Geomorfolog написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #90771
Наверно писал китайский чиновник, знающий русский язык.

Вот именно! Русский никогда бы так не написал, а иностранец - легко, поскольку не знает особенностей русского языка

Отредактированно Абу Касим (10.07.2009 10:16:27)

Россiя написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #90802
А росписи?

Про подписи я тоже думал. Имхо - сам документ составил чиновник,русские только подписывались. Далее когда я впервые наткнулся на эти данные был уверен,что эсминцы будут набиты морскими и сухопутными офицерами как сельди в банке. Ан нет,если верить распискам. Почти стандартные экипажи.

http://kortic.borda.ru/?1-16-0-00000018 … 1243843338
Давайте почитаем обсуждение этой темы у ув. коллег из Кортика. Думаю многое прояснится

Россiя написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #90846
Это не росписи, а фальшивка какая-то

Очень похоже на то. Наверное спасшихся было значительно больше. Позже попробую доказать сие утверждение.

Geomorfolog написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #90858
Увы - ни чертежа,ни схемки,ни фото.

Разве что английская вики http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: … n_1905.jpg

Россiя написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #90802
А росписи?

Позволю себе несколько слов. В тех документах, что я просмотрел - росписей (подписей) нет. Это просто рукописные копии оригинальных документов, сделанные человеком, знающим неплохо русский язык и написавшим фамилии так, как он разобрал. Весь текст, включая фамилии, написан одним почерком (одним человеком). Подписей г.г. офицеров там нет.

Еще немного документов об интернированых кораблях. Открывает документ о Бурном в Вэйхайвэи. Далее идут многочисленные англоязычные телеграммы(рукописные)Конечно вперемежку с японскими.
C09050849200 и C09050849300

Отредактированно Geomorfolog (30.07.2009 19:09:18)

The Times, Monday, August 15, 1904.

THE CAPTURE OF THE RESHITELNI.
RUSSIAN PROTEST.
(FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT.)

TOKIO, Aug. 13, 15 P.M.

    There are rumours from Chifu that the commander of the Reshitelni alleges that he was entrusted with the duty of carrying to a place of safety the wife and daughter of General Stössel and five engineers, who are believed to be high personages in disguise.

TOKIO, Aug. 14.*

    The Navy Department has issued the following statement covering the Chifu incident:-
    "According to the latest reports received, the Asashio and Kasumi, belonging to the first destroyer flotilla, Captain Fujimoto commanding, were despatched in search of the enemy's ships, which scattered on the night of August 10.
    "They found a vessel resembling a destroyer of the enemy's and pursued her, hut lost her in the darkness. Continuing their search they discovered that she had entered Chifu.
    "Our destroyers waited outside the port. As the Russian failed to leave, Commander Fujimoto, anticipating her escape by night and a possible attack upon merchant vessels, entered Chifu with the two destroyers. They found the Reishiteln still not disarmed.
    "Lieutenant Terashima was sent on board the Russian-with a message to the effect that the Japanese expected the vessel to leave by dawn or surrender.
    "The commander of the Russian vessel refused to accede to the demand, and while the conference I was stall going on he was heard instructing his men to blow up the ship.
    "At the same time he caught hold of Lieutenant Terashima and threw him overboard. Our interpreter was thrown overboard by the Russian seamen. The other men also showed signs of resistance. While this was progressing, the forward magazine exploded, killing and injuring some of our men. We then captured the destroyer and returned.
    "Our losses owing to the explosion were one killed and four mortally wounded, Lieutenant Terashima, the interpreter, and nine others wounded."

ST. PETERSBURG, AUG. 13.*

    Admiral Alexeieff has sent the following telegram to the Tsar, dated August 12 :-
    "According to a report of to-day's date from the Russian Consul at Chifu, during the preceding night two Japanese torpedo-boats entered the inner harbour and at about 3 ajn. made an armed attack on the Reshitelni, which had been disarmed on the previous day according to an arrangement arrived at between her captain and the Chinese authorities. This was known to the Japanese.
    "The Reshitelni's captain gave the order to blowup the boat, but she did not sink, and was' towed out of the port by the Japanese. Her captain, Lieutenant Rostachakovski, her officers, Lieutenant Kanievski, Ensign Serge Petroff, and second-class engineer Kisliakoff, and the greater part of her crew swain ashore. They reported that the Japanese fired on them as they were escaping."

