The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Front Matter: Preface
• List of Cases Cited
• Introduction
• Declaration of Paris, 1856 1
• Déclaration De Paris, 1856.
• The Declaration of Paris, 1856.
• Declaration of St Petersburg, 1868 1
• Geneva Convention, 1864 1
• Convention Pour L’amélioration Du Sort Des Militaires Blessés Dans Les Armées En Campagne.
• Convention For the Amelioration of the Condition of Soldiers Wounded In Armies In the Field.
• Articles Concerning Naval Warfare ( La Marine ).
• Geneva Convention, 1906 1
• Convention Pour L’amélioration Du Sort Des Blessés Et Malades Dans Les Armées En Campagne.
• Convention For the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick In Armies In the Field.
• Chapitre Premier. —: Des Blessés Et Malades.
• Chapter I.—: The Wounded and Sick.
• Chapitre II.—: Des Formations Et Établissements Sanitaires.
• Chapter II.—: Medical Units and Establishments.
• Chapitre III.—: Du Personnel.
• Chapter III.—: Personnel.
• Chapitre IV.—: Du Matériel.
• Chapter IV.—: Material.
• Chapitre V.—: Des Convois D’Évacuation.
• Chapter V.—: Convoys of Evacuation.
• Chapter VI.—: Du Signe Distinctif.
• Chapter VI.—: The Distinctive Emblem.
• Chapitre VII.—: De L’application Et De L’exécution De La Convention.
• Chapter VII.—: Application and Carrying Out of the Convention.
• Chapitre VIII.—: De La Répression Des Abus Et Des Infractions.
• Chapter VIII.—: Prevention of Abuses and Infractions.
• Dispositions Générales.
• General Provisions.
• Protocole Final De La Conférence De Revision De La Convention De Genève.
• Final Protocol of the Conference For the Revision of the Geneva Convention.
• The Hague Peace Conferences 1899 and 1907
• The Peace Conference of 1899 1 .
• The Second Peace Conference of 1907 1 .
• Final Acts of the International Peace Conferences.
• The Conventions of the Hague Conferences of 1899 and 1907 1 .
• I.: Convention For the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes.
• 1.: Règlement Pacifique Des Conflits Internationaux.
• 1.: Pacific Settlement of International Disputes
• I.: Convention For the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes 1 .
• II.: The Recovery of Contract Debts.
• II.: Convention Concernant La Limitation De L’emploi De La Force Pour Le Recouvrement De Dettes Contractuelles.
• II.: Convention Respecting the Limitation of the Employment of Force For the Recovery of Contract Debts.
• Convention No. 2. the Limitation of the Employment of Force For the Recovery of Contract Debts 1 .
• III.: Convention Relative to the Commencement of Hostilities.
• III.: Convention Relative à L’ouverture Des Hostilités.
• III.: Convention Relative to the Opening of Hostilities.
• Convention No. 3. The Commencement of Hostilities 1 .
• IV.: Les Lois Et Coutumes De La Guerre Sur Terre.
• II.: Convention Concernant Les Lois Et Coutumes De La Guerre Sur Terre.
• IV.: Convention Concernant Les Lois Et Coutumes De La Guerre Sur Terre.
• Règlement Concernant Les Lois Et Coutumes De La Guerre Sur Terre.
• Section I.: Des Belligérants.
• Section II.: Des Hostilités.
• Section III.: De L’autorité Militaire Sur Le Territoire De L’État Ennemi.
• Section IV.: Des Belligérants Internés Et Des Blessés Soignés Chez Les Neutres.
• IV.: The Laws and Customs of War On Land.
• II.: Convention With Respect to the Laws and Customs of War On Land.
• IV.: Convention Concerning the Laws and Customs of War On Land.
• Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War On Land.
• Section I.: Belligerents.
• Section II. Hostilities.
• Section III.: Military Authority Over the Territory of the Hostile State.
• Convention No. 4. Concerning the Laws and Customs of War On Land 1 .
• Appendix to Note On the Laws and Customs of War On Land. Translation of the Draft of an International Declaration Concerning the Laws and Customs of War Adopted By the Conference of Brussels, 27th August, 1874 1 .
• V.: Neutral Powers and Persons In Land Warfare.
• V.: Convention Concernant Les Droits Et Les Devoirs Des Puissances Et Des Personnes Neutres En Cas De Guerre Sur Terre.
• V.: Convention Respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons In War On Land.
• Convention No. 5. Respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons In War On Land 1 .
• VI.: Enemy Merchant-ships At the Outbreak of Hostilities.
• VI.: Convention Relative Au Régime Des Navires De Commerce Ennemis Au Début Des Hostilités.
• VI.: Convention Relative to the Status of Enemy Merchantships At the Outbreak of Hostilities.
• Convention No. 6. Relative to the Status of Enemy Merchant-ships At the Outbreak of Hostilities 1 .
• VII.: Conversion of Merchant-ships Into War-ships.
• VII.: Convention Relative à La Transformation Des Navires De Commerce En Bâtiments De Guerre.
• VII.: Convention Relative to the Conversion of Merchantships Into War-ships.
• Convention No. 7. Convention Relative to the Conversion of Merchant-ships Into War-ships 1 .
• VIII.: Automatic Submarine Contact Mines.
• VIII.: Convention Relative à La Pose De Mines Sous-marines Automatiques De Contact.
• VIII.: Convention Relative to the Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines.
• Convention No. 8. Relative to the Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines 1 .
• IX.: Bombardment By Naval Forces In Time of War.
• IX.: Convention Concernant Le Bombardement Par Des Forces Navales En Temps De Guerre.
• IX.: Convention Respecting Bombardment By Naval Forces In Time of War.
• Convention No. 9. Respecting Bombardment By Naval Forces In Time of War 1 .
• X.: Conventions For the Adaptation of the Principles of the Geneva Convention to Maritime War (1899 and 1907)
• X.: La Convention De Genève Et La Guerre Maritime 1 .
• III.: Convention Pour L’adaptation à La Guerre Maritime Des Principes De La Convention De Genève Du 22 Août, 1864.
• X.: Convention Pour L’adaptation à La Guerre Maritime Des Principes De La Convention De Genève.
• X.: The Geneva Convention and Maritime Warfare 1 .
• III.: Convention For the Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the Principles of the Geneva Convention of August 22, 1864.
• X.: Convention For the Adaptation of the Principles of the Geneva Convention to Maritime War.
• Convention No. 10. The Adaptation of the Principles of the Geneva Convention to Maritime Warfare 1 .
• A Convention Relating to Hospital Ships, Signed At the Hague, the 21st December, 1904 2 .
• XI.: Restrictions On Capture In Maritime War
• XI.: Convention Relative à Certaines Restrictions à L’exercice Du Droit De Capture Dans La Guerre Maritime.
• XI.: Convention Relative to Certain Restrictions On the Exercise of the Right of Capture In Maritime War.
• Convention No. 11. Relative to Certain Restrictions On the Exercise of the Right of Capture In Maritime War.
• XII.: Establishment of an International Prize Court.
• XII.: Convention Relative à L’Établissement D’une Cour Internationale Des Prises.
• XII.: Convention Relative to the Establishment of an International Prize Court.
• Annex to Article 15. Distribution of Judges and Deputy Judges By Countries For Each Year of the Period of Six Years.
• Convention No. 12. Relative to the Establishment of an International Prize Court 1 .
• XIII.: Neutral Rights and Duties In Maritime War.
• XIII.: Convention Concernant Les Droits Et Les Devoirs Des Puissances Neutres En Cas De Guerre Maritime.
• XIII.: Convention Respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers In Maritime War.
• Convention No. 13. The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers In Maritime War 1 .
• Declarations (1899 and 1907) Prohibiting Discharge of Projectiles, Etc. From Balloons
• Les Déclarations De 1899 Et 1907.
• Déclaration I.: Des Projectiles Et Des Explosifs Du Haut De Ballons.
• XIV.: Déclaration Relative à L’interdiction De Lancer Des Projectiles Et Des Explosifs Du Haut De Ballons.
• The Declarations of 1899 and 1907.
• Declaration I.: Projectiles and Explosives From Balloons.
• XIV.: Declaration Prohibiting the Discharge of Projectiles and Explosives From Balloons.
• Declaration Ii (1899).
• Des Gaz Asphyxiants Ou Délétères.
• Asphyxiating Or Deleterious Gases.
• II.: Declaration Prohibiting the Use of Asphyxiating Or Deleterious Gases 1 .
• Declaration Iii (1899).
• Des Balles à Enveloppe Dure Etc.
• Bullets With a Hard Envelope Etc.
• III.: Declaration Prohibiting the Use of Expanding Bullets 1 .
• Annexe Au Premier Vœu émis Par La Deuxième Conférence De La Paix 1 .
• Projet D’une Convention Relative à L’Établissement D’une Cour De Justice Arbitrale.
• Draft Convention Relative to the Creation of a Judicial Arbitration Court.
• The Draft Convention Relative to the Creation of a Judicial Arbitration Court 1 .
• The Results of the Second Peace Conference.
• Table of the Deposits of Acts of Ratification and Accessions to the Conventions and Declarations Signed the 29th July, 1899, At the First Peace Conference.
• Table of Signatures.
• Final Protocol of the London Naval Conference.
• Protocole De Clôture.
• Final Protocol.
• The Declaration of London, 1909
• Déclaration Relative Au Droit De La Guerre Maritime.
• Declaration Concerning the Laws of Naval War 1 .
• General Report On the Declaration Presented to the Naval Conference On Behalf of Its Drafting Committee 1 . ( Translation 2 .)
• Appendix. Instructions to British Delegation At the Second Peace Conference.
• Addenda and Errata.

