New Britain herald., 1915-08-05

sciples of international law.
 There only remains then to be cx- amined the question how far the Prussian-American treaty stipulations modify these principles of interna- tional law.
 Treaty of 17S5.
 ''In this connection article 12 of tho treaty of 1785 provides that in the event of a war between one of the con : tracting parties with another Power the free commerce and intercourse of the nationals of the party remain ing neutral with the belligerent DOW CTS shall not be interrupted but tha, on the contrary tho vessels of the neu- tral party may navigate freely to and from the ports of the belliyerent DOW CTS, even neutralizing enemy goods on board thereof. %"
 However, this articles merely for mulates general rules for the freedom of maritime intercourse and leaves lhe question of contraband untouched. . the specific stipulations on this point are contained in the following article which is materially identical with ar l force.
 "The plain intention of article I 3 is to establish 8 reasonable Compromise between the military interests of the belligerent contracting parties and the commercial interests of the neutral party.
 "on the other hand the belligerent party is to have the right to prevent the transportation of war supplies to his adversaries even when carried on vessels of the neutral party; on the other hand the commerce and naviga- tion of the neutral party is to be fn- terfered with as little as possible by the measures necessary for such pre- vention, and reasonable compensation is to be paid for any inconvenience or damage which may nevertheless en- sue from the proceeding of the bell ngerent party.
 Article 13 recites the following means whereby the belligerent party can prevent the vessels of the neutral party from, carrying war supplies ,n his adversary; the detention of the ship and cargo for such length of time as the belligerent may think neces- sary; furthermore, the taking over of the war stores for his own use, pay- ing the full value of the same as as- certained at the place of destination.
 sinking Not Mentioned.
 The right of sinking is not men, toned in the treaty and is therefore neither expressly permitted nor ex- pressly prohibited, so that on this point the part adaptations must be supplemented by the general rules rf law. From the meaning and spirit of the treaty it really ap- pears out of the question that it was intended to expect of the belligerent that he should permit a vessel loaded with contraband, for example, shipment or arms and ammunition of decisive importance for the outcome ,f the war, to proceed unhindered to his enemy when circumstances for- bid the carrying of the (omission) in- Q port, if the general rules of inter- national law allow sinking of the yes-- 'el.
 The remaining stipulations of ar- icle Is must likewise be considered n this light they provide that the aptain of a vessel stopped shall te flowed to proceed on his voyage if le delivers out the contraband to the which stopped his vessel. For, such delivering out cannot of curse be considered when the en- uing loss of time imperils either the varship herself or the success of her ,ther, operations. a
 ''In the case of the William F. Frye he German commander at first tried Q have matters settled by the de- livery of the contraband, but con- ,inced himself of the impracticabili.y if this attempt, in that it would ex- pose his ship to attack by whatever luperior force of enemy war vessels pursuing him, and was accordingly obliged to determine upon the sink ng of the Frye. Thus he did not ex- ,eed on this point the limits to which ,e was bound by article IS.
 Compensation For Loss. ~ However. article 1S asserts it. Ielf here to the extent that it founds he obligation to compensate the American citizens affected, whereas. to the general rules of in- ernational law, the belligerent party loes not need to grant compensation Or vessel lawfully sunk. For, if ,y article IS, the mere exercise of fight of highways makes the bel igerent liable for compensation, this must apply a fortiori to the exercise # the right of sinking.
 The question of whether the Ger nan commander acted legally was a subject for the consider .tion of the German prize courts ac- ording to general principles of inter- lational law, as laid down also in Article of the Hague convention for he establish ment of an international ,rize court and in Article 51 of the Declaration of London.
 The German government conse- tuently laid thu case of the William