AUGUST 14.*

    By command of the Tsar the Minister for Foreign Affairs has instructed the Russian Ambassador in Paris to request the French Government, on behalf of the Imperial Government, to lodge a strong protest with the Japanese Government through the French Minister in Tokio against what is described as the outrageous violation of the neutrality of China and the universally recognized principles of international law involved in the attack made by the Japanese on the Retshitelny while in a neutral harbour.
    The foreign Powers have also been informed of the Russian declaration. At the same time the Russian Minister in Peking has been charged to lodge an emphatic protest with the Chinese Government with reference to the serious consequences which the violation of neutrality permitted by them may entail.
    The Tsar has received the following telegram, dated August 11, from Lieutenant Rostachakovski, the commander of the Reshitelni :-
    "I have arrived at Chifu from Port Arthur with the Reshitelni, bearing important despatches and having effected a passage through twp blockading lines. According to the orders of Admiral Grigorovitch, I disarmed the ship and lowered my flag. All formalities were duly carried out. On the night of the 11th-12th I was in port when I was piratically attacked by the Japanese, who had approached with two torpedo-boats and a cruiser and sent a party under the command of an officer as though to enter into pourparlers. Not having arms to resist, I gave orders for preparations to be made to blow up my ship.
    "When the Japanese began to hoist their flag, I insulted the Japanese officer by striking him and throwing him into the water. I then ordered the crew to throw the enemy into the sea. Our resistance, however, was unavailing and the Japanese took possession of the boat. Explosions occurred in the engine-room and in the fore part of the vessel, but the Reshitelni did not sink and was taken from the port by the Japanese. I hope that they will not be able to take her to one of their own ports.
    "The officers and crew have been saved except an engineer, a stoker, and four other men slightly wounded. Naval Ensign Petroff, who resisted the hoisting of the Japanese flag, received a severe blow on the chest with the butt-end of a musket, causing internal hæmorrhage. I received a wound in the right thigh. The bullet has not yet been extracted. The conduct of the officers and crew was above all praise. The Imperial Vice-Consul extended the greatest hospitality and sympathy to us."
    Admiral Alexeieff has sent the following telegram of yesterday's date to the Emperor:-
    "Supplementing my telegram of August 12 the Consul at Chifu reports that while he was conferring with the Taotai regarding the temporary stay of the destroyer Reshitelni to repair her engines, the commander of the boat, acting on instructions from Rear-Admiral Grigorovitch and owing to the defective condition of the engines, entered into negotiations with the Chinese Admiral on the subject of the disarmament of the vessel, and handed over to him the breech blocks of the guns and rifles and lowered the ensign and pennant.
    "After the Japanese attack Lieutenant Rostachakovski, Ensign Petroff, Engineer Kisliakoff, and 22 sailors were picked up by a boat belonging to the Chinese cruiser. Lieutenant Kanievski and 22 sailors were also picked up by the crew of the lightship and boats belonging to merchant ships lying in the harbour. Out of a crew of 47 (?) men four are missing. The commander was seriously, but not mortally, wounded by a bullet in the thigh and has been removed along with the Ensign Petroff, who is ill, to the hospital of the French missionaries. Another sailor who is slightly wounded has also been removed thither.''

(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)

PARIS, Aug. 14.

    The unfortunate incident at Chifu is regarded by many people here in the same light as the sinking of the Knight Commander—that is to say, as a regrettable excess of zeal on the part of a naval subordinate. It is thought equally probable that all immediate responsibility in the former instance will be repudiated as there is good reason to believe it has practically been in the latter. Meanwhile, certain organs of the Russian Press are affording a striking illustration of Satan reproving sin. M. Michel Suvorin talks of the Chifu affair in the Novoe Vremya as a scandalous attack of brigands and blames the indifference of neutral vessels during the night action in a Chinese port. Europe, he says, seems deliberately to envenom the incidents resulting from the action of the Russian cruisers. He inquires whether international diplomacy will accept "this barbarous deed as it has accepted all such deeds perpetrated by Japan."
    This evening's Temps deals with the incident from a purely academic and technical standpoint without any trace of partiality. The two columns of comment, however, chiefly serve to show what has from the beginning been clear to all—namely, the  elasticity  of the  interpretation of international law. The Temps observes that owing to the restricted sphere in which the rules of international law are in force each State introduces in its application attenuations or amplifications according to its own individual interests.   The conclusion of the Temps is that none of the pending incidents affecting international law are of sufficient gravity to justify the apprehension that there will be an extension of the existing conflict, providing that the interested Powers are firmly resolved to maintain, universal peace. The fact that the rules of international law are variable and that every State applies them in a different: way according to its interests of the moment contributes to give rise to many conflicts which would never occur if there were an international code universally accepted. The hope of a peaceful solution seems all the more capable of being realized as both of the belligerent Powers appear-to have made the same mistakes, although not equally important, and as in the more serious instance—namely, the capture of the Retshitelny, the violation of Chinese neutrality was committed by subordinate officers, which has always been considered as an extenuating  circumstance  in diplomatic differences.