Projet d’une Convention relative à l’Établissement d’une Cour de Justice Arbitrale.

Titre I.

Organisation de la Cour de justice arbitrale.

Art. 1.

Dans le but de faire progresser la cause de l’arbitrage, les Puissances contractantes conviennent d’organiser, sans porter atteinte à la Cour permanente d’arbitrage, une Cour de justice arbitrale, d’un accès libre et facile, réunissant des juges représentant les divers systèmes juridiques du monde, et capable d’assurer la continuité de la jurisprudence arbitrale.

Annex to the first wish expressed by the second peace conference² .

Draft Convention relative to the Creation of a Judicial Arbitration Court.

Part I.

Constitution of the Judicial Arbitration Court.

Art. 1.

With the view of promoting the cause of arbitration, the Contracting Powers agree to constitute, without derogation to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, a Judicial Arbitration Court, freely and easily accessible, composed of Judges representing the various juridical systems of the world, and capable of insuring continuity in arbitral jurisprudence.

Art. 2.

La Cour de Justice arbitrale se compose de juges et de juges suppléants choisis parmi les personnes jouissant de la plus haute considération morale et qui tous devront remplir les conditions requises, dans leurs pays respectifs, pour l’admission dans la haute magistrature, ou être des jurisconsultes d’une compétence notoire en matière de droit international.

Les juges et les juges suppléants de la Cour sont choisis, autant que possible, parmi les membres de la Cour permanente d’arbitrage. Le choix sera fait dans les six mois qui suivront la ratification de la présente Convention.

Art. 2.

The Judicial Arbitration Court is composed of Judges and Deputy Judges chosen from persons of the highest moral reputation, and all fulfilling conditions qualifying them, in their respective countries, to occupy high legal posts, or be jurists of recognized competence in matters of international law.

The Judges and Deputy Judges of the Court are appointed, as far as possible, from the members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The appointment shall be made within the six months after the ratification of the present Convention.

Art. 3.

Les juges et les juges suppléants sont nommés pour une période de douze ans à compter de la date où la nomination aura été notifiée au Conseil administratif institué par la Convention pour le règlement pacifique des conflits internationaux. Leur mandat peut être renouvelé.

En cas de décès ou de démission d’un juge ou d’un juge suppléant, il est pourvu à son remplacement selon le mode fixé pour sa nomination. Dans ce cas, la nomination est faite pour une nouvelle période de douze ans.

Art. 3.

The Judges and Deputy Judges are appointed for a period of twelve years, reckoned from the date on which the appointment is notified to the Administrative Council created by the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. Their appointments can be renewed.

Should one of the Judges, or Deputy Judges, die or resign, the same procedure is followed in filling the vacancy as was followed in appointing him. In this case, the appointment is made for a fresh period of twelve years.

Art. 4.

Les juges de la Cour de justice arbitrale sont égaux entre eux et prennent rang d’après la date de la notification de leur nomination. La préséance appartient au plus âgé, au cas où la date est la même.

Les juges suppléants sont, dans l’exercice de leurs fonctions, assimilés aux juges titulaires. Toutefois, ils prennent rang après ceux-ci.

Art. 4.

The Judges of the Judicial Arbitration Court are equal amongst themselves, and rank according to the date of the notification of their appointment. The Judge who is senior in point of age takes precedence when the date of notification is the same.

The Deputy Judges are assimilated in the exercise of their functions to the Judges. They rank, however, after the latter.

