service, which has already added to the imperishable traditions of the silent navy, is epitomized by the recent behavior of a lieutenant of the R. N. V. R. This officer was in command of a motor launch attending a flotilla of minesweeping trawlers, when a drifting mine was sighted. A heavy sea was running at the time; and half a gale blowing. Attempts to sink the mine, by gun-fire were unavailing, and darkness was approaching, after which the mine would have been lost sight of and would have drifted away, a menace to navigation. The officer in question accordingly lowered a boat and pulled over to the mine, which was only visible every now and then on the smooth slope of a wave or when the crest broke in foam over the rounded top and sinister horns. Having pulled as close as he dared, the officer jumped overboard and swam to the mine with a line, which he passed through the ringbolt in the top. By this means the motor launch was enabled to tow the grim engine of destruction into smooth water, where eventually it was sunk by rifle fire. It must be remembered that a circular mine afloat in a gale is not the most stable of objects. The ringbolt could only be reached with the utmost difficulty, and a mistake, a grab at one of the horns inadvertently, would have brought the episode to a very swift conclusion.—Army and Navy Register, 17/11.

 

MINE IN BAY OF MALDONADO.—La Manana, a leading newspaper of Montevideo, prints an article in which it says that American officers on board a United States cruiser which recently was in the Bay of Maldonado discovered a submarine mine which was connected by an electric wire with a battery on land.

 

The vessel, the article says, immediately steamed out of the bay without taking on board the targets for which she had put in there.

 

La Manana attributes the presence of the submarine mine in the bay there as the reason why a British cruiser did not call at Maldonado Bay for coal, as it was previously announced she would do.

 

The newspaper expressed the hope that the Uruguayan Government will order an immediate investigation of the report and, if the mine is found, apprehend and punish the persons responsible for it.

 

It asserts that until the matter is fully investigated no warships will put into Maldonado Bay.—N. Y. Herald, 18/11.

 

FIRE BUILT ON DECK SAVES FREIGHTER.—Fires kindled on the hatches of an American freighter saved it from submarine attack recently. Shortly after leaving a European port a U-boat was observed approaching. The captain ordered small blazes made on the hatches, using material almost non-combustible but which produced heavy smoke.

 

When the submarine came close the steamer was stopped. The captain told the U-boat commander he carried explosives and that on account of the fire he was about to abandon the ship. The submarine immediately departed, its commander evidently believing an explosion was imminent.—Washington Star, 19/11.

 

BARS U. S. AIRPLANES OVER SPAIN.—A Madrid dispatch says the Spanish Government has issued a special warning that Spain would regard any flight of American airplanes over her territory as a violation of neutrality and would instruct the military to fire on such airplanes.—Washington Star, 20/11.

 

FIVE OF "ROCHESTER" CREW LANDED IN A LIFEBOAT.—The missing boat from the American steamship Rochester, which was sent to the bottom by a German submarine November 2, has just landed at a port in Ireland, the British Admiralty announced November 20. The boat contained five men, the only survivors from the original boat's crew of 12.

 

Hope had been abandoned for the second officer and 11 other men in a boat from the Rochester, who at the time of the arrival of the five survivors in Ireland had been missing for 58 days. Vice Admiral Sims cabled the Navy Department Saturday that these men had been given up as lost.

 

The landing of the five men reduces the Rochester's death roll from 19 to 14. Four men died of exposure in another boat. Two were killed by the explosion of the torpedo and one was drowned.—Washington Star, 20/11.

 

TRANSPORT "ROSE" RAMMED AND SANK U. S. DESTROYER.—The U. S. destroyer Chauncey, which was sunk at 1 a. m. November 19, was rammed by the transport Rose, according to a dispatch received by the Navy Department from Vice Admiral Sims, November 23.

 

"Both vessels were running without lights at the time of the accident, the Rose crashing into the Chauncey on the port side abreast of the fourth funnel. The after portion of the destroyer immediately submerged, and officers and men in that part were drowned. After the collison the remaining portion of the vessel floated for about an hour and the transport was thus enabled to rescue the remainder of the officers and crew. They were taken to port by the Rose."—Official Bulletin, 23/11.

 

TRANSPORTS COLLIDE; ONE ESCAPES TORPEDO.—The latest American transports to reach a French port had an exciting trip through the submarine zone. The first night in the zone two transports collided. One was slightly damaged, while the other had a small hole torn in her bow and a few projecting guns damaged. Temporary repairs were made and the ships proceeded.

 

The following night a submarine attacked the transports. The wake of a torpedo was seen off the bow of one of the vessels, but no conning-tower or periscope was visible. The transports raced ahead and succeeded in reaching port safely, where the collision damage was repaired.—Washington Star, 24/I11.

 

BRAZIL EXPECTS U-BOATs.—A resident of Rio Janeiro, well known in Brazilian society, has been arrested for photographing sections of the coast, especially near the German colonies. A search of his house revealed extensive plans for the operation and subsistence of submarines in Brazilian waters.

 

The authorities think it is the intention to operate German submarines along the Brazilian coast, if, indeed they have not already arrived. As a result, all navigation lights along the Brazilian coast have been shut off and vessels are navigating without lights of any kind.

 

Fishermen and passengers on coastwise vessels report having seen a submarine near this port, and Brazilian warships have been seeking it. The crew and passengers of a vessel which arrived here recently reported having sighted a Spanish sailing vessel off the island of Arvoredo. The belief was held that this vessel was one of several that were convoying submarines.—N. Y. Herald, 24/11.

 

SEAPLANE, SUBMARINE AND DEPTH BOMB.—The British Admiralty in a recent statement tells how a seaplane destroyed a German U-boat in the following words: "A seaplane attacked an enemy submarine which she had observed apparently maneuvering into position to fire a torpedo at a passing merchant ship. Before the seaplane arrived over the submarine the latter submerged, but three bombs were dropped on the position where he had disappeared from sight. In five minutes' time a large upheaval was noticed where the bombs had been dropped; this could best be compared to a huge bubble, rising some distance above the level of the sea, and distinctly visible for a minute or more. There was no further sign of submarine."—Scientific American, 24/11.

 

GLORY IN U-BOAT FIGHT.—The American destroyers which were responsible for the latest sinking of a German submarine have returned to their base with flags flying. Their victory over the U-boat was one of the cleanest, neatest and quickest pieces of anti-submarine work yet recorded by the American squadron.

 

The submarine was disabled by a depth charge, rose to the surface three minutes after charge was fired, hung hesitatingly at the surface for a few moments and then sank to the final place of lodgment at the bottom of the sea.

 

As she appeared above the water to meet gun-fire from the destroyers at close range, most of her crew clambered on deck and raised their hands.

 

Boats were put off from the destroyer to take the prisoners on board, and while this was going on some members of the crew were seen busy opening the sea cocks below.

 

When the prisoners were removed and a tow line had been attached, the captured craft, filling through the open cocks, went down.

 

The pressure of water at the 200 feet or so depth at which she sank soon completed the work of destruction on the strained plates of the submarine's hull.

 

For a long time bubbles and oil continued to rise in great gulps from the grave where she lay, and then the American made assurance complete in a manner of which it is unnecessary to go into detail.

