SUBMARINE WAR PROPHECY.

Taranaki Daily News, 29 December 1917, Page 7

SUBMARINE WAR PROPHECY.

t DANGER TO GERMANY 01)' BUTHLKSSNESS. (London Times' Correspondent.) 1 . Amsterdam, Oct. 27. Some highly interesting and strictly Confidential German documents relating to submarine warfare have just been submitted for my examination. ... In February, 1916, Herr von Bethmann Hollweg received from the German Admiralty Staff a work entitled "English Economy and Submarine Warfare." It was marked "Private—must not be published." Copies were issued in an abridged form and distributed as a Memorandum of the Admiralty Staff, to. gether with observations by Herr Helfferich, made by the Chancellor's instructions, and the reply of the author of the Memorandum, but without Herr Helfferich's final answer thereto. I recently read the German Admiralty Staff's abridged Memorandum predicting that England would be obliged to conclude peace within six fnonths after the beginning of a ruthless submarine war. I have now read Herr Helffericlr's confidential reply and the reply to Herr , Helfferich. Herr Helfferich criticises the Admiralty statements and expresses .the view that the conclusions there are not justified.

In his report, which is dated February 26, 1916, Herr Helfferich considers the arguments based on British foreign trade, sea freights, and prices, and refers to a message in the memorandum, which assumes, "merely for the purpose of illustration without attempting to establish the assumption and without a claim of its adoption as a firm basis, a tripling of the previous year's effect of a submarine war," and which attaches to it •,tjie conclusion that this idea of a tripling ,leads to the "certain assumption" that ~3» new submarine war," for which the ..war zone will lead, at the latest, in the course of half a year, to the result of compelling England to peace by way of i the suppression of her sea traffic. Herr Helfferich says that the passage indicated is the only one in the Memorandum in which an attempt at proof is made that a submarine war, ruthlessly carried 'put, would force England to her knees in the course of half a year. 'ln all ,the other parts, the memorandum, he says, restricts itself, "so far as I can see, ; to showing that a submarine war would economically, financially, and militarily, severely injure England, without attempting to set a definite time-limit to

the damage within which England must submit." It is hardly necessary to point out, he says, that the proof given above is not conclusive. It rests on three unprovable hypotheses:—(l) A definitely proved effect of the subarine war on the/whole economic development of England as it appears from imports, freight rates, and prices; (2) a tripling of this effect by a new submarine war; (3) that this tripling will suffice to break England's power of resistance in six months. Her* Hellferich then says that in his opinion such a certain judgment of the results of a new ruthless submarine war cannot be derived from the statistical ma-

terial put together in the Admiralty Staff's Memorandum. The materials and considerations collected in the Memorandum need completing from several points of view, including the following; "What are the reactions of a ruthless submarine warfare on Germany and her Allies, especially in the probable case that the' United States enters the war against us, and in the always possible event that Holland, Denmark, and other neutrals join against us in such a proceeding, whether by direct war-like action or by closing their frontiers?" He concludes:—"l cannot conceal from myself that even a complementary testing from these points of view will afford no confident prediction. Hie danger remains that the reaction of u new submarine war on Germany will be more fatal for us than the strongest conceivable injury of England. According to my personal view the danppr is so grave that it should only be accepted if the economic, financial, and military situation leaves us no other choice. So far as the financial domain /Aomes into consideration I believe I can deny such a compulsory situation." • In reply to Ilerr Helfferich's report., i 'long memorandum was issued contesting the soundness of his conclusions