Art. 5.

Les juges jouissent des privilèges et immunités diplomatiques dans l’exercice de leurs fonctions et en dehors de leurs pays.

Avant de prendre possession de leur siège, les juges et les juges suppléants doivent, devant le Conseil administratif, prêter serment ou faire une affirmation solennelle d’exercer leurs fonctions avec impartialité et en toute conscience.

Art. 5.

The Judges enjoy diplomatic privileges and immunities in the performance of their duties, and when outside their own country.

Before taking their seat, the Judges and Deputy Judges must take an oath, or make a solemn affirmation before the Administrative Council, to discharge their duties impartially and conscientiously.

Art. 6.

La Cour désigne annuellement trois juges qui forment une Délégation spéciale et trois autres destinés à les remplacer en cas d’empêchement. Ils peuvent être réélus. L’élection se fait au scrutin de liste. Sont considérés comme élus ceux qui réunissent le plus grand nombre de voix. La Délégation élit elle-même son Président, qui, à défaut d’une majorité, est désigné par le sort.

Un membre de la Délégation ne peut exercer ses fonctions quand la Puissance qui l’a nommé, ou dont il est le national, est une des Parties.

Les membres de la Délégation terminent les affaires qui leur ont été soumises, même au cas où la période pour laquelle ils ont été nommés juges serait expirée.

Art. 6.

The Court annually nominates three Judges to form a special Delegation and three more to replace them if the former are unable to act. They are eligible for re-election. The election is by ballot. The persons who secure the largest number of votes are considered elected. The Delegation itself elects its own President, who, in default of a majority, is appointed by lot.

A member of the Delegation cannot act when the Power which appointed him, or to which he belongs, is one of the parties.

The members of the Delegation are to conclude matters which have been submitted to them, even if the period for which they have been appointed Judges has expired.

Art. 7.

L’exercise des fonctions judiciaires est interdit au juge dans les affaires au sujet desquelles il aura, à un titre quelconque, concouru à la décision d’un Tribunal national, d’un Tribunal d’arbitrage, ou d’une Commission d’enquête, ou figuré dans l’instance comme conseil ou avocat d’une partie.

Aucun juge ne peut intervenir comme agent ou comme avocat devant la Cour de justice arbitrale ou la Cour permanente d’arbitrage, devant un Tribunal spécial d’arbitrage ou une Commission d’enquête, ni y agir pour une Partie en quelque qualité que ce soit, pendant toute la durée de son mandat.

Art. 7.

A Judge may not exercise his judicial functions in any case in which he has, in any way whatever, taken part in the decision of a National Tribunal, of a Tribunal of Arbitration, or of a Commission of Inquiry, or has figured in the suit as counsel or advocate for one of the parties.

No Judge can act as agent or advocate before the Judicial Arbitration Court or the Permanent Court of Arbitration, before a Special Tribunal of Arbitration or a Commission of Inquiry, nor act therein for one of the parties in any capacity whatsoever so long as his appointment lasts.

Art. 8.

La Cour élit son Président et son Vice-Président à la majorité absolue des suffrages exprimés. Après deux tours de scrutin, l’élection se fait à la majorité relative et, en cas de partage des voix, le sort décide.

Art. 8.

The Court elects its President and Vice-President by an absolute majority of the votes cast. After two ballots, the election is made by a bare majority and, in case the votes are equal, by lot.

Art. 9.

Les juges de la Cour de justice arbitrale reçoivent une indemnité annuelle de 6,000 florins néerlandais. Cette indemnité est payée à l’expiration de chaque semestre à dater du jour de la première réunion de la Cour.

Pendant l’exercice de leurs fonctions au cours des sessions ou dans les cas spéciaux prévus par la présente Convention, ils touchent une somme de 100 florins par jour. Il leur est alloué, en outre, une indemnité de voyage fixée d’après les règlements de leur pays. Les dispositions du présent alinéa s’appliquent aussi aux juges suppléants remplaçant les juges.

Ces allocations, comprises dans les frais généraux de la Cour, prévus par l’article 31, sont versées par l’entremise du Bureau international institué par la Convention pour le règlement pacifique des conflits internationaux.

Art. 9.

The Judges of the Judicial Arbitration Court receive an annual salary of 6,000 Netherland florins. This salary is paid at the end of each half-year, reckoned from the date on which the Court meets for the first time.

In the exercise of their duties during the sessions or in the special cases covered by the present Convention, they receive the sum of 100 florins per diem. They are further entitled to receive a travelling allowance fixed in accordance with the regulations existing in their own country. The provisions of the present paragraph are applicable also to Deputy Judges when acting for Judges.

These emoluments are included in the general expenses of the Court dealt with in Article 31, and are paid through the International Bureau created by the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes.

Art. 10.

Les Juges ne peuvent recevoir de leur propre Gouvernement ou de celui d’une autre Puissance aucune rémunération pour des services rentrant dans leurs devoirs comme membres de la Cour.

Art. 10.

The Judges may not accept from their own Government or from that of any other Power any remuneration for services connected with their duties as members of the Court.

Art. 11.

La Cour de justice arbitrale a son siège à La Haye et ne peut, sauf le cas de force majeure, le transporter ailleurs.

La Délégation peut, avec l’assentiment des Parties, choisir un autre lieu pour ses réunions si des circonstances particulières l’exigent.

Art. 11.

The seat of the Judicial Arbitration Court is at The Hague, and cannot except in the case of force majeure be transferred elsewhere.

The Delegation may choose, with the assent of the parties concerned, another place for its meetings, if special circumstances render such a step necessary.

Art. 12.

Le Conseil administratif remplit à l’égard de la Cour de justice arbitrale les fonctions qu’il remplit à l’égard de la Cour permanente d’arbitrage.

Art. 12.

The Administrative Council fulfils the same functions with regard to the Judicial Arbitration Court as with regard to the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

Art. 13.

Le Bureau international sert de greffe à la Cour de justice arbitrale et doit mettre ses locaux et son organisation à la disposition de la Cour. Il a la garde des archives et la gestion des affaires administratives.

Le Secrétaire-général du Bureau remplit les fonctions de greffier.

Les Secrétaires adjoints au greffier, les traducteurs, et les sténographes nécessaires sont désignés etassermentés par la Cour.

Art. 13.

The International Bureau acts as registry to the Judicial Arbitration Court, and shall place its offices and staff at the disposal of the Court. It has the custody of the archives and carries out the administrative work.

The Secretary-General of the Bureau acts as Registrar.