 

It was daylight, with good visibility, when the periscope was sighted by the lookout of a destroyer, which, with a sister craft was engaged in its customary duties. The submarine commander was just preparing to fire a torpedo, either at one of the destroyers or at a merchantman nearby.

 

"Periscope two points off the starboard bow," sang out a lookout in a voice which could be heard from end to end of the craft. Instantly an alarm to general quarters was sounded and the helm thrown hard over.

 

Signal flags were swung out notifying the sister ship of the exact location of the enemy. At the same time the heliograph began its staccato flashing of orders for a combined attack.

 

A scant 18 inches of periscope had shown above the surface of the sea 400 yards distant for a few instants, and then vanished. In less time than it takes to tell, the destroyer, under the impetus of suddenly opened throttles, had fairly leaped into the track where the periscope had disappeared.

 

At the proper moment the commander on the bridge released a depth charge from its fixed place. The powerful explosive, 300 pounds in weight, in its steel case, sank with a little splash into the destroyer's wake and at the required depth responded to the bidding of its valves and burst in a terrific explosion.

 

A vast extent of water was upheaved and rose in a column to a great height. That the charge had found its mark was shown by a mass of oil and bubbles which marked the spot as the water found its level.

 

Meanwhile a second destroyer passed through the boiling, oily waters and dropped a second depth charge, and then followed the tactics of the first destroyer in circling the spot. The two destroyers did not have long to wait. In less than three minutes there was a rush of water and the U-boat, whale-like, came to the surface not more than 500 yards from the first destroyer.

 

The Americans were taking no chances on a German trick. The gun crews stood with their guns, machine guns and torpedo tubes trained on the stricken enemy ready to let loose a shower of steel in case the submarine showed fight. But the U-boat was badly stricken; the explosive charge had done its work thoroughly.

 

Although the upper part of the boat appeared to have been untouched, it was evident from her actions that the submarine was unmanageable. She was badly listed, owing to the damage to her ballast tank, and it was apparent that her steering gear and probably also her engines had jammed.

 

The three minutes which elapsed between the time the depth charges were fired and the time she emerged, as if catapulted, provide food for interesting speculation.

 

It is probable she was driven to the bottom by the force of the explosion, but retained enough buoyancy to rise to the surface.

 

But by the time she reached the open air the strain had done its work and she hung on the surface of the water only a few moments and then began to settle again, at first hesitatingly, soon with evidence of complete collapse.

 

During the brief period several American sailors jumped into the sea in an effort to get the prize buoyed up with hawsers so she could be towed to port. One line was fastened to the submarine successfully, but before it could be reinforced she gave a final lurch and sank like a plummet, breaking the line.

 

One of the Germans was drowned while being transferred to a destroyer and another died. The latter was buried with military honors.

 

Navy officers assume that the German sailor who died was wounded by shellfire, though it is understood that Admiral Sims' report did not clear up that point.—Washington Post, 25/11.

 

THREE AMERICAN AIRNI EN PICKED UP AT SEA BY PATROL BOAT.—Suffering from cold, exhaustion and hunger, three American naval airmen were picked up by a French patrol boat, November 24, after having been lost at sea for nearly 60 hours.

 

The three men, in a huge triplane hydroairplane, left a French base November 22 in search of four enemy submarines which were reported operating off the coast.—N. Y. Herald, 26/11.

 

NEW GERMAN BARRED ZONE.—A new German barred zone, a dispatch from Berlin via Amsterdam announces, has been established around the Azores, "which have become in economic and military respects important hostile bases of Atlantic navigation." .The new zone is outlined thus: from 39 degrees north latitude and 17 west longitude to 44 north latitude and 27 degrees 45 minutes west longitude; to 44 degrees north latitude and 34 west longitude; to 42 degrees 30 minutes north latitude and 37 west longitude; to 37 degrees north latitude and 37 west longitude; to 30 degrees north latitude and 26 west longitude; to 34 degrees north latitude and 20 west longitude, and thence back to the starting point.—Shipping, 1/12.

 

GERMAN CRUISER HITS MINE AND BLOWS UP.—It is reported from Dragoer, at the southeastern extremity of the Island of Amager, that a German auxiliary cruiser, the guard ship Botnia, was blown up after a collision with a German mine field off that coast. The cruiser sank, but the number of men lost is unknown, the survivors refusing to give any information. The Botnia was formerly a Russian vessel, which was captured by the Germans.—N. Y. Herald, 6/12.

 

SAY ARGENTINA WARNED GERMANY.—There was a persistent rumor December 8 in newspaper circles that President Irigoyen had notified Germany that a submarine attack on Brazilian ports would be the cause of Argentina breaking relations with Germany. This rumor follows an unverified report that a submarine had been seen somewhere off Rio Janeiro.—Washington Star, 8/12.

 

U. S. DESTROYER TORPEDOED.—The Navy Department, December 8, announced that the destroyer Jacob Jones, one of the latest type, had been torpedoed and sunk while on patrol duty in foreign waters on Thursday night, December 6, at 8 o'clock.—Baltimore Star, 8/12.

 

The first official account of the sinking of the American destroyer Jacob Jones, given by Lieutenant J. K. Richards, one of the surviving officers, was received at the Navy Department to-day from Vice Admiral William S. Sims.

 

Lieutenant Richards' report virtually removes all doubt concerning the fate of the missing officers and men. He says that a careful search was made for survivors, but none were found except those who were in boats or on life-rafts.

 

The submarine which sank the destroyer appeared to be about 150 feet in length, with a 3-inch gun forward, and had two periscopes.

 

The following statement, giving Lieutenant Richards' account of the disaster, was issued by the Navy Department:

 

"Lieutenant Richards said the destroyer was proceeding toward port after holding target practice, when at 20 minutes after 4 p. m. a torpedo was sighted by the lookout. The commanding officer stationed on the bridge ordered the rudder hard right and engines full steam ahead. The torpedo struck the ship on the starboard side, abreast of torpedo tube No. 3. This tube, with torpedoes, was blown 250 feet in the air. The radio was wrecked and the mainmast brought down.

 

"Guns were manned immediately, but as no submarine was sighted and the vessel began to settle by the stern, the captain gave the order to abandon ship. Whaleboats which were got out capsized. The motor sailer could not be got out. A wherry and motor dory managed to escape safely. Three life-rafts floated clear.

 

"The vessel sank at 29 minutes past 4 p. m. Depth charges aboard exploded apparently blowing off the stern of the ship.

 

"No survivors except those in the boats and on the life-rafts were found after a thorough search. After 17 hours in the water the men on the rafts were picked up by a British ship."—New York Herald, 13/12.

 

U-BOAT BOMBARDS CAPITAL OF MADEIRA.—Funchal, capital of Madeira, has been bombarded by a German submarine. Forty shells were fired, killing or wounding several persons and damaging several buildings. The submarine fled on being attacked by patrol boats.—N. Y. Herald, 15/12.

 

BRITISH DESTROYER SUNK.—A British airship is believed to have been destroyed by a hostile seaplane and a second British airship was forced to descend in Holland, according to an official announcement December 15.

