Connecticut western news., 1915-07-01
|. s. AGAIN ASKS
 FRYE PREPARATION
Refuses 10 Fave Prize Court
 Decide Question.
TREATY OF 1923 DISCUSSED

Issue Presented Arises on Disputed
 Interpretation of Treaty Provisions,
 Settlement of Which Requires Dipo-
 matc Discussion and Cannot Proper
 Iy Be Based Upon Prize Court De-
 cision."
 Publication of the text of the Ameri- ran note sent to Germany on June 24 with regard to the case of the Ameri- can four masted ship William P. Frye. sunk by the German auxiliary cruiser Bring Eitel Friedrich last January. dis closes the fact that the controversy has become one regarding the interpreta- tion of the treaty of 1928 between the United States and Prussia.
 Indirectly, by. virtue of certain claims made by the German government as to her right to sink neutral vessels carry ing contraband the correspondence also is coming to have a bearing on the issues involved in the submarine ques- tion.
 The note, made public at Washing ton, shows the United States for the second time taking exception to the German plan of having the Frye case settled in a prize court. The United States renews it's demand for the pay. ment of indemnity, the amount of which it asserts should be agreed upon in direct negotiations between the two governments.
 It is made clear in the note that the United States will have nothing to do with any prize court proceedings which the German government may institute in the Frye case. As the owners of the Frye have put their interests entirely in the hands of the state department, it is considered improbable that they will make any effort to be represented at the first hearing, which was set for late this month,
 Liability Under Treaty of 1928.
 The stand of the United States in this case rests wholly upon the pro- visions of the treaty of 1920 which. as Germany herself admitted in the first exchange of notes on the subject, ren- dered her liable to pay an indemnity for the destruction of the Frye.
 Germany having been the first to in yoke this treaty as still ill force and applying to this issue, the state de- partment is trying to hold her to the ground she has taken. The issue is thus summed up by Secretary Lansing in his latest note:
 ~The real question between the two governments is what repaTation must be made for breach of treaty obliga- tions, that is not a question which falls within the jurisdiction of a prize court
 It is said further that the United States government cannot recognize the propriety" of submitting the Frye claim to a German prize court for set clement.
 "The issue thus presented" says the Lansing note, arises on a disputed in terprctatiOn of treaty provisions, the settlement of which requires direct diplomatic discussion between> the two governments and cannot properly be based upon the decision of the German prize court, which is in no way con elusive or binding upon the government of the United States.''
 Secretary Lansing also dissents most vigorously from claims put forward by Germany in the note to which his com- muication is reply to the effect that the treaty of 1928 gives either party the right to destroy vessel belonging to the other party when carrying con- traband, if it is not practicable to stop the contraband in any other way
 This is the contention which has beer regarded here as bearing upon Ger many's submarine operations. It is be lieved here that the German govern ment is seeking to have the prize court review the provisions of the treaty o1 1928 ill the hope of getting . court de cision which will strengthen her posi- tion in regard to the destruction by submarines of neutral ships carryin: contraband. Replying to this conten tion. MT. Lansing says:
 '"The government of the United States cannot concur in this conclusion On the contrary, it holds that thes treaty provisions do not authorize tn destruction of a neutral vessel in an, circumstances. By it's eXp1ess term the treaty prohibits even the detention of a neutral vessel carrying contraban if the master of the vessel is willing t surrender the c0ntraband."
 While the United States does not ad
 init that the wheat on tic Frye was a( sual1y contraband, it points out tha even if it was the German naval con ,plander had no right to sink the Frye