The necessary secretaries to assist the Registrar, translators and shorthand writers are appointed and sworn in by the Court.

Art. 14.

La Cour se réunit en session une fois par an. La session commence le troisième mercredi de juin et dure tant que l’ordre du jour n’aura pas été épuisé.

La Cour ne se réunit pas en session, si la Délégation estime que cette réunion n’est pas nécessaire. Toutefois, si une Puissance est partie à un litige actuellement pendant devant la Cour et dont l’instruction est terminée ou va être terminée, elle a le droit d’exiger que la session ait lieu.

En cas de nécessité, la Délégation peut convoquer la Cour en session extraordinaire.

Art. 14.

The Court meets in session once a year. The session opens on the third Wednesday in June and lasts until all the business on the agenda has been transacted.

The Court does not meet in session if the Delegation considers that such meeting is unnecessary. However, when a Power is party in a case actually pending before the Court, the pleadings in which are closed, or about to be closed, it may insist that the session be held.

When necessary, the Delegation may summon the Court in extraordinary session.

Art. 15.

Un compte rendu des travaux de la Cour sera dressé chaque année par la Délégation. Ce compte rendu sera transmis aux Puissances contractantes par l’intermédiaire du Bureau international. Il sera communiqué aussi à tous les juges et juges suppléants de la Cour.

Art. 15.

A Report of the work of the Court shall be drawn up every year by the Delegation. This Report shall be forwarded to the Contracting Powers through the International Bureau. It shall also be communicated to the Judges and Deputy Judges of the Court.

Art. 16.

Les juges et les juges suppléants, membres de la Cour de justice arbitrale, peuvent aussi être nommés aux fonctions de juge et de juge suppléant dans la Cour internationale des prises.

Art. 16.

The Judges and Deputy Judges of the Judicial Arbitration Court can also be appointed Judges and Deputy Judges in the International Prize Court.

Titre II.

Compétence et Procédure.

Art. 17.

La Cour de justice arbitrale est compétente pour tous les cas qui sont portés devant elle, en vertu d’une stipulation générale d’arbitrage ou d’un accord spécial.

Part II.

Jurisdiction and Procedure.

Art. 17.

The Judicial Arbitration Court is competent to deal with all cases submitted to it, in virtue either of a general undertaking to have recourse to arbitration or of a special agreement.

Art. 18.

La Délégation est compétente:—

1. Pour juger les cas d’arbitrage visés à l’article précédent, si les parties sont d’accord pour réclamer l’application de la procédure sommaire, réglée au titre iv., chapitre iv., de la Convention pour le règlement pacifique des conflits internationaux;

2. Pour procéder à une enquête en vertu et en conformité du titre iii. de la dite Convention en tant que la Délégation en est chargée par les Parties agissant d’un commun accord. Avec l’assentiment des Parties et par dérogation à l’article 7, alinéa 1, les membres de la Délégation ayant pris part à l’enquête peuvent siéger comme juges, si le litige est soumis à l’arbitrage de la Cour ou de la Délégation elle-même.

Art. 18.

The Delegation is competent:—

1. To decide the cases of arbitration referred to in the preceding Article, if the parties agree upon the application of the summary procedure, laid down in Part iv., Chapter iv., of the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes;

2. To hold an inquiry under and in accordance with Part iii. of the said Convention, in so far as such an inquiry is intrusted to the Delegation by the joint accord of the parties. With the assent of the parties, and as an exception to Article 7, paragraph 1, the members of the Delegation who have taken part in the inquiry may sit as Judges, if the case in dispute is submitted to the arbitration of the Court or of the Delegation itself.

Art. 19.

La Délégation est, en outre, compétente pour l’établissement du compromis visé par l’article 52 de la Convention pour le règlement pacifique des conflits internationaux, si les Parties sont d’accord pour s’en remettre à la Cour.

Elle est également compétente, même si la demande est faite seulement par l’une des Parties, après qu’un accord par la voie diplomatique a été vainement essayé, quand il s’agit:—

1. D’un différend rentrant dans un traité d’arbitrage général conclu ou renouvelé après la mise en vigueur de cette Convention et qui prévoit pour chaque différend un compromis, et n’exclut pour l’établissement de ce dernier ni explicitement ni implicitement la compétence de la Délégation. Toutefois, le recours à la Cour n’a pas lieu si l’autre Partie déclare qu’à son avis le différend n’appartient pas à la catégorie des questions à soumettre à un arbitrage obligatoire, à moins que le traité d’arbitrage ne confère au tribunal arbitral le pouvoir de décider cette question préalable.

2. D’un différend provenant de dettes contractuelles réclamées à une Puissance par une autre Puissance comme dues à ses nationaux, et pour la solution duquel l’offre d’arbitrage a été acceptée. Cette disposition n’est pas applicable si l’acceptation a été subordonnée à la condition que le compromis soit établi selon un autre mode.

Art. 19.

The Delegation is also competent to settle the Compromis referred to in Article 52 of the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes if the parties are agreed to leave it to the Court.

It is equally competent to do so, even if the request is only made by one of the parties, when all attempts to reach an understanding through the diplomatic channel have failed, in the case of:—

1. A dispute covered by a general Treaty of Arbitration concluded or renewed after the present Convention has come into force, providing for a Compromis in all disputes, and not either explicitly or implicitly excluding the settlement of the Compromis from the competence of the Delegation. Recourse cannot, however, be had to the Court if the other party declares that in its opinion the dispute does not belong to the category of questions which can be submitted to obligatory arbitration, unless the Treaty of Arbitration confers upon the Arbitration Tribunal the power of deciding this preliminary question.

2. A dispute arising from contract debts claimed from one Power by another Power as due to its nationals, and for the settlement of which the offer of arbitration has been accepted. This provision is not applicable if the acceptance is subject to the condition that the Compromis should be settled in some other way.

Art. 20.

Chacune des Parties a le droit de désigner un juge de la Cour pour prendre part, avec voix délibérative, à l’examen de l’affaire soumise à la Délégation.

Si la Délégation fonctionne en qualité de Commission d’enquête, ce mandat peut être confié à des personnes prises en dehors des juges de la Cour. Les frais de déplacement et la rétribution à allouer aux dites personnes sont fixés et supportés par les Puissances qui les ont nommés.

Art. 20.

Each of the parties concerned has the right to nominate a Judge of the Court to take part, with power to vote, in the examination of the case submitted to the Delegation.

If the Delegation acts as a Commission of Inquiry, this task may be intrusted to persons other than the Judges of the Court. The travelling expenses and remuneration to be given to the said persons are fixed and borne by the Powers appointing them.

