Great Falls daily tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1895-1921, 1920-01-24

Following is the reply of Inc Netner-'
lands government to the entente:
BY verbal note, dated January 10,
1920. given to the envoy of the queen at
Paris. the powers, referring to article
221 of the treaty of Versailles. demand
that the government of Holland give
into their hands William Of Hohenzol-
lern. former emperor of Germany, so
that he may be tried.
What Germany Would Do.
Supporting this demand. they observe
that if the former emperor had remain
ed in Germany. the German government
would. under the terms of article 22S
of the peace treaty. have been obliged
to deliver him.
In citing az preneditated violations
uf international treaties. as well as &
systematic disregard of the most sacred
rules of the rights of man. a number
of acts committed during the war by
German authority. the powers place the
responsibility, at least morally. upon the
former emperor.
They express the opinion that Hol-
land would not filfulI her agreements.
if she refused to associate herself with
them within the Limit of her ability. to
pursue or. at least. not to impede, the
punishment of crimes committed.
Holland Not Bound BY Treaty.
They emphasize the special character
of their demands, which contemplate not
a juridical accusation but an act of high
international policy and they make an
appeal 10 Hollands respect OF law and
love Of justice not to cover with her
moral authority violation by Germany
of the essential principles of the
solidarity Of the nations.
The queen has the honor to observe.
first that obligations which for Germany
could have resulted from article 22S
of the treaty of peace cannot serve t.
determine the duty of Holland, which is
not party of the treaty.
Problem for Own Duty.
THE government of the queen. NOV
ed by imnrescriptible reasons, cannot
view the question raised by the demands
of the powers except from the point OF
view of its own duty. Ii was absolutely
with origin of the war and
has maintained. and not without dif
ficulty. its neutrality u the end. 1t finds.
then. face TO face with facts of the war
in a position different from that of the
powers.
1t rejects with energy. all suspicion
of wishing to cover with its sovereign
right and it's moral authority violations
of the essential principles of the solid
arity of nations: but it cannot recognize
IN international duty To associate itself
with thcis act of high international policy
Of the powers.
Might. in League Be Otherwise.
If. in the future. there should be in
stituted by the society of nations. an in
ternational jurisdiction competent to
crimes and submitted TO its jurisdiction
Judge. i'll case of war deeds qualified as
~ statute. adding the acts committed,
I would be fit fer Holland to associate
herself with the new regime.
The government of the queen can
lot admit in the present case. any other |
iuty than that imposed upon it by the
avs Of the kingdom and national tradi- |
ion.
Neither Law Nor Tradition.
"Now. neither the constituent laws !
It the kingdom, which are based upon !
he principles of law universally recog- |
lized. nor IA respectable secular tradi- |
ion which has made this country always |
measures. Representative Burke, re-
of Pennsylvania, broke into the
ebate to say that the Pennsylvania state
aw relating strictly to sedition' had /
cen used during strikes to prohibit ''even
Continued on Page Two.)