The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-08-05

tration at The Hague.
May Go to Hague.
That the United States might he
willing to accept the latter sugges-
ton is considered possible. 1t could
properly do so, as it is, in many ways
pledged TO settle disputes arising over
the Interpretation of treaties in pre-
ciselv this manner. The United states
/ is satisfied that its construction of the
treaty of 1928 Is the correct one, but
would have difficulty in finding a good
objection to submitting II to impartial
review.
The United States has contended
that the treaty of 1928 provides that
Ia German warship shall, under no
circumstances. destroy an American
lcardying contra band. that the utmost
THAT the German commander can do Is
TO direct the captain OF the merchant
man to remove the contraband from
I his vessel
/ Germany contends that, inasmucn
as the sinking of a vessel wnen carry
! ing contraband Is not expressly pro-
hihited by the treaty, the right may
be assumed, II II is in accord with the
general principles of law. This GER
many declares, is the fact, and her
only obligation under the treaty Is 10
pay for ships and cargoes so de-
stroyed
The United States attaches an i'm
portance to its construction OF the
treaty OF 1928 far beyond the Frye
case itself. Germany has made GER
tain general claims in the course of the
discussion of the Frye case, to admit
which would greatly impair the posi-
ton of the United States in future
cases, particularly in regard to subma-
rine operations. That is why 1t Is
certain that the German offer of con-
, ditional payment of the losses in the
Frye case will not be accepted.
. Owners May Act Themselves.
1t is possible. however. that while
the governments are seeking to reach
/ sssxne adjustment of view on the ques-
tidn<AGf treaty Interpretation. the
! ! owners of the Frye may step In an6
get their money from Germany with.
| out further delay. There Is nothing te
= prevent the owners OF the Frye from
A relieving the United States of charge
], of their interests and notifying Ger,
many that they are willing to havt
the amount Of damages due then
, fixed by Joint commission of ex
y perts. The question of treaty inter
probation is nothing to the owners o
the Frye, whose proper and sole in
a terest Is merely in recovering thu
amount of their loss.
Since the controversy over the Fry
case arose, there has been anothe
4 case almost identical with It. whtcl
Is an added reason why the State De
90 partment is determined to make NJ
\ sacrifice in principle The American
- st mship Leelanaw, carrying flax AM
tow from Russia to Ireland, was tor
pedoed by a German submarine OF
- the Scotch coast, after opportunit
10 had been given those on board to TAX
)" TO the ships boats. In this case tn
al Cfnt
- =, that the Germans had no right t
- rink the vessel. even If she was carry
ing contraband, and also that flax an
=, : tow, though on the German contra
, band list ought, pote.t@ .ha4 20. eass3sed
, Text of German Note.
- The text of the German note
e. as follows:
ambassador Gerard to Secretary c
State:
- American Embassy, Berlin.
July 13,191i
a. Following note received,
Foreign ONCE, Berlin.
II July 30,191j
H. The undersigned has the honor I
MORN His Excellency, Mr. James u
~ Gerard, Ambassador of the Unite
~ states Of America, in reply to tn
note OF the 26th ultimo. foreign offic
number $780, on the subject OF III
~ vessel William p. Frye by the Germa
- auxiliary cruiser Rrinz Eitel Fried
'' rlch, That the points OF view brougf
lout in the note have been CAREFUL
examined by the Imperial Germa
Government. This examination ha
- led to the following conclusions: TIL
~ Government Of the United States be
:, lieves that 1t is incumbent upon it I
take the position that the treaty right
which A mr. too l. 1zL
tanned IN article 10, OF the Prussiar
American treaty of amity and CON
~ merce OF September 10, 1885
Oh article 49, of the Prussia n "A merica
le treaty of amity and commerce of Jul
~ II, 1893. were violated by the sink
" y, ing OF the william p. Frye. 1t inter
IN prets these articles as meaning ths
- merchantmen of the neutral cor
tracing party carrying contraban
cannot, in any circumstances. be de-
stroycd by warship of the belligerer
contracting party. and that the sinkin
of the William p. Frye was therefor,
In violation of the treaty even if he
cargo should have consisted Of cor
trabaEd, which II leaves outside
- the discussion.
DO Claims Within It's Rights.
The German Government came
IS. accept this view. 1t insists, as hereto
2 man auxiliary cruiser acted In II
A. legal exercise OF the right of contr
~ of trade in contra band, enjoyed /
ne warships OF belligerent nations. ar
Of that the treaty stipulations mentione
merely oblige the German Cover
t. ment to make compensation for II
" damage sustained by the Americs
p icitizens concerned.
IN lit is not disputed by the America
r Government that. according to Il
go general principles OF International la
ID a belligerent Is authorized in sinkir
neutral vessels under almost any col
ne dhion for carrying contrahand. As
c. we'll known, these principles were la
he down In articles 40 and so of Il
IT declaration OF London. and We
he recognized at that time by the du
lempowered delegates OF all the natioi
Sc which participated In the conferenc
he Including the American delegates.
70 fdnrlarafivas az exirffng fufernafion