Art. 21.

L’accès de la Cour de justice arbitrale, instituée par la présente Convention, n’est ouvert qu’aux Puissances contractantes.

Art. 21.

The Contracting Powers only may have access to the Judicial Arbitration Court set up by the present Convention.

Art. 22.

La Cour de justice arbitrale suit les règles de procédure édictées par la Convention pour le règlement pacifique des conflits internationaux, sauf ce qui est prescrit par la présente Convention.

Art. 22.

The Judicial Arbitration Court follows the rules of procedure laid down in the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, except in so far as the procedure is prescribed by the present Convention.

Art. 23.

La Cour décide du choix de la langue dont elle fera usage et des langues dont l’emploi sera autorisé devant elle.

Art. 23.

The Court determines what language it will itself use and what languages may be used before it.

Art. 24.

Le Bureau international sert d’intermédiaire pour toutes les communications à faire aux juges au cours de l’instruction prévue à l’article 63, alinéa 2, de la Convention pour le règlement pacifique des conflits internationaux.

Art. 24.

The International Bureau serves as channel for all communications to be made to the Judges during the interchange of pleadings provided for in Article 63, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes.

Art. 25.

Pour toutes les notifications à faire, notamment aux Parties, aux témoins, et aux experts, la Cour peut s’adresser directement au Gouvernement de la Puissance sur le territoire de laquelle la notification doit être effectuée. Il en est de même s’il s’agit de faire procéder à l’établissement de tout moyen de preuve.

Les requêtes adressées à cet effet ne peuvent être refusées que si la Puissance requise les juge de nature à porter atteinte à sa souveraineté ou à sa sécurité. S’il est donné suite à la requête, les frais ne comprennent que les dépenses d’exécution réellement effectuées.

La Cour a également la faculté de recourir à l’intermédiaire de la Puissance sur le territoire de laquelle elle a son siège.

Les notifications à faire aux Parties dans le lieu où siège la Cour peuvent être exécutées par le Bureau international.

Art. 25.

For all notices to be served, in particular on the parties, witnesses, or experts, the Court may apply direct to the Government of the State on whose territory the service is to be carried out. The same rule applies in the case of steps being taken to procure evidence.

Requests for this purpose can only be rejected when the Power applied to considers them calculated to impair its sovereign rights or its safety. If the request is complied with, the fees charged must only comprise the expenses actually incurred.

The Court is equally entitled to act through the Power on whose territory it sits.

Notices to be given to parties in the place where the Court sits may be served through the International Bureau.

Art. 26.

Les débats sont dirigés par le Président ou le Vice-Président et, en cas d’absence ou d’empêchement de l’un et de l’autre, par le plus ancien des juges présents.

Le juge nommé par une des parties ne peut siéger comme Président.

Art. 26.

The discussions are under the control of the President or Vice-President, or, in case they are both absent or cannot act, of the senior Judge present.

The Judge appointed by one of the parties cannot preside.

Art. 27.

Les délibérations de la Cour ont lieu à huis clos et restent secrètes.

Toute décision est prise à la majorité des juges présents. Si la Cour siège en nombre pair et qu’il y ait partage des voix, la voix du dernier des juges, dans l’ordre de préséance établi d’après l’article 4, alinéa 1, ne sera pas comptée.

Art. 27.

The Court considers its decisions in private, and the proceedings remain secret.

All questions are decided by a majority of the Judges present. If the number of Judges is even and equally divided, the vote of the junior Judge, in the order of precedence laid down in Article 4, paragraph 1, is not counted.

Art. 28.

Les arrêts de la Cour doivent être motivés. Ils mentionnent les noms des juges qui y ont participé; ils sont signés par le Président et par le greffier.

Art. 28.

The judgments of the Court must state the reasons on which they are based. They contain the names of the Judges taking part in them; they are signed by the President and by the Registrar.

Art. 29.

Chaque Partie supporte ses propres frais et une part égale des frais spéciaux de l’instance.

Art. 29.

Each party pays its own costs and an equal share of the costs of the trial.

Art. 30.

Les dispositions des articles 21 à 29 sont appliquées par analogie dans la procédure devant la Délégation.

Lorsque le droit d’adjoindre un membre à la Délégation n’a été exercé que par une seule Partie, la voix du membre adjoint n’est pas comptée s’il y a partage de voix.

Art. 30.

The provisions of Articles 21 to 29 are applicable so far as may be to the procedure before the Delegation.

When the right of adding a member to the Delegation has been exercised by one of the parties only, the vote of the additional member is not recorded if the votes are equally divided.

Art. 31.

Les frais généraux de la Cour sont supportés par les Puissances contractantes.

Le Conseil administratif s’adresse aux Puissances pour obtenir les fonds nécessaires au fonctionnement de la Cour.

Art. 31.

The general expenses of the Court are borne by the Contracting Powers.

The Administrative Council applies to the Powers to obtain the funds requisite for the working of the Court.

Art. 32.

La Cour fait elle-même son règlement d’ordre intérieur, qui doit être communiqué aux Puissances contractantes.

Après la ratification de la présente Convention, la Cour se réunira aussitôt que possible, pour élaborer ce règlement, pour élire le Président et le Vice-Président, ainsi que pour désigner les membres de la Délégation.

Art. 32.

The Court itself draws up its own rules of procedure, which must be communicated to the Contracting Powers.

After the ratification of the present Convention, the Court shall meet as early as possible in order to draw up these rules, to elect the President and Vice-President, and to appoint the members of the delegation.

Art. 33.

La Cour peut proposer des modifications à apporter aux dispositions de la présente Convention qui concernent la procédure. Ces propositions sont communiquées par l’intermédiaire du Gouvernement des Pays-Bas aux Puissances contractantes, qui se concerteront sur la suite à y donner.

Art. 33.

The Court may propose modifications in the provisions of the present Convention concerning procedure. These proposals are communicated through the Netherland Government to the Contracting Powers, which will confer together as to the measures to be taken thereon.

Titre III.

Dispositions Finales.

Art. 34.

La présente Convention sera ratifiée dans le plus bref délai possible.

Les ratifications seront déposées à La Haye.

Il sera dressé du dépôt de chaque ratification un procès-verbal, dont une copie, certifiée conforme, sera remise par la voie diplomatique à toutes les Puissances signataires.

Part III.

Final Provisions.

Art. 34.

The present Convention shall be ratified as soon as possible.

The ratifications shall be deposited at The Hague.

A procès-verbal of the deposit of each ratification shall be drawn up, of which a duly certified copy shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to all the Signatory Powers.

Art. 35.

