DEPARTMENT OF STATE.

234 SUBMARINE WARFARE.
In view of the above mentioned course I can state with
full assurance that to the best of my knowledge and
belief none of the fragments referred to belong to any
part of the vessel and that they found their way to the
locations in which recovered as the result of the explosion
which caused the damage to the vessel.
I was present during the taking of the depositions of
the Master of the vessel, of the Chief Engineer, and of
the Officer of the Watch at the time of the explosion, which
have been previously forwarded. , Since the taking of these
depositions I have talked over many details with these
and other officers of the ship; I have made a careful examination
of the ship in wake of the damage; and my
conclusion from these sources of information is that the
damage is the result of the explosion of a torpedo. My
reasons for this conclusion are as follows:
(a) The sworn deposition of the Chief Engineer stating
that immediately prior to the explosion he saw a white
streak in the water leading from about abeam towards
the forward part of the vessel. I have considerable confidence
in this statement inasmuch as the Chief Engineer
appears to be a man well balanced and observant; he is,
moreover, averse to publicity in this connection, as he
does not desire to be quoted as having seen this evidence
of a torpedo attack inasmuch as he states that he has
read in the press a large number of statements of passengers
and members of crews of various vessels, who have
thought they had seen a torpedo when all the other facts
in these cases were absolutely against such a possibility.
(b) Considering the position of the ship at the time of
the explosion, I consider that it is beyond the bounds of
probability that a floating mine could be encountered in
this vicinity. I do not consider that the damage to the
ship could have been caused by an anchored mine which
had broken adrift, as such a mine would float on the surface
of the water and if exploded on contact with the ship,
would have caused damage at and above the water line
instead of entirely below the water line as is actually the
case.
(c) The damage was beyond any possibility of doubt
or question caused by an external explosion.
(d) At least one of the fragments forwarded herewith,
although bearing no identification marks, appears to me
to be a portion of the shell of a torpedo.
(e) The force of the explosion as indicated by the
damage to the upper and lower tween decks and the
weather deck appears to have been from very slightly
abaft the beam; due to the well known uncertainty of
the phenomena attendant upon the action of high explosives,
I realize that this apparent direction of the force
of explosion is not conclusive in any sense, but taken
together with the other elements, is believed to have
some slight corroborative value.
LEWIS B. MCBRIDE.
Forwarded:
1ST JUNE, 1915.
J. H. TOWERS,
Lieutenant, U. 8. N., Naval Attache {Acting)