 

It was also officially announced that a British destroyer had been sunk. The text of the official announcement by the Admiralty telling of the losses reads:

 

"A British airship of the non-rigid type, with a crew of five, which proceeded on patrol December 11 from an east coast base, has not returned, and from the information available it is believed she has been destroyed by a hostile seaplane in the southern part of the North Sea.

 

"A second airship of similar type was forced to descend in Holland through engine failure on December 12.

 

"One of His Majesty's destroyers was sunk on December 12 after being in collision. All the officers and the ship's company were saved except two men who are presumed to have been drowned."—Washington Post, 17/12.

 

PACIFIC

 

GERMAN RAIDER REPORTED.—Another German raider is reported operating in the Pacific. According to the officers of a steamer which arrived at a Pacific port November 28, that steamer received a wireless message from the steamer Manoa November 23 stating that she had been approached by a suspicious looking craft. The Manoa altered her course and escaped.—Shipping, 8/12.

 

GERMAN RAIDER.—That the steamer Maverick, which figured prominently in the Hindu revolutionary plot trials now in progress at San Francisco, is operating as a German raider between San Francisco and Honolulu, was the belief expressed here by officers of a steamer.

 

A vessel, which the officers declared was undoubtedly the Maverick, was seen on the night of December 8, approximately 600 miles from this port. They said their attention was attracted by flare lights and rockets evidently intended to signify distress. Their ship which steered toward the steamer soon was covered by rays from a huge searchlight.

 

Two other vessels are reported to have sighted the Maverick recently.—Baltimore Sun, 14/12.

 

NORTH SEA

 

NAVAL INCIDENTS.—With the exception of the naval activity which developed during the month in the region of the Gulf of Riga, the events of the war at sea reported during October may properly be classed as incidents. On the morning of the 2d, his Majesty's armored cruiser Drake was torpedoed off the north coast of Ireland. She managed to reach harbor, but thereafter sank in shallow water. Of her complement 19 were killed by the explosion. The Drake was a sister ship of the ill-fated Good Hope. She was completed at Pembroke in 1902, and carried two 9.2-inch and sixteen 6-inch guns. Her normal speed was 24½ knots. Two losses were announced by the Admiralty on the 15th. One was that of the minesweeping sloop Begonia, which, being considerably overdue, had to be considered as lost with all hands. The other was that of the armed mercantile cruiser Champagne, which was torpedoed and sunk with the loss of 56 of her company. On October 17 two very fast and heavily armed German raiding vessels attacked 12 neutral merchant ships that were being convoyed across the North Sea by the British destroyers Mary Rose and Strongbow. A short and unequal engagement followed. After a hopeless fight the two British ships were sent to the bottom. Thereafter nine of the neutral merchantmen were sunk by gunfire. The remaining three made good their escape. The action was fought midway between the Shetland Islands and the Norwegian Coast. The enemy fled immediately after it and left his victims, without compunction, to their fate. Some 30 neutral sailors were rescued by British patrol vessels. All the officers and men of the Mary Rose, 88 all told, lost their lives, together with 47 from the complement of the Strongbow. These two destroyers are understood to have been vessels of recent construction. On the 21st British war vessels bombarded naval works at Ostend with, it is reported, good results. On the 23d it was announced by the Admiralty that a British destroyer had been lost as the result of a collision. Two officers and 21 of her crew were saved. On the same date it was intimated that the armed mercantile cruiser Orama—an Orient Steam Navigation vessel launched at Clydebank in 1911—had been torpedoed and sunk. There were no casualties among her crew. An engagement between six British and French destroyers patrolling off the Belgian Coast and three German destroyers and 17 aeroplanes occurred on the afternoon of the 27th. The enemy destroyers were hit twice by our shells and retired to the protection of their land batteries, while the aeroplane formation was broken up. The aeroplanes each dropped three bombs near the allied vessels, but our casualties amounted only to two men slightly wounded.—Engineering, 2/11.

 

GERMAN DESTROYER SUNK BY. MINE.—A German torpedo-boat destroyer belonging to the Zeebrugge flotilla struck a mine off Westkappelle, Holland, and sank, according to an Exchange telegraph dispatch from Amsterdam. Only two of her crew were saved.—N. Y. Herald, 30/11.

 

PROOF OF VIGILANCE OF BRITISH PATROLS.—In reply to one of the enemy's customary and calculated lies, the Admiralty explained the character of a short and sharp brush with the German destroyers off the Belgian coast on November 12. In the British communiqué it was stated that "incidents of this nature occur daily and in no way interfere with the maintenance and efficacy of our patrol, and they are therefore not reported." It may be assumed that similar incidents do not occur with such frequency between the patrols in the Heligoland Bight, and that this is the reason why the authorities do not exercise the same reticence when they do occur. Another reason may be that collisions between light forces in the Bight may, as experience shows, lead to bigger things, and it is well that the public should be prepared for them. And manifestly, with our cruiser squadrons and destroyer flotillas skirmishing along what the Germans call "the fringe of the English barred zone," opportunities for such a brush as that of Saturday may occur fairly often, and every time they do must be a challenge to Admiral Scheer to send out heavier forces to deal with the trespassers. He does not do so, but contents himself with driving them away on paper.

 

It is worth while noting that in all the recent engagements with the German guard patrols the latter have suffered except when they have discreetly retired under the protection of their mine-fields and fortresses. On August 16 there was an engagement between outposts in the Bight, when a German destroyer was hit and two mine-sweepers were sunk. The British were accused by the enemy of "a large superiority." Then, again, on September 1 a British detachment surprised four armed trawlers, patrol vessels, off the Danish coast, and destroyed them. Again, on November 2, there was the affair in the Cattegat. All these incidents attest the energy and watchfulness of the British patrols and the manner in which the policy of the offensive-defensive, as it was described by Sir John Jellicoe in April, is now being carried out close up to "the fringes of the British barred zone."—London Times, 19/11.

 

CATTEGAT ACTION NOVEMBER 17.—The recent naval action in the Cattegat, where the British sank a German cruiser and 10 armed patrol vessels, is an example of the careful scheming which lies behind every move on the naval chart. A comparatively insignificant force of British destroyers and light cruisers were the actual stage performers in the little Skaggerak drama.

 

The actual fight in the Cattegat began about seven o'clock in the morning and was over three hours later. The German fleet behind its fortifications received the calls for help, but dared not take a chance—probably well knowing that any attempt to send out help would be confronted with enemies rising out of the sea from all directions.

 

The Cattegat is a deep bay lying between Denmark and Sweden and leading out through the Skaggerak into the North Sea near the scene of the famous Jutland battle. A fog lay over the entire Cattegat throughout the action and the British destroyers picked off their victims one by one and sank them.

 

The German auxiliary cruiser Marie, which was leading the fleet of patrol boats, was a vessel of 3000 tons. Her captain, Herr Lauterbach, was wounded, but reached the Danish shore safely. His vessel, which had four guns and a crew of 90, was "suddenly attacked," he said in an interview with a Danish newspaper man afterward," by a fleet of British destroyers, and the shells fired by them descended with such rapidity that the men on the Marie were almost unable to use the guns. Only a few shots were fired before the ship was a mass of flames."

