New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-08-05
Insists Sinking Amer
lean Ship Violated
No Treaty.
WOULD AGREE
TO ARBITRATE
Reply to Washington Pro-
test Gives Little Hope
of Agreement.
DISPUTE IN DEADLOCK
Berlin Reiterates Right Under
Law of Nations to Destroy
Neutral Vessels.
From The Tribune Bureau. J


Washington. Aug. Reiterating its
right TO sink American vessels carrying
contraband the German government, IN
it's answer to the American note pro-
testing against the sinking Of the ship
William p. Frye, declares that its
treaty with this country merely oollges
it to make compensation. The conten-
tion of the United States was that the
sinking of the Frye was violation OF
the treaty between this country and
Prussia. The German government re-
! iects this contention and indicates that
there is not much chance of agreement
as TO the Interpretation of the existing
treaties.
The German note was made public by
the State Department to-day. 1t in
sists that the commander of the aux
iliary cruiser Prinz Eitel Friedrich
acted in the legal exercise Of the right
of control Of trade in contraband en-
loved by warships of belligerent ma
tlOnS, tnc beImdH SoNNAH"N" 'e
called on only to pay for the damage
. sustained By American citizens.
1t is asserted that a German prize
court found that the sinking of the
Frye was justified, but was unable to
fix the indemnity, as il had no data
before it. This government refused to
accent the sending of the Frye case to
a German prize court and protested
against it.
at will now be necessary to settle
these points in 4 different way says
the German note. "The German gov
ernment suggests as the simplest way
that each of the two governments des-
icnate an expert, and that the two ex-
perts Jointly fix the amount of indem-
ntv for the vessel and any American
property which may have been sunk
with her. The German government will
promptly pay the amount of indemnity
thus ascertained. 1t expressly declares,
however, reverting to what has been
stated above, that this payment does
not constitute satisfaction for the vio-
lation of American treaty rights, but
duty or policy of this government
founded on the existing treaty stlpu-
lations.
Would Go to The Hague.
Should the American government
not agree to this manner of settling
the matter the German government is
prepared TO submit the difference of
opinion as being a question of the in
depreciation of the existing treaties be-
tween Germany and the United States
to the tribunal at The Hague. pursuant
to Article SO of The Hague convention
for the pacific settlement of interna-
tional disputes"
A deadlock has been reached between
the two governments. While no de-
cison as to the course that will be
pursued has been arrived at by the
State Department, il was evident to-
day that recourse would eventually be
had TO arbitration.
The German note in effect covers the
Leelanaw case. and it indicates clearly
the attitude Germany will take in deal
ing with the sinking of that American
NeSSel tnat IL is prepared 10 submit
the difference of opinion to The Hague
tribunal.
The question at issue between the
two governments is the Interpretation
of Article 13 of the PrussianA American
treaty of 1893, which was revived by
the treaty of 1928. This article pro-
vdes for the detention of ship and
cargo for such time as the belligerent
may think necessary, and for the TAX
ing over Of the war stores for his own
use by paying their full value. The
right Of sinking is not mentioned IN
the treaty, and Germany asserts that II
is neither expressly permitted nor ex-
pressly prohibited, so that on this point
the treaty stipulations must be supple.
mented by the general rule Of interna-
tional law.
The German government says that
il is not disputed by the American
government that, according to general
principles Of international law. bel
iicerent is authorized to sink neutral
vessels under almost any conditions for
carving cortraband The law on which
Germany depends to support its con-
Continued on page 3. column