Отредактированно vs18 (13.08.2009 13:59:42)

The Times, Wednesday, August 17, 1904.

THE CAPTURE OF THE RESHITELNI.
(FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT.)

TOKIO, Aug. 15, 2 P.M.

    The Japanese journals state that the country does not intend to repeat the Mandjur farce. Japan cannot break up her fleet for the purpose of watching Chinese ports in which Russian vessels are abusing the privileges of refuge and taking advantage of China's inability to enforce neutral rights.
    The journals are confident that when the facts of the Resnitelni's capture are known Europe will endorse Japan's procedure.

9 30 P.M.

    In addition to the details already announced Commander Fujimoto's report says that on board the Reshitelni no steps had been taken to remove the armament, and that all the members of the crew were still on board. The vessel had taken in coal at Chifu. Therefore, at 3 a.m. on the I2th inst. he sent a lieutenant and 10 men to require her to surrender or leave the port within an hour.

(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)

PEKING, AUG. 15, 6 30 P.M.

    On Friday M. Lessar gave a Note to the Wai-wu-pu  detailing tho circumstances from the Russian side of the seizure of the Russian destroyer at Chifu. Yesterday afternoon M. Lessar followed up the Note by presenting a strongly-worded demand to the Chinese.
    It must have given him momentary satisfaction, amid the misfortunes of the present disastrous war to lie able to return, to the minatory tone that characterized his communications with the Chinese Government when Russia was still believed to be invincible. He demanded that China should recover possession of the captured destroyer, and should degrade the senior naval officer in command at Chifu, Commodore Sah. He stated that unless the vessel was recovered by the Chinese, into whose protection it had been given, China would stand convicted of acting in complicity with Japan, while the dismissal of the commodore was justified, since he was either a traitor or a coward.
    The Chinese hope that Japan will spontaneously restore the destroyer to their custody. This procedure would meet with, general approval in Peking. The constant violation of the neutrality of Chinese neutral territory between the Great Wall and the Liau River by Russia, her disregard of the neutrality of the treaty port of Niu-chwang, the sinking of the Hipsang, and other outrages are held to extenuate, but not to justify, the action of Japan at Chifu.
    The story that France and Germany have supported the Russian demands is untrue. No communications have yet been received by the Wai-wu-pu either from France or from Germany in connexion with the incident.

ST. PETERSBURG, Aug. 16.*

    The newspapers to-day contain denunciations of the alleged violation of international law by the Japanese in seizing the Russian destroyer Reshitelni at Chifu. The Journal de St. Petersbourg says that the blow given by Captain Rostchakovski to the commander of the Japanese boarding party has become historical, constituting the political degradation of the Japanese nation.
    The Novoe Vremya remarks :—" "While Russia is willing to undertake that the Askold and the Grosovoi should not be used for the rest of the war, these vessels must remain armed ready to repulse the treacherous enemy."

The Times, Tuesday, August 23, 1904.

THE CAPTURE OF THE RESHITELNI.
———
TO THE EDITOR OP THE TIMES.