 

Presumably the Marie was making her way toward the trade route between Norway and Scotland, in hopes of repeating the successful German attack on the British convoy on October 17. The British commander concentrated his fire first of all on the Marie, and then detached his fastest vessels to round up the escorting patrol vessels. This was thoroughly done after a hunt lasting nearly three hours.

 

This action, it should be remembered, occurred in waters which the Germans regard as practically one of their "inland seas." The Cattegat is the gateway to the Baltic. The scene of the fight is 500 miles from the nearest British coast, but less than 200 miles from Kiel.

 

The Germans held their favorite "interior lines," while the British forces had to cross the North Sea, go up through the Skaggerak, and then around the Skaw. The Germans had every chance to execute a coup, cutting off the retreat of the British forces by bringing superior units up the coast to the entrance of the Skaggerak. That they did not dare to attempt this is evidence of their appreciation of the initiative and resource of the British Navy.

 

Tip-and-Run Raid.—An interesting comparison might be made between this clean victory by the British destroyers and the tip-and-run raid by the German light cruisers on a British convoy on October 17. The Germans sent out two of their fastest cruisers in the darkness, struck their blow in nervous haste in the early morning hours, not even pausing to rescue a single life of hundreds of combatants and non-combatants; then ran away northward to spend the remaining hours of daylight in hiding, and when night fell dashed down the Norwegian coast and thus returned home without being intercepted.

 

On the occasion of the British victory the fight occurred, not in the North Sea, but on Germany's doorstep; not at night but in daylight; not hurriedly or nervously, for 64 prisoners were taken, drowning men rescued from the water, thus providing another vivid contrast between German and British methods of warfare. Moreover, no non-combatant lives were lost or endangered in the British action, whereas the Germans ruthlessly and unnecessarily sacrificed scores of innocent neutrals.

 

The return of the British squadron to its base was quiet and unostentatious. By nightfall they were off again on their business of sweeping the sea.

 

The cruise of the fleet into the Cattegat and the little victory which the British Navy won there without the loss of a single British life, while not largely important in itself, is a concrete illustration and proof of the manner in which the allied fleets control the seas and enabled the allied governments to use their resources in full strength on the various fronts.—N. Y. Herald, 20/11.

 

CRUISER FIGHT IN THE BIGHT.-Our light forces operating in the Heligoland Bight have been engaged with enemy light forces November 17.

 

The only information we have at present is that our vessels have engaged enemy light cruisers, that the latter have retired at high speed, and that our vessels are in chase.

 

We have as yet no further detailed information as to the operations of our light Cruisers in the Heligoland Bight, beyond the fact that the enemy's light cruisers were chased by them within 30 miles of Heligoland until they got under the protection of their battle fleet and mine-fields, when our light forces retired.

 

One of the enemy's light cruisers was seen to be on fire and another one appeared to be damaged in her machinery, as she was dropping astern. One enemy mine-sweeper was sunk in addition.

 

We had no losses and only slight material damage in ships, and our casualties in personnel were slight.

 

German Official Report.—For the first time since the early months of the war strong English naval forces sought to penetrate into the German Bight on the morning of November 17. They were discovered by German naval patrols as soon as they had reached the Riff-Terschelling line, and by counter-operations, which were begun immediately by our advanced-post forces, were repulsed without difficulty and without loss to ourselves.—Admiralty, per Wireless Press.—Land and Water, November.

 

FIGHT OFF HELIGOLAND.—On November 17 our light forces chased German light cruisers into the Heligoland Bight. One German cruiser was set on fire. Our vessels broke off the action on the arrival of the German battle fleet.—Land and Water, November.

 

 

BRITISH DESTROYER AND CONVOY SUNK.—One British and five neutral merchantmen, a British destroyer and four mine sweepers have been sunk in the North Sea by German naval forces.

 

The losses were the result of an attack on a convoy bound from Scotland to Norway, Sir Eric Geddes, First Lord of the Admiralty, announced December 17. The total tonnage of the lost merchantmen was 8000.

 

Eighty-eight Scandinavian, two of them were women, and 10 British were rescued by four British destroyers, detached from a cruiser squadron which was hastened to the scene. Other survivors reached Norway in boats.

 

The merchant vessels were being convoyed by the destroyers Partridge and Pelew. The Partridge was sunk and the Pelew was damaged.

 

Sir Eric said the circumstances of the attack, so far as available, were that the Partridge sighted four enemy destroyers shortly before noon, and, with the Pelew, engaged them, while the convoy scattered. The Partridge was hit heavily. Shortly afterward an explosion occurred aboard and she sank. The Pelew was pierced at the water-line and her engines were disabled, but eventually she was brought safely into port. The enemy then attacked the convoy, sinking the six merchantmen and four armed trawlers.

 

The entire crew of the trawler Lord Alverston was saved in one of its own boats. The casualties on the Pelew were one officer and three men killed and two wounded seriously. Information regarding the crew of the Partridge, Sir Eric said, was incomplete, but a report from Kiel told of the taking there of three officers and 21 men from the Partridge and one officer and 25 men from the trawlers.

 

The Partridge and the Pelew, together with four armed trawlers, said Sir Eric, comprised the anti-submarine escort of the convoy. For some reason as yet unexplained, he added, the force which was sent for the purpose of protecting the convoy against surface attacks was not on the scene in time to prevent the destruction of the convoy. A court of inquiry had been appointed to investigate the circumstances, he announced. A second convoy which also was being covered was not attacked.

 

The German raid duplicates the successful enterprise of last October carried out by two German raiders which attacked a convoy in the North Sea. They sank nine neutral merchantmen and two of the escorting British destroyers. Five Norwegian, three Swedish and one Danish vessel were sunk without warning, three other merchantmen escaping. The raiders were armed heavily and succeeded in evading the British watchers on the return as well as the outward trip.—Baltimore Sun, 18/12.

 

MEDITERRANEAN

 

DESTROYER AND MONITOR SUNK.—A British destroyer and a small monitor which were operating in conjunction with the British Army in Palestine have been sunk, it was officially announced. A total of 32 men from the two vessels are missing, seven from the destroyer and 26 from the monitor.

 

A hostile submarine sank the two war ships.—Washington Post, 15/11.

 

GERMAN U-BOAT SUNK.—A German submarine was destroyed at the time the French steamship Medie, with a cargo of munitions, was torpedoed in the western Mediterranean on September 23 with a loss of 250 lives, says a dispatch from Algiers to the Journal. The liner Biskra was proceeding with a convoy of French and British steamers, among which was the Medie, leading the line. The Medie was torpedoed without warning before she was able to bring her guns to bear on the submarine.

 

Apparently thinking that the ships were not armed, the submarine commander brought his boat slowly to the surface. The Biskra immediately opened fire at a distance of two miles. The second shot struck the submarine forward and low. An explosion followed. The submarine's stern shot up. The U-boat plunged to destruction before the Medie disappeared.—Washington Star, 24/11.

 

BRITISH PATROL SHIP SUNK.—A British patrol vessel was torpedoed by an enemy submarine in the Mediterranean, November 18, according to an Admiralty statement.

