New-York tribune., 1919-05-29

cratic one and that Germany in her
proposals for q league of nations has
adhered to the principle OF limitation
OF armamerts.
Says Allies Broke Faith
at would be difficult to see" one
section reads, "what different cond-
tons could nave been imposed upon an
imperialistic government The solemn
assurances of France. Great Britain
and President Wilson that the peace
would be Q peace OF right, and not Of
violence, have not been kept, especially
regarding territorial gucstions.'
The reply complains that "night be
fore right dominates the whole Allied
treaty
Objection IS expressed to the demand
that Germans be surrendered for trial
in enemy courts, the reply contending
that an impartial authority ought to be
instituted TO establish all violations OF
international law by whomsoevor COM
.nstted.
= is declared by the Germans that
although the speech made by Prcsi
dent Wilson il October, 1916. recog
nized that responsibility 70 rthe war
reste& on the entire European systen
The tfe ATTY requires Germany to ac-
knowlelGe that She and her allies we're
responsible for all damage suffered in
opposing countries. It is asserted that
it IS incortestable that some Of the
Allied and associated powers, such as
Italy and Rumania, entered the war for
the sake OF territorial conquest.
FIGHTS Compensation Plan
The German counter proposals argue
that there is no basis Of right for the
obligation to camke compensation
which is to be imposed on Germany.
Complaint is made that the amount Of
compensation is to be fixed by hostile
commission, whose power would enable
1t to administer Germany as bank
rupt state. This, is is declared is IN
compatible with the innate right Of ma
tions.
The statutes of the league of ma
tions, it is further asserted, contradict
numerous declarations made by the
governments opposed to Germany and
the league is merely continuation OF
the enem coalition. 1t is added that
there is no realization Of a real league
OF nations, and that in its present form
the league reastablishes IN effect the
alliance of 1915.
The reply maintains that the treaty
shows Germany as nation which is
simply to be destroyed, and adds:
This is a complete repudiaton of
the idea that every nation mas q right
to existence and violates the right of
seif- determination"
The statement then details long OBJ
jections to the proposed treatment Of
the Saar region, Eupen, Mamedy,
Morosnet and Alsace and the Eastern
frontiers and srgues that the worst
manifestation OF The disregard of the
right of self determination is the sep
aration of Danzig from TIE German
Empire. Other abrogations Of this
right, as cited in the statement, in
olude the refusal to allow the millions
OF Germans IN German-Austria TO unite
with Austria, while other millions OF
Germans are forced to remain under
the new Czecho-Sloval, state.
Section III Of the counter proposals
reiterates the declaration that the
draft Of the peace treaty is in sharpes.
contradiction to the basis of right for
lasting peace, ''of right which was
'S1ceu "Ho-' II says tHaI 'le treaty
involves destruction of German eco
nomic life and subjects the German
people to financial slavery "unparal-
ieiled in the history Of the world"
Gcrmany's Final Appeal
II such treaty came into force, it
is declared, it would mean fresh
catastrophe for the whole world. The
German statement adds
"A dying philosophy of imperial
istic and captalistic tendencies is
here celebrating its last terrible
triumph. We appeal to the
innate right Of men and nations, un-