The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-03-13

Government department Of the enemy
Stnks,
ARTICLE So.
Conditional contraband n not liable
10 capture, except when found on board
a vessel bound for territory belonging
TO or occupied by the enemy. and when
It liz not 70 be discharged in an inter-
vening port. Tho ships papers ire n
elusive proof both as to the voyage on
which the ship Is engaged and as to the
port Of discharge Of the goods. .
ARTICLE 81.
"A vessel carrying goods liable to cap
ture a. absolute or conditional contra
band may b captured on the high ssas,
owe II she h to touch ut Q port Of call
before reaching the hostile destination.
ARTICLE 80.
-ContrahAnA goods are liable 70 con-
deqnnatton
ARTICLE %.
"A vesssi carrying oontraband may
be condemned II che oontraband. reck-
oned either by value. weight, volume or
freight. forms moro thar half tho cargo.
ARTICLE -.
"A neutral vessel which has been np-
turcd may o b DESTROYED bv the
cAptor: she must b. taken into such
port az u proper for the determination
there Of all questions concsrning tho
validity Of tho capture
ARTICLE a.
AS an exception . neutral ves~el
which has been captured by . ~beliiserent
warship. and which would BE- liable to
condemnation may be Destroyed " the
o~bserconcs o. Article ~ could involve
danger TO the sotefy Of the Scdrship or 70
the success Of the operoNors N ,ch,cA
she Is engaged at the tt.ne.
ARTICLE 81.
IT the capture Of q neutral vessel 4,
subsequently, held to b invalid. though
h act Of destruction has been held to
be 5ustlnahls, the captor must ray COM
p~ensation TO the parties interested. in
place OF the restitution I which they
would have been entitled"
In offering the foregoing exhibit from
the nearest available approach to au-
thority on the rules Of the permissible
In time Of war We are far from nj.
tempting to e%xonerate Captain THEIR
IcHsEN or to Justify his act Of de-
struction. In his main assumption
as to the c%ontraband character Of
the cargo he apparently committed
a stupendous blunder. for which he
is responsible 10 his own greatly
embarrassed Government and for
which that Government Is responsible
to u Government and through
Washington to the owners Of the
Frye. As we have already remarked,
perhaps the Captain Of the Prinz Eitel
Friedrich Is the person most TO he
commfserated. We have put together
the articles from the Declaration OF
London merely to show how a sailor
mind, not particularly we'll disci.
plined in the Interpretation Of inter
national law. but Jealous and perhaps
overzealous IN the service OF his coun-
try. might be led on to do exactly
what Captain THIERrcRsEN did. once
having become firmly convinced Of
the c%Ontraband character Of the
Frye's cargo. 1t IL easy TO see how
the wording of Article 40 might seem
70 him to Justify the sinking OF the
ship as n matter Of convenience. or
because It promoted "the success Of
the operations Of hts warsh.p in a
general way.
How foolish, therefore. is talk about
piracy" or OF outlswing the com.
mander who thus reasoned to him.
self, or Of treating the incident as an
outrageous and unprecedented and
deliberately insolent insult TO our
flag!
Nevertheless. II is n great misfor-
tune that the German Captains very
maladrolt experiment IN international,
law should have been conducted az
the expense Of one Of the last sur.
vivors Of that splendid sailing fleet
which formerly carried the fame Of
Maine shipbuildcrs and the beauty Of
the American nag to the uttcrmost
parts Of the navigable sea.