 

Four officers and five men of the crew were killed.—Baltimore Sun, 22/11.

 

ADRIATIC

 

NAVAL CO-PPERATION IN THE ADRIATIC.—At this stage of the war it may be ventured as a question rather than a certainty, What is to be expected of the Austrian fleet, rusting so long at its moorings in Pola? Will it come out and attack the Italian ships and the British monitors now assisting in the defence of Venice by their support of the right wing of the defending army? To a competent fighting and energetic sea force this opportunity should be irresistible. Unfortunately, there is only one precedent in 50 years upon which any data may be based, and these, let us hope, may be wrong in the new solution.

 

So far neither the Austrian nor the Italian Navy has played a speaking part in the drama of the war. Austria has contented itself with a supine defence. Italy has declared a quasi blockade against Pola, Trieste, Fiume and further to the southeastward off the Dalmation coast, where the Boche di Cattaro herds flotillas of destroyers and submarines. Light cruisers have made rare raids, submarine attacks in the Mediterranean have been on the Austrian side effective, but in the main it has been a game of hide and seek. Before Italy entered the war an Italian officer told our London naval correspondent that French ships would never enter Pola—for that victory was reserved for the Italian fleet. It is still reserved.

 

What is to be expected? At the beginning of hostilities Italy ranked as a possible fifth in the hierarchy of important sea powers; Austria was surely at the lowest rung of the ladder. Historically, Austria had proved itself the better navy, for on July 20, 1866, its fleet under the great Tegetthoff, in the Battle of Lissa, whipped to a standstill the Italian squadrons under the negligent and incapable Pessano.

 

The Italian ships were unprepared in crews, guns, munitions, sea sense—indeed, in everything save a splendid heroism matching the best traditions of Italy. The outcome was, therefore, from the outset inevitable, for the Austrians sought battle under the command of Rear Admiral Freiherr Wilhelm von Tegetthoff, then 48 years of age, and the only sailor since Trafalgar that stood forth as worthy to rank with our own incomparable Farragut.

 

What will the Austrian Navy attempt at this vital moment and what will be the answer of the recreated navy of Italy? Our best wishes go out to our allies, fortified as they are by the knowledge that in all essentials the officers, seamen and ships of the peninsula are, as never before in equal measure, at the high water mark of efficiency and, let it be hoped, of creative, initiative and impulse.—N. Y. Herald, 19/11.

 

GUNS IN MARSHES.—By Edgar Ansel Mowrer.—(The retreat of the Italian Army to the Piave has made untenable some of the floating batteries described below.) On October 19, co-operating in the advance of the army, floating batteries of the Royal Navy and Italian and British monitors bombarded effectively enemy positions and communications along the lower Isonzo. At the same time Italian monitors cannonaded the industrial shops south of Trieste.

 

So the Italian headquarters, for almost the first time since the war's beginning, announced the existence of the floating marine batteries around the mouth of the Isonzo.

 

And surely no one ever dreamed anything more fantastic than the daily existence of the Italian marines and naval gunners in the swampy lagoon of Grado.

 

Drawn up on the shore of a muddy island, half in and half out of the water, was a steel float, or hollow raft, or covered scow, square in shape. Firmly imbedded in it, their long muzzles pointing over the tops of some reeds, two large naval guns were planted on pivots. They cannot so easily be silenced; their bark sounds for miles across the gulf, their bite is worse than their bark. For the dog and his mate are two long marine guns that lie on the very sea sands, so near that the gunners hear the sound of the surf, so low that a high tide covers them completely with the cement emplacements which serve as great cushions to prevent their sinking too deeply into the bottomless muck. So far as I know, no other guns in the world are mounted like these, left where the sea washes over them completely, yet planted and maintained in the face of what must have seemed insuperable difficulties just where their presence would be most annoying to the enemy.

 

The dog and his mate bark in all seasons. When the tide is high they are temporarily eclipsed, but as soon as the waters subside the gunners, wet to the skin but undaunted, clean out the guns, dimounting and assembling the minor parts, and in a few hours the voices of the two are again booming across the gulf.

 

The importance of the role played by this floating naval artillery need not be exaggerated, however. Naval guns, valuable for their long range and penetrative power, are but slightly efficient against infantry or rival guns. But the importance of the guns near the Sdobba should certainly not be overlooked. The dog and his companions are thorns in the side of the Austrians. They annoy them day and night and no spot within range is exempt from their fire. What this constant annoyance means only those who have been under fire for days and weeks at a time can say.—Washington Star, 26/11.

 

ITALIANS TORPEDO AUSTRIAN WARSHIPS.—The torpedoing of two Austrian battleships in the harbor of Trieste by Italian torpedo craft on the night of December 9 is reported in a message received here December 9 by Commander C. Pfister, of the Italian Navy. The information was contained in a telegram received by Commander Pfister from Captain L. Vannutelli, the naval attaché of the Italian Embassy at Washington.

 

"After successfully crossing several obstructions and mine fields," the dispatch said, "the Italian torpedo craft entered the harbor of Trieste, where they fired four torpedoes against two Austrian men-of-war of the Monarch type. All the torpedoes reached their targets and exploded.

 

"Though the most intense artillery fire was concentrated against the attacking torpedo-boats, and though even torpedoes were fired against them, all of our units returned safely and unhurt to their home bases."

 

A London dispatch received Wednesday quoted a Vienna official statement as saying the Austrian battleship Wien was sunk on the night of the date mentioned in the foregoing communication. Most of the crew was saved, the London message stated. The waters in which the vessel was sunk were not named, however.

 

The Wien is a ship of the Monarch type. The Wien, Monarch and Budapest were built in 1895 and 1896. They displaced 5600 tons and are registered as carrying complements of 441 men. They were 323 feet long, 56 feet beam. They were armed with four 9-inch and twenty guns of smaller caliber. Each had two torpedo tubes.—Baltimore Sun, 14/12.

 

GENERAL NOTES.

 

A GOOD LOOK OUT.—Sir Eric Geddes in the course of his masterly review of the naval position called attention to the great importance of keeping a good lookout on merchant ships as a means of defeating the submarine. He even went so far as to say that, as compared with the use of science and of various kinds of weapons and appliances, a sharp lookout is almost the most potent protection against submarines that exists, the odds being seven to three on the ship if the submarine is sighted, and four to one against the ship if the submarine is not sighted.

 

The prime importance of keeping a keen lookout was called attention to in The Times on March 1 last by Sir Alfred Yarrow, who generously offered a reward of £20 (up to a total expenditure of £10,000) to anyone on board a British merchant ship who first draws the captain's attention to an enemy submarine being in the vicinity. A large number of awards have been made under this scheme, which has proved to be of the greatest service in encouraging a sharp lookout being kept. I have no hestitation in saying that it has been the means of saving valuable lives and property, and that its usefulness might be considerably increased if it were given greater publicity; and I am sure that shipowners will be only too glad to do all they can in this direction.

