The Oklahoma City times. [volume] (Oklahoma City, Okla.) 1908-1984, 1915-06-10
RIGHT TO SINK
FRYE IS UPHELD
Germans Assert They Can Destroy
U. S. Vessels II COntraband
Is Carried
AGREE TO PAY FOR ACTIONS
Reject Two Points Made By Wilson
Regarding Loss OF
Eitel'S Victim

mnny's latest note 10 the United States
on the sinking ~ the American sailing
ship william f. Frye by the Prnz
Eitel Friedrich, received here today.
makes the far-rrachlng claim uf II
right to destroy any American vessel
carrying cOnlrnhnnd, while agreeing to
pay dnmuges for the net
Two points made 10y the United
States ARE rejected by Gcmuny. One
was the statement Of the American
government In its note NJ April - that
prize court martial proceedings mcnnt
unnecessary delay all matters con.
Cerned being susceptible " prompt set
tlcmcnt through diplomatic channels
The other was that the destruction NJ
the Frye was "unuucstiouuhy viola.
tion Of the obligations imposed upon
the imperial government under exist.
Ing treaty stipuHtlons between the
United States aud Prussia
In the prusslnu treaty NJ lS2S the
binding force ~ which was ndmitt1l
by Germany In It's note " April D. the
right of citizens ~ either country to
ship arms und ammunition Hs well as
all other Kind, of contrnband In their
own vessels was granted IN time "
wnr hut each party hud the right t.
detnin such coutrHhnnd and make pay
mcnt for II II coufscatcd
The note from Germany today en-.
lnrges ON treaty N lS2S hy claiming
that while the treaty did not Sprclfl-
cnlly permit the destruction " ship
nevertheless. II rs coutrnhaud could
not be- stopped IN any other way II
could lin the extreme ease he effected
hl the destruction ~ the contraband
and of the ship carry IT,"
The German View
The following II the German reply
Foreign office, Berlin, June Z, 1913.
The undersigned hus the honor to
make the following reply 10 the note
" His Exccilency MIR james ". Ger
ard. ambassador Of the United States
of America, dated April 30. 1915. for
elsn office No. 1901. Oh the subject
" ~ sinking " the American sailing
ttstN William T. Frye, by the Ger.
man auxiliary cruiser Prinz Eitel
Friedrich
THE German government cannot
here admit that as the American gov
ernmcnt assumed the destruction ~
sailing vessel mentioned constitutes a
violation N the treaties concluded he
tween Prussia aud the United States
nt mn earlier date and nov applicable
tu the relations between the German
empire and the United states, or of
the American rights derived there
from. For these treaties die not have
the intention " dcpriving one NJ the
contracting parties engaged In war
~ the right NJ stopping the supply Ot
cnntrnband 10 his enemy when he re-
cognzcs the supply NJ such as detri
mental tu his military interests
"On the contrary article ~ NJ the
prussluu. American treaty NJ July H.
100, expressly reserves to the party
at war the right to stop the carrying
~ contrnhnn1 aud to detain the con
trnhand II follows. then, that II II
cannot be- ncct mplshrd IN any other
way the stopping ~ the supply. may
IN the extreme case be- effected by the
destruction " the cuntrnhnnd and oi
the ship carrying IT, Az n matter OF
course. the obligation Of the party M
war tO pay compensation 10 the par
ties interested NJ the neutral con
tractlng party remains In force. what
ever he the manner " stopping the
supply
According To general principles oi
international law any exercises Of IN,
right of control over the trade In con
trnhaud Is subject tO the decision NJ
the prize courts, even though sucl
right may be- restricted by specin
treaties.
AT the beginning df the present wal
Germany pursuant to these principle,
established 10y law, prize jurisdiction
for cases Of the kind under consider
alton. The case Of the William +
Frye Is likewise subject To the Ger
man prize jurisdiction for the prus
dan-American treaty mentioned con
tain no stipulation M to how tn,
amount of the compensation provide,
by article 10 of the treaties cited, 4
tu he fixed
The German government therefor
complies with lts treaty obligations {,
fun extent when the prize court
instituted by II In accordance with IN
ternatlOnal law proceed In pursuance
tu the treaty stipulation and thu
award the American interested al
equitable Indemnity, There would
therefore, he no foundation for a claim
Of the American government unles
the prize court should not grant In
demnity IN accordance with the treaty
IN such event, however, the German
government would not hesltnte 10 M
range for equitable indemnity NOT
wlthstandlng. For the rest. nrlye mr.
ceedlngs for the case Of the Frye ar
indlspensabl apart from the Amer
can claims for the reason that othe
claims Of the neutral and enemy In
terested parties are TO he considered 4
the matter.
"As was stated In the note NJ Apr
4, last, the prize court should hav
TO decide the question whether IN
destruction Of the ship and cargo wn
leRnl, whether nnd under what con
lltions the property sunk was llnbl
10 conflscatlon and 10 whom and 4
= what amount Indemnity IL to be pni
prnv'dod nnnlicatiOn therefore. II r,
(Ooutinued on Last Page,I