Show N NOT 1 Ab AGREED ON N 7 W WAR A CAUSE AU 1 l Certain Parts of Report D Do o Not Please the Delegates Dy fly Associated Press Pren PARIS April lt j. 25 It Iran liaa become known that hat the tho American AmericA d delegates pave have U been unable to 10 agree to c certain of the report adopted by the ther portions I r majority of or th the IhA commission on rc pon- pon for tor the war and AS na presented to lo the council of or four Cour the iho report con con- contains tJ na A n m memorandum setting forth the American rt reservations r The Americans objected to Iho rho principle principle prin prin- ciple thin that persons accused of or offenses against the la laws of ot humanity should ie t subjected m to criminal prosecution contending c t that ha t the la laws It and principles pies ples les of oC humanity constitute n a st standard too joo uncertain to bo be rightly applied In InI I legal fral proceedings 1 The principle that heads he of ot states bould should be ht liable to criminal prosecution pro prosecution eu tion for lor broaches breaches of positive law V was wait another point In which they failed to tos toI s I gree with the majority AMERICAN BELIEF The American belief in n this tills respect was t that the essence of or sovereignty Lies U s in the fact act that the head read of ot a n state is II responsible for or his tl Illegal acts to ih the people from rom whom he lie d derives rives his y 8 and nd not to any foreign soy sov- This Thin was not held to apil app ap- ap il p In tho case of or n a hoed bead of oC a tate a.-tate state v. v wiio lo ha hai indicated for nn any proceedings s a al a n person would be against I Itin embodying the tin in nn no longer rO of ur a u state nor does it apply apply ap ap- ply to u political offenses committed b by bythe jh the heal f ot a n. state which ma may If Ir bo he made the subject of bt Judicial action on and punishment I e UNABLE TO CONCUR Holding I those heart hf views the American were therefore unable to concur con- con fur cur in If n hI I for Cor the esL es- es nt L of 1 a t high tribunal and a commission for Cor or th the trial o of oft t l rl ci calif'S es as nR oC Ild advocated h tl by hy th the t They proposed d Instead thai that thain n An n Intel national committee of oC Inquiry be c cl an-cl io to consider the relative cul- cul of t the h authors of ot the war Wll a is as isas 11 as their thir culpability as ns to the theIu lu Iu ns of fit t the laws and customs of war oar carid and id that enemy persons accused d I of r il- il these ilse se lett latter offenses 8 should be t tried I by military t tribunals or commissions commission t already d existing or to be cr created In Indifferent different nl countries I I Each J of I these tribunals tribunal will have Jurisdiction when the the- offense was committed on th the th territory of ot the na nation nation nation na- na tion or against It Its property or nationals na na- tk nal I In n i be the h case cane of ot offenses b bv ray tho the enemy affecting more Inore than one one country ilu national courts might I unite to form funn on one mixed tribunal al I I |