 

The numerous cases which have come before me in dealing with the awards under Sir Alfred Yarrow's public-spirited offer show how important it is that the submarine should be sighted at the earliest possible moment. Needless to say, the splendid officers and men of our mercantile marine, who are fighting our ruthless foe as courageously at sea as our magnificent soldiers are doing in the trenches, are keenly alive to the advantage of keeping a sharp lookout; but it is highly desirable to enlist the services of every one available on board, for, obviously, the greater the number of eyes there are on the lookout the better chance there is of sighting the submarine before it has time to approach near enough to make an attack.

 

The notices which I suggest to be put up in every ship should, therefore, invite passengers as well as members of the crew to make a point of keeping a sharp lookout, and of informing the officer on the bridge immediately they see anything of a suspicious character.

 

THOS. L. DEVITT, Chairman of Lloyd's Register of Shipping.

—London Times, 6/11.

 

FLIES FROM ENGLAND TO BOMBARD THE TURKS.—The Admiralty announces that a successful air attack in the vicinity of Constantinople has been fully accomplished by a large British bombing airplane, which flew from England to a British base in the Mediterranean in a series of eight flights. The stopping places included Lyons and Rome and the total distance covered was nearly 2000 miles.

 

The machine was actually in the air 31 hours. This is believed to be a world record for a cross-country journey and for the weight carried. During some parts of the flight strong winds and heavy rainstorms were experienced, and there was one stretch of 200 miles over a mountainous country where it would be impossible for any machine to land.—Washington Star, 23/11.

 

BRITISH TANKS.—The impression which existed in the minds of many soldiers that the British tanks were freaks of little value as instruments of war is being wiped out on account of the achievements of the great army of these mighty engines which on the morning of November 20 broke through the main Hindenburg line and carried the war miles into enemy territory. The work which the tanks did on that first day and have been doing ever since is one of the most striking features of the war. It cannot be said they are alone responsible for the tremendous victory won by the British, for infantry, artillery and cavalry all have played their part. Nevertheless, the tanks drove the entering wedge, without which this triumph probably would have been impossible.

 

In a few hours they tore to shreds lines of barbed wire, the demolition of which by concentration of artillery would have required many days. Furthermore, their employment made possible the arrangement of the secret attack, which would have been out of the question had the artillery been brought into play.

 

The tanks have demonstrated fully their power in saving the lives of men and in conserving ammunition. The casualties among the infantry which followed the tanks into action were exceedingly light. The correspondent has heard that two battalions, for instance, had only one casualty each and that another suffered the loss of but three men. This is almost unprecedented in an attack of such magnitude.

 

The casualties among the crews of the tanks also were very light on the opening day, which is the only one for which reports have thus far been received. It is impossible to state how many tanks were in action, but there were several hundred, and out of all the men who went forward in them it happens that less than 20 were killed and less than 100 wounded. Many of these casualties were due to the fact that men left the tanks to perform some work in the open, where they came under the fire of snipers.

 

The performance of the tanks was the more remarkable because there was only a short time to prepare for their use. Some of the tanks were veterans, but many had never been in an engagement before, and the crews lacked actual fighting experience. Moreover, it was necessary to train the infantry to co-operate with them. All this was accomplished in a few weeks.

 

In addition, a great amount of work was done to get the tanks into position and bring forward their fuel. Many hundred tons of petrol were brought up secretly and stored pending the attack. It was done so quietly that few soldiers in the territory involved knew what was proceeding.

 

The advance of the tanks, with their general leading the way in the monitor flying his flag, was the most impressive sight imaginable. For miles they were lined up along the British front, and when they started forward it was like a great ceremonial parade. Back of them came the infantry, giving the final touch to the picture.

 

Tanks have been engaged in some bitter fighting since they entered enemy territory. They crushed their way through barbed wire easily, tearing great gaps for the infantry, and it was not until they had made a considerable advance that strong resistance was encountered. The stiffest fighting was at Lateau Wood, south of Masnières. There the tanks engaged a number of German field and heavy guns and won the day against them. One tank deliberately charged a 5.9-inch gun and cleaned out its crew with its machine guns.

 

Cantaing fell before one tank which never had seen action until that time. It charged into the village, making it untenable by the vigorous action of its guns. Twelve tanks led the way into Marcoing. Their crews previously had studied maps and been assigned posts, and the tanks went about the business methodically, each one taking up the position designated. These 12 movable forts completely organized the place.

 

At Ribecourt the tanks arrived just as the Germans were sitting down to breakfast. The crews of the tanks got their morning meal from the food prepared for the enemy.

 

These are not the only places which tanks assisted in taking. They have been swarming over the whole great territory annexed by the British, and when the full story of the exploits is told it will make remarkable history.—N. Y. Herald, 24/11.

 

1000 AEROS FELLED BY FRENCH IN I917.—French airplanes have brought down 120 enemy machines behind the French lines; 397 behind the enemy lines. Listed as "probably destroyed" were 513 others. Twenty-two observation balloons were likewise wrecked in this same period.

 

In the four months beginning March the French fliers as a whole had their busiest bit of work. During that period 73 machines were brought down inside French lines, 188 behind German lines, and 231 were probably destroyed.—Washington Post, 25/11.

 

CONVOYS AND THEIR ACHIEVEMENTS.—It is known in a general, not to say a casual, way that our navy is convoying merchant vessels of all classes to European waters, but the assembly and subsequent movements of the protecting vessels are so carefully guarded that little in regard to their number and character has been open to the public. This is as it should be. In the beginning some slackness in the conduct of these operations may have appeared, but even this existed for only a brief period and to a minor degree, and was so speedily corrected that the secrecy, surety of dispatch and subsequent performances leave nothing to be desired.

 

Connected with this phase of naval activity much idle guessing as to the number of troops inshipped and transferred over sea has been indulged in. The usual assertiveness of positive knowledge has been associated with the usual positive contradiction, and in both cases mischievous and foolish rumors have at times become dangerous—dangerous because it is held by army experts that no one thing could afford more aid and comfort to the enemy than a description of the strength and character of the forces sent to join our allies.

 

The decreasing losses by submarine assault bear witness to the secured efficiency of this transport service. It is high praise to the naval side that not one American soldier has been lost in transit, that the arrival and departure of the convoys and of their shepherded flocks have been made practically on schedule time and that no knowledge of these activities has slipped through the meshes of the censorship ordered.

 

It has been declared by the highest British naval authority that of all the vessels employed in the Atlantic trade 90 per cent were under convoy and that after entering the danger zone 5 per cent only, or one ship in 200, were destroyed by enemy attack. An important contribution to this factor of safety came from our destroyers on the other side, and this assistance has been publicly acknowledged in earnest and sincere words by the First Lord of the Admiralty. "If the total sailings and the area of the danger zone are considered," adds the First Lord of the Admiralty, "we may to some extent understand the magnitude of the strain and of the task imposed."—Editorial in N. Y. Herald, 1/12.

 

NOT A SINGLE SHOT ON RUSSIAN FRONT.—December 7, for the first time since the war began, not a single shot was fired on the Russian front, from the Black Sea to the Baltic. The cessation of hostilities officially began at noon, when the ten-day armistice, signed last Wednesday, became effective. Notice of this truce reached the armies on the northern and western fronts yesterday, where the Russian war office communication declared that no hostilities had occurred.—Washington Star, 9/12.