    Sir,—From general observation of the reports and comments on the capture of the Reshitelni in Chifu harbour, I think it has been, far too hastily assumed by every one that "Japan, has been guilty of an act of violence, towards neutral rights which it is difficult to defend on either legal or political grounds " (the Spectator). International law is of real obligation and sanction only in so far as it accords with practical reason and common sense or with the substitutional reason that is supplied by customary practice; although a noticeable feature of the present war has been the readiness of the rest of tho civilized world to accept Russian enunciation of momentary practices, which we may be sure for the most part are only pro hac vice, for the principles of that law.
    The presence of the " Shadowy Third," as the St. James's Gazette aptly describes China, divides this question into two distinct issues or sots of abnormal relations, viz., (1) Belligerency, and (2) Neutrality, the latter, it is wall to remember, being historically a derogation of tho former.
    (1.) The issue as between the belligerents is perfectly simple. There can be no foundation for Russian denunciation of Japanese "treachery " or "brigandage" save in impudence; and Russian protests to all and sundry of the principal powers are those. The juridical relation is set forth by Mr. Justice Story in the "Anne" (3 Wheaton, 435) :—
    "A capture made within neutral waters is, as between enemies, deemed to all intents and purposes, rightful; it is only by the neutral sovereign that its legal validity is to be considered void. The enemy has no rights whatsoever, and if tho neutral sovereign omits or declines to interpose a claim, the property is condemnable jure belli to the captors."
    To like purport Lord Stowell decided in the " Eliza Ann " (1 Dod. Adm., 244) :—"The right of claim is tho privilege, not of the enemy, but of the neutral country, which has a right to see that no act of violence is committed within its jurisdiction. When a violation of neutral territory takes place, that country alone, whose tranquillity has been disturbed, possesses the right of demanding reparation for the injury which she hag sustained" ; and " Acts of violence by one enemy against another are forbidden within the limits of a neutral territory, unless they are sanctioned by the authority of tho neutral state, which it has the power of granting to either of the belligerents, subject, of course, to a responsibility to the other " (ibidem). Vide also the "Purissima Conception" (G C. Rob. 45), the " Di Cigentia" (1 Dod. Adm., 404), "La Estrella" (-1 Wheaton, 298) et passim. As between Russia and Japan I conclude from these authorities there has been no excess of belligerent rights on tho part of the latter.
    (2) At first sight tho " affaire Reshitelni " appears to be an infraction of China's neutrality and an international wrong inasmuch as if imposes on China a duty to procure redress by way of restoring her neutral equilibrium. Let us, however, look a little closely at China's neutrality, whether it be substance or shadow.
    The late Mr. Hall defines (Int. Law 4th ed. p. 15, et seq.) the rudimentary principle of neutrality to be a duty of impartial conduct:—
    "A state must not allow feelings of friendship for a country to betray it into embarrassing an enemy of the latter in the exercise of his legitimate rights of war.
    ...During war, privileges tending to strengthen the hands of one of two belligerents help him towards tho destruction of his enemy. To grant them is ... to embarrass one by reserving to the other a field of action in which his enemy cannot attack him."
    Now looking at the matter in the light of practical reason, which alone can harmonize might and international right, and quite apart from any custom that may be alleged to have established itself, can a practice be regarded as the exercise of a duty of impartiality, which in effect, by stepping in between pursued and pursuing belligerents, not only witholds from the latter the fruition of a victory all but in his hands, but by the mere attainment of a neutral port, enables the disabled enemy to renew the conflict, recreated by time and the materia belli there open to him? I cannot think this to be a reasonable derogation of full belligerent rights, but that in such a case summum jus would be summa incuria.
    Leaving however the abstract question, the particular merits of the case remain to be considered. Antecedently to the capture of the Reshitelni, has there been any evidence of the existence of China's neutrality beyond a bare profession? From the beginning her neutrality, it may be quite involuntarily, has been coloured by Russian domination. Witness the delay of Russian, warships in Chinese ports on the outbreak of war, and the alleged installation of wireless telegraphy stations at points on the coastline. The Japanese had certainly some reason to distrust China's ability to effect the dismantling of the Reshitelni, and in point of fact there is evidence tending to show that tho ship had not been I denuded of munitions of war. Similarly with regard to the other refugee  ships now in Chinese ports, what I assurance has Japan that their "reception" will be I limited to the satisfaction of the bare requirements of navigable necessity which is the utmost indulgence warranted by International law?
    The true principle surely is that derogation from I belligerent rights in favour of neutral sovereignty can only be demanded where such sovereignty is in fact neutral, and such neutrality is sovereign, that is, in a position and determined to assert itself. Those who may hold this view will differ from your correspondent Mr. Wilson, who  impliedly treats the capture as a case of "cutting out."
    Cessante ratione cessat et ipsa lex.
        I am yours truly,
            H. GORDON THOMPSON.
17.  Abchurch-lane, E.C.