La Convention entrera en vigueur six mois après sa ratification.

Elle aura une durée de douze ans, et sera renouvelée tacitement de douze ans en douze ans, sauf dénonciation.

La dénonciation devra être notifiée, au moins deux ans avant l’expiration de chaque période, au Gouvernement des Pays-Bas, qui en donnera connaissance aux autres Puissances.

La dénonciation ne produira effet qu’à l’égard de la Puissance qui l’aura notifiée. La Convention restera exécutoire dans les rapports entre les autres Puissances.

Art. 35.

The Convention shall come into force six months after its ratification.

It shall remain in force for twelve years, and shall be tacitly renewed for periods of twelve years, unless denounced.

The denunciation must be notified, at least two years before the expiry of each period, to the Netherland Government, which will inform the other Powers.

The denunciation shall only have effect in respect of the notifying Power. The Convention shall continue in force as far as the other Powers are concerned.

The Draft Convention relative to the creation of a Judicial Arbitration Court¹ .

Origin of the Draft Convention.The genesis of this Draft Convention which is annexed to the Vœu already recorded in the Final Act² cannot be understood without some reference to the Permanent Court of Arbitration created in 1899 and amended in 1907. It proposes to create another Court, called in order to distinguish it from the body brought into existence by the Conventions of 1899 and 1907, a “Court of Arbitral Justice” or a “Judicial Arbitration Court” intended to sit alongside and supplement the so-called Permanent Court, but of a far more permanent character than the already existing body.

The Permanent Court was called into being in consequence of the recognition by the Conference of 1899 that arbitration is the most effective and most equitable method of settling disputes which diplomacy has failed to settle in questions of a legal nature and especially in the interpretation or application of international conventions (1 H. C. 1899, Art. 16). By Article 20 of the 1 H. C. 1899 the contracting Powers undertook to organise a Permanent Court accessible at all times and working, unless otherwise agreed on by the parties, under the procedure laid down in the Convention. The parties, as is the rule in international arbitrations, choose their own judge and Article 17 provides that the Arbitration Convention is concluded for questions already existing or for questions which may eventually arise: it may embrace any dispute or only disputes of a certain category.

From Articles 16, 17 and 20 it is clear that questions of a judicial order were then deemed peculiarly susceptible of artibration, and it was hoped by means of the erection of a permanent Court that such questions would be frequently arbitrated and decided on the basis of respect for law. It thus seemed that the Convention had laid the foundations of a Court in the strictly juridical sense of the word, save that instead of judges, there would be arbitrators nominated by the free choice of the parties.

By Article 21 the Permanent Court was declared to be competent for all arbitration cases, unless the parties agreed to institute a special tribunal; it is therefore evident that the framers of the Convention considered that it was possible to submit to the Court problems other than those of an exclusively judicial nature. There was thus created a single institution competent to decide purely legal questions on the basis of respect for law, and wider problems of an extra-judicial character, either or both of which were to be decided by judges, or rather arbitrators, chosen by the parties to the dispute.

The Report of the Sub-Committee of the First Committee in 1907, prepared by Mr J. B. Scott¹ (from which the foregoing is taken), goes on to observe that in private litigation parties do not choose their own judges, but, as M. Bourgeois pointed out during the discussion, no nation in matters involving political interest will consent to go before a Court of arbitration unless it takes an active part in the appointment of the members composing it. In matters of a purely legal nature, he said, it is not the same, for everyone realises that a real Court composed of jurists may be considered as the most competent instrument for dealing with controversies of this nature and giving decisions on pure questions of law² .

The intention of the framers of the Draft Convention was to organise a Court competent primarily for controversies of a legal nature, but at the same time not prohibited from dealing, if the parties so desire, with cases of a different character. The Permanent Court established in 1899 is not strictly speaking permanent, for it requires to be organised each time resort is had to it; the panel of judges from which the litigants choose the arbitrators is, together with the Administrative Bureau, the only permanent part of the system. Another defect of the system, as has already been pointed out, is its expense¹ , which, said Mr Choate, was probably one of the reasons why certain nations had failed to appear before it. “It should be one element of reform,” he continued, “that the expense of the Court itself, including the salaries of the judges, shall be borne at common expense of all the signatory Powers, so as to furnish to the suitors a Court, at least, free of expense to them, as is the case with suitors of all nations in their national courts. The fact that there was nothing permanent, or continuous, or connected in the sessions of the Court or in the adjudication of the cases submitted to it has been an obvious source of weakness and want of prestige in the Tribunal. Each trial it had before it has been wholly independent of every other, and its occasional utterances, widely distant in point of time and disconnected in subject-matter, have not gone far towards constituting a consistent body of international law or of valuable contributions to international law, which ought to emanate from an international tribunal representing the power and might of all the nations.... Let us then seek to develope out of it a permanent court which shall hold regular and continuous sessions, which shall consist of the same judges, which shall pay due heed to its own decisions, which shall speak with the authority of the united voice of the nations and gradually build up a system of international law, definite and precise, which shall command the approval and regulate the conduct of the nations. By such a step in advance, we shall justify the confidence which has been placed in us and shall make the work of this Second Conference worthy of comparison with that of the Conference of 1899² .”

The Russian draft.Two proposals were before the First Sub-Committee of the First Committee at its meeting on the 1st August, namely a Russian draft³ and a United States draft⁴ . The Russian draft was in the nature of an extension of the work of the existing Permanent Court, the members of which were to assemble every year in full session for the following purposes: (1) to select by ballot three members from the list of arbitrators who must be ready at any time to constitute the Permanent Court: (2) to consider the annual report of the Administrative Council and of the International Bureau: (3) to express the opinion of the Permanent Court upon the questions which have arisen during the course of the procedure of an Arbitration Court as well as on the acts of the Administrative Council and the International Bureau: (4) to exchange ideas on the progress of international arbitration in general.

Under this scheme there would have been an annual meeting of the whole panel of judges of the Arbitration Court for the business set forth; three of their number were to be chosen, and these, as Mr Scott suggests, would, when selected, probably reside at the Hague and devote their time to cases presented for their decision¹ . The whole of the Russian scheme, which consisted of four Articles, was intended for incorporation into Convention No. 1 as Chapter ii., Articles 24-27. It was not discussed by the Examining Committee, though both it and the United States scheme were referred to that Committee after a discussion of the general principles of the two schemes by the First Sub-Committee on the 1st and 3rd August.