 

ONLY 1½ PER CENT OF SHIPS CONVOYED TO ENGLAND LOST.—The percentage of ships carrying wheat to England lost in September was 3.3, according to Sir Leo G. Chiozza Money, Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Ministry of Munitions, speaking in the House of Commons to-day. The percentage in October was .7 of 1 per cent. The percentage of all incoming convoyed ships lost since the system was adopted was only 1½per cent.—N. Y. Herald, 7/12.

 

HALIFAX DISASTER.—Like the fabled crack of doom a heavily laden munitions vessel exploded in Halifax Harbor, December 6, with a force that rocked the province and sent at least 1000 and perhaps 2000 souls into eternity.

 

The explosion happened in the Narrows, leading from the harbor to Bedford Basin, the northwest arm of the harbor. The Mont Blanc was bound in from New York with a cargo of American munitions for the Allies and a deck load of benzine. She was proceeding to the examining station near Rockingham, on the northwestern shore of Bedford Basin.

 

The Belgian relief steamship loma, of which there is no available record in various registers, had just passed through examination by the British authorities and was bound out to sea.

 

The pilot of the Mont Blanc has stated that the collision was due to a misunderstanding of signals. The storm also was at its height, and the loma rammed the Mont Blanc near pier No. 8, at the entrance to Bedford Basin and opposite the northern end of the city of Halifax, known as the Richmond section.

 

The bow of the Ioma penetrated the fire-room of the Mont Blanc and broke open barrels of benzine on the deck. The benzine caught fire, and is was apparent almost instantly that the munitions ship would blow up with a devastating crack. Seventeen minutes later, when the munitions let go their terrible force, nothing visible was left of either vessel and it seemed that the universe had been shaken and shattered by the blow.

 

The Belgian relief vessel hit the munitions vessel amidship, driving a hole into her boiler-room and probably turning over the boiler. In any event the crew of the Mont Blanc had time to lower the lifeboats and to get away from the drifting and damaged vessel.—N. Y. Herald, 7/12.

 

THE GERMANS HAVE CALLED UP CLASS 1920.—It is possible that in this, the fourth year of the war, the full meaning of that sentence may be missed. Here, then, in the briefest possible space is the meaning of this fundamental piece of news.

 

1. The French have not yet called up any of Class 1918.

 

2. Germany called up 1918 exactly this time last year, and the fighting—mainly the fighting in Flanders—has eaten up not only 1918, but already so large a part of 1919 that she is now compelled to call up 1920.

 

3. Class 1920 means the lads who are not yet 18. The oldest of them will only be 18 on the 1st of January and the youngest of them is not 17.

 

4. The German Empire has for the first time since the war began been compelled to call up three classes in exactly one twelvemonth. When she called up 1918 a year ago she was two years ahead of the normal. She is now four years ahead. I will leave it at that.—Land and Water, 22/11.

 

PORT OF NEW YORK IS PLACED UNDER U. S. MILITARY CONTROL—The Department of Justice authorizes the announcement that the port of New York was put under military control in compliance with the proclamation of the President of November 16, 1917, at midnight (Sunday night, November 25) all docks and water fronts involved in trans-Atlantic shipping to be guarded by the regular army, in dress uniform to distinguish them from enlisted men on other duty, fully armed and with orders to prohibit the passage of any person, alien or citizen, who cannot establish a business reason for access to water-front areas. Citizens and aliens are warned of the peril of trespassing on the prohibited areas. The War Department has requested the Department of Justice to emphasize the necessity of a strict observance by the public of the military control.—Official Bulletin, 26/11

 

AMERICAN MARINES READY FOR DASH TO TAMPICO OIL FIELDS.—The Navy Department has prepared to transport a formidable force of marines to Tampico to guard the oil fields in the event that they are imperilled by Mexican troops or German agents. While military rules oppose the publication of the exact number of marines under orders to go to the Mexican port at an hour's notice, the Herald is able to state that the American forces are prepared for any exigency.

 

Recently two separate forces of marines were sent to a port from which they might embark without delay. Through a system of co-operation of the navy and merchant lines, arrangements have been made to supply the necessary transports if the administration decides that a force must be thrown around the oil fields.

 

Agents of this government are scrutinizing carefully every move being made at Mexico City and on the coast which might possibly affect the oil supply which the American and British navies are relying upon for fuel.

 

Despite the fact that constant rumors of impending trouble have been circulated from Tampico and Vera Cruz since the United States joined the Allies, nothing tangible has developed within the last few days to warrant the belief that the supply will be interfered with in the immediate future.

 

Through the co-operation of Manuel Palaez, a bandit chieftain, who has maintained control of the fields in defiance of Carranza for more than two years, the operators have made it possible to keep the supply moving. Recently Carranza decided to dislodge Palaez so that he would be able to increase taxation on the American and British owners to help fill his depleted coffers. The usual exaggerated announcements of Mexican military activities were circulated from Mexico City by way of giving the impression that troops of the de facto government were about to take the field in force against Palaez.

 

Up to the present these reports have not materialized into facts. It is assumed that Carranza has his usual difficulties in inducing his leaders to collect and move enough forces to the coast to attack Palaez. What became of the army that was ordered to take control of the fields is a matter of conjecture.

 

It generally is known here that Carranza is short of ammunition, and it is believed that he may have found it absolutely impossible to supply his soldiers with enough cartridges to make a sortie against the organized bands which Palaez controls.

 

Some officials of the administration fear that if Carranza fails to dislodge Palaez an attempt will be made to interfere with the operation of the wells by other methods. It is known that the notorious Von Eckhardt, the German Minister, has been active in attempting to damage the oil properties, and it is feared that some of his Mexican emissaries may attempt to accomplish with German gold what cannot be accomplished by the Carranza forces. In other words an attempt may be made to buy off Palaez so that he will cause his followers to damage the wells to the satisfaction of the German agents. If the administration gets tangible evidence of such a scheme the marines will be sent to Mexico without asking Carranza's consent.—N. Y. Herald, 26/11.

 

MUNITIONS EXPLOSION DISASTER TO GERMANY.—Germany suffered a disaster comparable with a very serious military defeat in the explosion during November which destroyed the Griesheim Chemical Works, near Frankfort-on-the-Main, one of the greatest munitions factories in the world, according to a statement issued to-day by the Press Bureau. It is said to be impossible to reconstruct the works during the war. The statement adds that sooner or later Germany must show on her fighting fronts the effects of this staggering blow.

 

[The destruction of the Griesheim works by an explosion on November 22 was reported in a Zurich dispatch on the following day.]—N. Y. Herald, 12/12.

 

 

The light line, ships below 1600 tons; medium line, ships above 1600 tons; heavy line, total ship losses.—Scientific American.

 

HOW GERMANY TRIED TO EMBROIL JAPAN AND U. S.—While the ship's band was playing lively tunes, to drown out all tell-tale sounds, the wireless apparatus of the German cruiser Geier, at the time she was interned in this harbor, relayed messages between German agents in the United States and Japan, in furtherance of a plot to embroil the two countries in war, according to an article printed in the Star-Bulletin here.

