Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1915-04-09
ADMITS REsPoNslslLlTY FOR
LOSS or UNITED STATES
MERCHANTMEN FRYE.
INSISTS ON FoRMALiTY
or PRIZE COURT TRIAL
Official Answer Made 70 American Note
Demanding That Owners 6s Rsim-
burssd-kaissr's Government Justi.
iiss Action sf Captain .: Etc! Fried
rich Under Circumstances - Legal
Phase Discussed.

OF the state department Tor compenSa.
ton for the sinking by the Prinz Eitel
Friedrich Of the American ship VIII
liam p. Frye, assuming liability not
only for destruction OF the vessel. but
Of the cargo. under the treaty Of 1928.
Germany requires, however. that the
case shall be taken before prize court
for the establishment. Of facts concern
ing ownership Of the ship and cargo.
To this the state department will as
sent.
The reply was handed by the foreign
Office at Berlin to Ambassador Gerard.
who cabled it to the state department.
It follows:
THE undersigned has the honor to
make reply to the note of his excel.
|lency, Mr.. James w. Gerard, ambas-
sador of the United States Of Amer
ice, dated the Sd instant, foreign Of
flee No. 1882, relative to claims for
damages for the sinking Of the Amer
lean merchant vessel, William p. Frye
by the German auxiliary cruiser Prinz
Eitel Friedrich.
Tried to Remove Cargo.
According to the reports which have
reached the German government the
commander Of the Prinz Eitel Fried
rich stopped the William p. Frye on
the high seas Jan. 81, 1915, and
searched her. He found on board q
cargo Of wheat consigned to Queens
town, Falmouth or Plymouth to order.
After he had first tried to remove
the cargo from the William p. Frye
he took the ships papers and her crew
on board and sank the ship.
1T results from these facts that the
German commander acted quite in ac-
cord with the principles OF interna-
tional law az laid down in the declara-
ton Of London and the German prize
ordinance. The ports Of Queenstown,
Falmouth and Plymouth whether the
ship visited was bound are strongly
fortified English coast places which.
moreover, serves az bases for the
British naval forces.
Conditional contrsband.
The cargo. Of wheat being food or
|foodstuffs was conditional contraband
within the meaning Of article %, No.
Il, Of the declaration Of London and
article 90, No. 1, Of the German prize
ordinance and was therefore to be con-
sidered as destined for the armed
forces Of the enemy pursuant to ar.
ticles SO and "a Of the declaration OF
London and articles 80 and 80 Of the
German prize ordinance and to be
treated as contraband pending proof
Of the contrary.
This proof was certainly not capa-
BILE Of being adduced at the time Of the
visiting of the vessel since the cargo
papers read to order. This however,
furnished the conditions under which
pursuant to article ~ Of the declara-
ton Of London and article 113 of the
German prize ordinance the sinking
OF the ship was permissible since it
was not possible for the auxiliary cruz
ser to take the prize into a German
port without involving danger to its
own security or the success Of its OPP
erations.
"The duties devolving upon the
cruiser before destruction of the ship
pursuant to article so Of the declara-
tion of London and article 116 Of the
German prize ordinance were fulfilled
by the cruiser in that it took on board
all the persons found on the sailing
vessel as well as the ships papers.
To Go Before Prize Court.
"The legality Of the measures TAX
en- by the German commander is fur
thermore subject to examination by
the German prize court pursuant to
article 50 Of the declaration Of London
and section l. No. 2 Of the German
code of prize procedure. These prize
proceedings will be instituted before
the prize court at Hamburg as soon as
the ships papers are received and will
comprise the settlement Of question
whether the destruction Of the cargo
and the ship was necessary within
the meaning Of article 40 Of the declar-
alton OF London; whether the property
sunk was liable to capture and,
whether, or to what extent indemnity
Is to be awarded the owners.
I'm the trial the owners OF ship
and cargo would be at liberty ur-
suant to article "a. paragraph 3 Of
the declaration Of London, to adduce
proof that the cargo Of wheat had
an innocent destination and did not,
therefore. have the character Of COM
traband.
'Tf such proof Is not adduced, the
German government would not be
liable for any compensation whatever,
according to general principles Of In
ternational law.
Can't 30 C00nee4Soos 5s - 81
However, the legal situation Is
somewhat different In the light Of
the special stipulations applicable to
the relations between Germany and
the United States since article Is Of
the Prussian-American treaty Of
friendship and commerce Of July II.
1893, taken in, connection with ar
ticle IL Of the Prussian- American
treaty Of commerce and navigation
Of May 1. 1928. provides that contra
band belonging to the subject Or
citizens OF either party can not b.
confiscated by the other in any case
but only detained or used in consid-
GRAFTON Of payment Of the fun value
OF the same.
"On the ground Of this treaty stipu-
lation which is ~ a matter Of course
binding on the German prize court the
American owners Of ship and cargo
would receive compensation even II the
court should declare the cargo Of
wheat to be contraband. Nevertheless,
the approaching prize proceedings are
not rendered supernucils since tie
competent prize court must examine
into the legalityIof the capture and de-.
struction and also pronouncS upon the