The Times Friday, Aug 12, 1904; pg. 3

CHIFU, Aug. 11, 7 30 A.M.*

    A Russian torpedo-boat destroyer entered Chifu Harbour at half-past 5 this morning and reported that six Russian battleships, four cruisers, and half the torpedo-boats escaped from Port Arthur yesterday morning.
    The destroyer left tho fortress last night. She brought five passengers, who state that the Japanese fleet is pursuing the Russians, and that a battle in the open sea is expected.

10 30 A.M.*

    The Russian torpedo-boat destroyer which reached here from Port Arthur this morning is the Retshitelny. Captain Rostachakovsky, her commander, states that her engines broke down when she was half-way to Chifu, and she had to proceed at a speed of 12 knots. No Japanese were seen.
    The captain confirms the statement that the large Russian warships have left Port Arthur. He refused to state directly that the fleet had gone on an extended cruise, but hinted strongly, in the course of a long interview, that the warships expected to join the Vladivostok squadron, which had been, recruited by the purchase of Argentine ships. He stated fiat the torpedo-boats, gunboats, and small craft generally were all remaining in Port Arthur. Some of them came out as usual to perform their various duties in the vicinity of the port, bat they were not following the big ships.
    The firing recently heard, he explained, came from Port Arthur, where the Japanese continue to make daily attacks with scarcely less energy than during the three days' battle. The Japanese line now extends from Louisa Bay on the north shore to a point immediately east of Tache Bay, about seven miles east of Port Arthur.
    The Japanese, the captain alleged, were wasting lives with reckless courage—positions were frequently lost and retaken and then lost and retaken again.
    Passengers by the Retshitelny state that for the last five days shells from Wolf's Hill, have been dropping into the town. Several civilians have been injured. One shell hit the oil storehouse under Golden Hill, and it was destroyed by fire in spite of every effort to save it.
    The time that the fleet left Port Arthur is estimated at 7 o'clock on Wednesday morning ; only the smaller Japanese vessels opened fire, and the pursuit lasted 2½ hours.
    The hospital ship Mongolia, carrying women and children, accompanied the fleet.

LATER.*

    News from other sources absolutely confirms the report that all the big ships except the Bayan, which was injured, left Port Arthur yesterday, exchanging shots with the Japanese at long range.
    There seems no doubt that the long-expected junction of the Port Arthur and Vladivostok fleets la now being attempted, and it is thought possible that it may be effected.
    Shortly after the arrival here of the Retshitelny the Chinese Admiral San sent an officer on board, who demanded that the destroyer should either leave the port or be disarmed. The engines being disabled, the captain agreed to render them absolutely useless and to disarm the vessel in the manner required by Admiral Sah.
    The captain has requested the Chinese Admiral to indicate a position nearer shore where the destroyer may lie till the end of the war under the protection of the Chinese Government.
    The destroyer bears traces of long service. Her paint is scratched and is fading to yellow through exposure to the sun. The deck resembles machine shop. The destroyer has not been damaged by the Japanese guns, although it is stated that she was under fire constantly for three months.
    Before leaving Port Arthur the Russian war-ships took on board large quantities of stores, machinery, and materials for ship repairing.
    According to information from an official source, 16 Russian warships were sighted last night in the vicinity of Chifu. It is stated that the Mongolia is going to Shanghai. The battleship Retvisan was bit 17 times during the recent bombardment of Port Arthur, but was only slightly damaged.
    The Japanese fleet has been directing its fire against the dockyards, where there are 100 vessels and on a spot whence a powder magazine was recently removed. The Japanese are reported to have only an inadequate number of large guns ashore. Those they are at present using have mostly been drawn from their fleet. Ta-ku-shan was captured by the Japanese on Monday night and recaptured by the Russians next day.
    Three Japanese torpedo-boat destroyers are now outside the harbour watching the Retshltelny, which is still flying the Russian flag.
    The Russian fleet left Port Arthur in response to imperative orders from Admiral Skrydloff.
    A semi-official telegram has been received here; denying a report that the Russian battleships Pobieda and Retvisan have returned to Port Arthur injured.

8 P.M.*

    It is reported that the Japanese cruiser Kasagi has been sunk in a naval engagement off Round Island.
    The Retshitelny has been dismantled by the removal of the breeches of her guns.

[A portion of the above appeared in our Second Edition of yesterday.]

*Through Reuter's Agency.

Отредактированно vs18 (15.08.2009 15:37:46)

Пропущенные страницы 178-179 и рапорт Каневского

Первый отряд истребителей.