 

Captain Grasshof's diary says that in November, 1914, and February, 1917, messages ordering widespread promulgation of reports that Japanese forces were to land in Mexico and German forces in Canada were handled by the Geier's wireless. According to the diary, Count von Bernstorff and Captains Boy-Ed and von Papen, his principal aids, figured prominently in the plot. George Roedik and H. A. Schroeder, former German consuls at Honolulu and Manila, were also implicated. Both pleaded guilty in San Francisco recently to complicity in a plot to establish a revolutionary government in India.

 

A German secret agent aided in the transmission of these messages, and also advised the German Government of the sailing time of Danish vessels. The diary hints at a plot to stir up revolts in China against the British, in furtherance of which quantities of arms were supposed to have been secretly buried in Shanghai and Manila. It also reveals supposed orders from the German embassy at Washington, following the destruction of the Lusitania, to destroy German vessels in American and insular ports, as immediate war was feared.

 

Orders to the sailors of the Geier to return to Germany through the use of false passports also were issued, the article states, and that Grasshof, who was court-martialed, is now in solitary confinement pending his removal to Fort Douglas, Utah.—Washington Star, 17/12.

 

SHIPBUILDING NEAR LOSSES.—London, Thursday.—"The submarine menace, in my opinion, is held but not yet mastered," said Sir Eric Geddes, First Lord of the Admiralty, in the House of Commons to-day. "Our shipbuilding is not yet replacing our losses.

 

Since November 1, when I made my last statement," Sir Eric continued, "the downward trend of mercantile marine losses has continued satisfactory. The upward curve of merchant shipbuilding and the upward curve of destruction of enemy submarines have been equally satisfactory. I have no reason to doubt that all three will continue satisfactory."

 

The First Lord said that if the country would economize so as to restrict the use of tonnage and set vessels free for more urgent uses; if the English would follow the tradition of their race and put forth all their power, relaxing no effort to defeat the submarine; then the war could end only in victory.

 

"We must have ships, more ships, still more ships, and now I want the men to build them," Sir Eric added. He said the arrangements were made and the steel had been obtained, and that unless he mistook the spirit of the country there would be an adequate response to the appeal for men.

 

Since June, said Sir Eric, there had been only three torpedoed vessels in home waters, the salvage of which had been abandoned and only one vessel which it had been decided not to repair for the present. In June 27 per cent of the total salved tonnage on hand was under repair, while to-day 80 per cent was undergoing the repairing process. Since August the output of vessels repaired in drydock had increased 48 per cent, and repairs afloat by 45 per cent.

 

The First Lord described three new national shipyards which were being built on the Severn River. The first keels, he said, would be laid there during the early part of the year of a more highly standardized vessel than heretofore had been undertaken. A great deal of the steel work would be done in bridge yards and a considerable part of the labor would be performed by prisoners of war and unskilled help.

 

These yards, added Sir Eric, will provide 34 shipbuilding berths. They were located on the Severn because of the facilities there for the more comfortable and healthier housing of the workmen. The cost of the new yards, he stated, would be £3,837,000.

 

In 1913, continued Sir Eric, Great Britain launched 2,282,000 tons of shipping, of which 1,920,000 tons was merchant tonnage. That, said the First Lord, was the highest output ever reached. If the output for December was as good as that in November the tonnage launched this year, he stated, would be equivalent to that of 1913. The rate reached during November and thus far in December was 18 per cent higher than in 1913.

 

When the Associated Press inquired of a high naval authority to-day "if the anti-submarine war was going well and what was the reason for the high rate of sinkings in the last three weeks," the answer was:

 

"The enemy has had more submarines at work. He has acutally been attempting a submarine offensive of the greatest possible magnitude in an effort to reinforce his offensive on land. He is trying to bring off a coup which will incline us to peace.

 

Foe Fails on Sea and Land.—"He has failed signally on sea as on land, and he has had to pay a heavy price. Our counter measures are meeting with increased success and the enemy will experience constantly increasing difficulty in maintaining his campaign.

 

"If the shipbuilding efforts can be properly spurred on in England and America, the allies will be able to say within a measurable time that tonnage is being launched at a rate exceeding the sinkings; and also, if the naval measures continue to improve as it is reasonable to expect, that U-boats are being sunk faster than the Germans are able to build them and that the German U-boat fleet is steadily dwindling away.

 

"Much still depends on American shipbuilding, but as encouragement to those who are putting their efforts into that work it may be said with confidence that the allied navies are able to handle the U-boat.

 

Despite the fairly large number of sinkings reported this week, there is no decrease in optimism among those who know the submarine war situation, who see no reason for modifying or altering Mr. Lloyd George's statement of November 20 that there is no longer any fear of the submarine proving a decisive factor in the war.

 

Events since November 20, in fact, have tended to increase rather than decrease the confidence with which the Premier spoke. The month of November was a red letter month in the anti-U-boat war for three reasons: First, the loss of tonnage during the month was the lowest since the unrestricted submarine campaign began; second, the sinkings of enemy submarines were the greatest ever recorded in a single month; third, the launchings of new merchantmen from British yards came "within measurable distance" of equaling the loss of tonnage by submarine attacks.

 

The phrase "within measurable distance" is that used by the government spokesman in the House of Commons, and the slender margin indicated by that phrase is one of the chief reasons for the prevailing optimism. The margin between the sinkings and launchings was so slight that if the Germans had sunk one or two less vessels there would actually have been more tonnage launched than sunk.

 

Regarding the number of submarines destroyed during the same period, it is not permitted to give the actual figures, but this much may be said: The sinkings of submarines during November were "within measurable distance" of the largest number the Germans U-boat yards were capable of turning out in the same period.

 

This destruction of submarines was by no means due to any spasmodic run of luck, but to the development of a detailed, comprehensive campaign involving many devices and embracing many phases—a campaign which will grow more efficient rather than less so as time goes on, according to expert opinion. The first ten days of December have maintained the good record of November as far as the U-boat sinkings are concerned. Moreover, it is considered inevitable that the British-American success in this direction will find a reflection in the morale of the submarine crews, making them less confident and less efficient at the same time that the British and American naval men are becoming more confident and more efficient.

 

The convoy system of protection for shipping, which the Allies have adopted and perfected, has forced the submarine campaigners to alter some of their schemes. It is no longer possible for the submarines to lie in wait for unprotected merchantmen and pot them in leisurely fashion. The U-boat shows its periscope nowadays at great peril when within torpedoing distance of a merchantman, for the latter is only one of a considerable number in the neighborhood, and if any one of the scores of skilled lookouts sights that periscope the submarine's chances of escape from the convoying destroyers are slim.

 

The German reply to the convoy system is to send submarines out in groups, which attack the convoy simultaneously in the hope that in the resulting confusion considerable damage can be done and an easy escape then effected. This system of group attack, while it occasionally has been effective, is very costly when it fails, for it spells the doom not merely of one U-boat but of perhaps three or four.

 

When the story of the submarine war can be written fully some of the most thrilling tales will be of the wonderful accomplishments of one or two destroyers against whole squadrons of submarines.—N. Y. Herald, 15/12.