The United States draft.The United States draft proposed that a permanent Court of Arbitration should be established at the Hague to consist of 15 judges, the mode of choice to be left to the Conference, “but they shall be so chosen from the different countries that the various systems of law and procedure and the principal languages shall be suitably represented in the personnel of the Court” (Art. 1). The Court should meet annually at the Hague and remain in session as long as necessary; the judges were to receive a sufficient salary to enable them to devote their time to the consideration of the matters brought before them (Art. 2). No judge was to take part in the consideration of any case when his nation was a party thereto (unless with the express consent of the parties) (Art. 3). The cases which might come before the Court were set forth in Article 4. The judges were to act on Commissions of Enquiry or Special Arbitration Tribunals (Art. 5). The present Permanent Court of Arbitration might, as far as possible, constitute the basis of the Court, care being taken that the Powers which recently signed the Convention of 1899 are represented on it (Art. 6)² .

The only important opposition to the general scheme of a really permanent Court as outlined by the United States draft came from M. Beernaert, who contended that the comparative failure of the Permanent Court established in 1899 was due not to inherent defects but to the timidity of Governments to make trial of a new institution; the Permanent Court was preferable to that proposed by the United States plan, which he proceeded to criticise in detail, especially dwelling on the fact that permanent judges were imposed on the parties to the dispute who would thus be deprived of the right of choice which was essential to the idea of arbitration¹ .

M. Léon Bourgeois, in his capacity of French delegate, replied to the various speeches, particularly emphasising the fact that the proposed Court was not to take the place of the Permanent Court established in 1899, but that each would have its own separate sphere and that it was in no sense obligatory on the contracting parties to take cases before it² . Before the vote was taken several delegates enquired as to the manner in which the judges who should compose the new Court would be chosen, and no reply being forthcoming they decided to abstain from voting. The United States proposal was put to the vote and carried by 28 votes, with 12 abstentions³ .

Proceedings in the Examining Committee.In the Examining Committee (Comité d’Examen, B) the United States draft was taken as a basis, but it was subsequently withdrawn in favour of a common draft prepared by the American, British and German delegates⁴ . During the course of the discussions M. Ruy Barbosa (Brazil), on the 20th August, presented a draft based on the principle of the equality of states in their representation on the Court to be established, and the abolition of the existing Court. He supported his proposal in lengthy, detailed and somewhat heated speeches⁵ . His draft was not discussed by the Examining Committee and was subsequently withdrawn. Amendments were also presented by the Bulgarian, Haitian and Uruguayan delegates regarding the composition of the Court, the latter dealing with the question of obligatory arbitration⁶ .

The Examining Committee held 8 meetings between the 13th August and the 16th September but their labours did not result in their being able to lay before the Conference a draft Convention for its acceptance. The rock which so nearly proved fatal to the Prize Court Convention, viz. the mode of appointment of the judges, wrecked the scheme.

The draft Convention.It is not necessary to enter into a detailed explanation of the draft Convention, it will be sufficient to summarise its contents. It proposes the creation of a really permanent Court which shall meet at the Hague once a year for the hearing of such cases as shall be set down for it. The Court is to be freely and easily accessible, composed of judges representing the various judicial systems of the world and capable of insuring continuity in arbitral jurisprudence (Art. 1). It is to be composed of judges and deputy-judges of the highest qualification, appointed for a period of twelve years and taken as far as possible from the members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (Arts. 2 and 3). The Court is annually to nominate three judges to form a special Delegation and three more to replace them should the necessity arise (Art. 6). No judge is to exercise his functions in any case in which he has taken part in the decision of a national tribunal, or in which he has acted as counsel or advocate; a judge cannot act in the latter capacity before the Judicial Arbitration Court, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, a Special Tribunal of Arbitration or a Commission of Inquiry (Art. 7).

The judges are to receive an annual salary of 6000 Netherland florins (about £480) per annum, together with a further allowance of 100 florins per diem when exercising their functions, and travelling expenses fixed in accordance with the regulations in their own country. These emoluments are included in the general expenses of the Court and are paid through the International Bureau created by 1 H. C. 1899 (Art. 9). The judges may not accept any remuneration from their own or any other Government for services connected with their duties in their capacity of members of the Court (Art. 10).

The Delegation is competent (1) to decide arbitrations, if the parties are agreed that the summary procedure laid down in Part iv. Chapter iv. 1 H. C. 1907 is to be applied: (2) to hold an inquiry under Part iii. of that Convention. With the assent of the parties, and as an exception to the rule laid down in Article 7, the members of the Delegation who have taken part in the inquiry may sit as judges if the case in dispute is submitted to the arbitration of the Court or of the Delegation itself (Art. 18). The Delegation is also competent to settle the Compromis under Article 53 of 1 H. C. 1907.

It will thus be seen that the draft follows the general principles of the United States scheme with the addition of the small Committee as suggested by the Russian proposal, but nothing is said of the number of judges who shall compose the Court or the mode in which they are to be chosen. This subject occupied the attention of the Examining Committee for a considerable time but all attempts to produce a scheme which would meet with general acceptance failed. At the meeting on the 5th September Mr Choate reviewed the various suggestions made on this important subject¹ .

Proposed methods of choosing Judges.The Sub-Committee which had charge of the preparation of the draft had attempted to devise a scheme which should serve as a basis of discussion. It recognised the equal sovereignty of nations and took account at the same time of the differences that existed between them in population, in territory, in commerce, in language, in system of law and other respects. A Court of seventeen judges was proposed to be organised for a period of twelve years. The eight great Powers would each nominate a judge for the full period of twelve years, other states for smaller periods varying in proportion to their population, territorial extent, commerce etc.¹ These periods ranged from ten years to one.

M. Barbosa had presented a counter-scheme² “based upon the alleged equality, not only in sovereignty, but in all other respects of all the states. It proposed to abolish the existing Court, and for a new Court to be constituted consisting of forty-five judges, one to be appointed by each state, and these to be divided into groups, in alphabetical order, of fifteen each, which were to sit for alternate periods of three years....Two objections to it were suggested—first, that an allotment of periods by alphabetical order was really the creation of a court by chance, and second, that it deprived each nation of any hand or voice in the Court for six years out of the nine for which it was proposed to establish it, whereas the first scheme had given every nation a seat in the Court by a permanent judge for a fixed period, besides the right to have a judge of its own appointment upon the Court whenever it had a case before it for decision³ .” This system was not considered by the Examining Committee. M. Barbosa subsequently withdrew the draft. Although it had been put forward as a counter proposal, the Brazilian delegate was not dissatisfied with the existing Court, and had introduced the alternative scheme merely “to illustrate by a concrete example the kind of Court consistent with the unimpaired equality of nations, and the exercise of sovereignty⁴ ,” which he was prepared to accept.

