In yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald there was a report from the enquiry indicating a lack of caution on the part of the Sydney's captain in approaching the Kormoran. It was known that the only trader likely to be encounterred by the Sydney was the Dutch "Jepara", about 1/3 the size of the Kormoran and depicted in recognition references on board Sydney. It was also commented that sailors went to action stations in only about 1/3 of such approaches (actual numbers were quoted), which would account for the almost complete devastation of Sydney once the Kormoran opened fire.

But, when I searched for the digital version, all I came up with was the following.

Flag casts doubt on submarine theory
A THEORY that a Japanese submarine torpedoed HMAS Sydney in 1941 has taken a further dive with evidence that a painting in a former Japanese naval academy, supposedly celebrating a Japanese submarine's role in the battle, depicts a flag not introduced into the Australian navy until more than 20 years after the war.

Terence Cole, QC, who is heading an inquiry into the sinking of the Sydney, is likely to dismiss the widely held theory of a Japanese submarine's intervention in the battle in November 1941, 18 days before Japan attacked Pearl Harbour.

Austin Chapman, who served with the Commonwealth Occupation Forces in Japan after the war, told the inquiry he had seen the painting at the former academy on the island of Etajima, near another painting which he took to be a celebration of the Japanese victory at Pearl Harbor.

The conning tower of a Japanese submarine was depicted and a cruiser sailing towards it depicting what he took to be the White Ensign. "I immediately thought, 'This is the sinking of the Sydney,"' he said. "I could see a blue background in the corner and the rest was white. And there were stars."

Commander Jack Rush, QC, said the White Ensign was not introduced until 1967, though a White Ensign was flown by the Royal Navy. Mr Cole has heard from a number of witnesses, including author John Samuel, who said one Japanese submarine in the war was unaccounted for. Mr Cole asked how he could infer from that that a Japanese sub was involved in the sinking of the Sydney.

David Angwin, a persistent correspondent with the inquiry, said in evidence he had written to the Japanese Prime Minister saying that a Japanese submarine had been involved in the attack. But he agreed he had only been acting on a theory.

Michael Montgomery, whose 1981 book, Who Sank the Sydney, ignited the debate on the sinking, told the Herald he stood by a theory that the Japanese submarine had torpedoed the Sydney hours after its battle with the German raider Kormoran, and that survivors had been machine-gunned to cover up the involvement.

Cheers, Rowan