The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-03-13
The Other Side Of the Frye Incident.

in al cases send sfdmps for fhof purpose.
The Other Side Of the Frye Incident.
The owners Of the william =. Frye
are not warranted in denounclng the
act of the German commander al
piracy" II that Is really their opin-
Ton as reported. 1t WAS manifestly
r blunder suggested by overzeal; but
that circumstance does not make pi.
rates of Commander THIERIcHsEN and
his suhordinates on the Prinz Eitel
is responsible for the sinking Of the
ship by order Of one Of It's duly
commissioned naval officers; and
there Is not the remotest probability
that the German Government Is seek
ing or will seek to evade It's full re-
sponsibility.
Nor Is there any sense in the talk
about proceeding to Obtain reparation
by libelling the Prinz Eitel Friedrich
now that she is within the 1urisdic-
ton Of the American courts. An at
tempt TO subject this warship to civil
process would come to a speedy and
humiliating end at the hands Of our
W J~urists.
Once again, there is NO merit in the
by one of the owners Of the Frye,
namely. that when the Government
War Risk Bureau insured the vessel II
"placed the Governments oficial seal
not contraband cargo on the charter
for the cruise on which the vessel
was about TO embark" This Ia a
mistaken view Of the force Of the
insurance policy. As We pointed out
yesterday. the fact Of insurance by
our Government has a direct and i'm
portant relation to the case. hut not
exactly in the name which Mr..
SEwAIL seems 10 take for granted.
The acceptance of the war risk on
rho frye by the United States Gov
eminent did not in any way guar
uultf III dhNdl't INV i'I u u
character of the cargo or render the
vessel immune to search and seizure
by visiting ~belligerents. That insur-
ance is conditional upon the non-con-
traband character Of the cargo, not
determinative Of such character. If
The wheat should turn out IN have
been Intended for military oil Gov
eminent Use and properly to be re-
Carded as conditional contraband
then tho policy would he void: that
is all. In deciding whether 10 nay
or not n pay the loss. therefore. the
United States will have to pass upon
the same question which would have
come before n prize court in the case
of the capture Of the Frye by the
T'rinz Eitel Friedrich.
II ts not necessary that national
bitterness or patriotic Indignation
should enter into this case: much
loss that there should he demands
for lis solution by extraordinary
methods. All things considered. IL
strikes us that the person most to he
commisrrated is the gallant Captain
Of the German auxiliary cruiser: the
seadOg whose humane qualities are
attested alike by his prisoners and
by the photographs OF his counte-
nance. He sailed a gallant race for
seven months against disaster. and
finally came to grief only through his
own laundering zeal and miscon"ep-
lion Of international law and German
policy. His Government will have TO
pay the bill pecuniarily, but In every
other way he is likely to he the chief
sufferer in consequence Of the Incl
dent OF January 2s. Let us see what
can he said for the point Of view Of
captain TUrrRrCUsEN
In the first place. when he ran m
against the American ship william
p. Frye he could have had no knowl.
edge OF the policy and position which
his Government was taking. in It's
own interests, with regard 10 the i'm
munity Of foodstuffs In neutral bot
toms on the high
In the second place, n Captain
T'HTRICHsES was shaping his actions
by the light Of the Declaration OF
London, a code Of rules signed and
accepted by both Germany and the
United States ~ corresponding In
substance with "the generally rccoc-
2lzcd principles Of International law
"A code, however. without the force
~ actual treaty ohligation-he found
therein these several provisions
ARTICLE "a
The following articles, susceptible OF
use in war ss we'll az for purposes o'
peace, may, mithout notice, he treated
ss contrabard OF war under the nams
OF cond tional contraband
-. Foodstufs.
"ARTICLE 81.
"Conditioral contraband ~ abb. tc