Another proposal was that seventeen nations including the eight great Powers, and nine others which together should represent all parts of the world, languages, legal systems, interests etc., “should be selected by the Conference with a power to each to appoint a judge for the whole term of the Court, thus recognising the principle of equality of sovereignty to be exercised in the power of creating the Court and selecting the judges⁵ .”

According to another proposal four judges should be assigned to America as a unit, the selection to be left to the States of the American Continent, while the other nations should elect thirteen judges among themselves.

All these schemes having failed, Mr Choate then proposed the following: “The plan would be for an election, each state casting one vote for a prescribed number of judges, which should be deemed suitable for the temporary and provisional organisation of the Court, to hold office, either until the next Conference, or for a specified number of years, or until the Powers, by a diplomatic interchange of views, should adopt some different method as a permanency¹ .”

Final efforts.A final effort was made to secure an acceptable result by sending all the various proposals to a Sub-Committee of 8 delegates consisting of Baron Marschall von Bieberstein, Count Tornielli, Sir Edward Fry, MM. Nélidow, Bourgeois, Choate, Barbosa and Mérey de Kapos-Mère, but this endeavour failed also, and the Examining Committee met for the last time on the 18th September when Mr Choate made a final effort which he said he hoped would meet all the objections raised to the other schemes. Each state was to nominate a judge and deputy-judge and to send their names to the International Bureau. The Bureau was then to make a list of the names submitted and of countries nominating them and to send the list to the signatory Powers. Each would then vote for 15 judges and 15 deputy-judges taken from the list, and return their votes to the Bureau who would notify the names of those receiving the greatest number of votes; in case of equality of votes the decision to be by lot. The project, said Mr Choate, was simplicity itself. If only 15 nations accepted it, a beginning would be made and accessions would soon follow² . M. Ruy Barbosa was inflexible in his opposition, and when it was put to the vote Mr Choate’s proposal was rejected by 9 to 5. Sir Edward Fry then moved to accept the draft, leaving out all the provisions relating to the nomination of the judges or the rotation to be established, and recommending that it be brought into force as soon as an agreement had been reached respecting the selection of the judges and the constitution of the Court. The draft was accepted by 8 votes to 5 with 2 abstentions, and Sir Edward Fry’s proposal by the same numbers³ .

The First Committee adopted the motion of Sir Edward Fry as a Declaration (the name was changed to Vœu in the Final Act) at their meeting on the 10th October, and the Conference at its Ninth Plenary Meeting on the 16th October also adopted it by 36 votes with 6 abstentions.Reservations. The following states made reservations chiefly in the sense of accepting the Court providing that the principle of the legal equality of states be recognised in the composition of the Court: Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, San Salvador, Persia, Guatemala, Hayti, Venezuela, Paraguay, San Domingo, Panama, Ecuador, China, Bolivia and Nicaragua¹ . On signing the Final Act Switzerland made a reservation of this Vœu, the Swiss Federal Council having declined to accept it.

The labour of weeks spent in discussing the various projects for the composition of the proposed Court of Arbitral Justice was frustrated, and rendered fruitless for the present by the opposition of the smaller Powers, headed by the Brazilian delegate, M. Ruy Barbosa. To them the doctrine of the equality of states was a dogma accepted in its crudest meaning. Equality before the law, and equality in influence are two very different things. The “primacy of the great Powers” is a fact, if it is not a legal principle, and if these Powers should be able in the future to agree upon a method for the appointment of the judges for the Court, the lesser Powers will in course of time gradually be found desirous of taking their part in an institution which would contain the germs of the most important judicial body ever known to the world. But are these Powers really in earnest in their desire to establish such an institution? The international Palais de Justice has been built, furnished and decorated, and is ready for the judges to take their seats; it is for the Powers to open the doors and send them in² .

[2 ]See ante, p. 67.

[1 ]See ante, pp. 66-9, 85; Parl. Papers, pp. 59-61, 257-301; La Deux. Confér. T. i. pp. 332-5, 347-398; T. ii. pp. 144-161, 309-325, 331-351, 596-630, 1031-70; A. Ernst, L’œuvre de la deuxième Conférence de la Paix, pp. 14-17; A. H. Fried, Die zweite Haager Konferenz, pp. 98-119; E. Lémonon, La seconde Conférence de la Paix, pp. 220-279; T.J. Lawrence, International problems and Hague Conferences, pp. 73-5; J. Westlake, Quarterly Review, January, 1908, p. 234; J. B. Scott, The proposed Court of Arbitral Justice, Amer. Journ. of Inter. Law, Vol. ii. pp. 772-810; Idem, The Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907, Vol. i. pp. 421-466.

[2 ]See ante, pp. 67, 85.

[1 ]The subject was discussed by the First Sub-Committee of the First Committee and subsequently by an Examining Committee called Comité d’Examen, B.

[2 ]La Deux. Confér. T. i. p. 348; T. ii. pp. 347-8.

[1 ]See ante, p. 177.

[2 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. p. 328; Mr Choate’s speech in introducing the subject for discussion before the First Sub-Committee of the First Committee on the 1st August, 1907, is set out in English on pp. 327-330.

[3 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. p. 1030.

[4 ]Ibid. p. 1031.

[1 ]The Hague Peace Conferences, Vol. i. p. 438.

[2 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. p. 1031; J. B. Scott, The Hague Peace Conferences, p. 821.

[1 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. pp. 331-4.

[2 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. pp. 347-9.

[3 ]Ibid. T. ii. p. 350. The states abstaining from voting were: Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Greece, Norway, Roumania, Servia, Siam, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey.

[4 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. p. 1035.

[5 ]Ibid. pp. 618-622, 624-7; see post, p. 515.

[6 ]Ibid. pp. 1033, 1034, 915.

[1 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. pp. 689-693, where Mr Choate’s speech is given in English. The résumé of these various schemes is taken from Mr Choate’s speech and Mr J. B. Scott’s Hague Peace Conferences, pp. 457-460.

[1 ]See Table set out in La Deux. Confér. T. ii. pp. 609-612.

[2 ]Ibid. pp. 1045-8; see also pp. 618-622.

[3 ]Ibid. p. 690.

[4 ]J. B. Scott, The Hague Peace Conferences, Vol. i. p. 459.

[5 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. p. 690.

[1 ]La Deux. Confér. T. ii. p. 691.

[2 ]Ibid. pp. 697-9.

[3 ]Ibid. pp. 704-8.

[1 ]La Deux. Confér. T. i. pp. 333-5.

[2 ]Ibid. p. 391.