Слике страница

the great highways of the sea. Where this cannot be done by the cession of territory, it can no doubt be done by the neutralization of direct rights of way under the general guarantee which wil. assure the peace itself. With a right comity of arrangement no nation need be shut aw y from free access to the open paths of the world's commerce.

And the paths of the sea must alike in law and in fact be free. The freedom of the seas is the sine qua non of peace, equality and cooperation. No doubt a somewhat radical reconsideration of many of the rules of international practice hitherto sought to be established may be necessary in order to make the seas indeed free and common in practically all circumstances for the use of mankind, but the motive of such changes is convincing and compelling. There can be no trust or intimacy between the peoples of the world without them. The free, constant, unthreatened intercourse of nations is an essential part of the process of peace and development. It need not be difficult either to define or to secure the freedom of the seas if the Governments of the world sincerely desire to come to an agreement concerning it.

It is a problem closely connected with the limitation of naval armaments and the cooperation of the navies of the world in keeping the seas at once free and safe. And the question of limiting naval armaments opens the wider and perhaps more difficult question of the limitation of armies and of all programmes of military preparation. Difficult and delicate as these questions are, they must be faced with the utmost candor and decided in a spirit of real accommodation if peace is to come with healing in its wings and come to stay. Peace cannot be had without concession and sacrifice. There can be no sense of safety and equality among the nations if great preponderating armies are henceforth to continue here and there to be built up and maintained. The statesmen of the world must plan for peace and nations must adjust and accommodate their policy to it as as they have planned for war and made ready for pitiless conquest and rivalry.

The question of armaments, whether on land or sea, is the most immediately and intensely practical question connected with the future fortunes of nations and of mankind.

I have spoken upon these great matters without reserve and with the utmost explicitness because it has seemed to me to be necessary if the world's yearning desire for peace was anywhere to find free voice and utterance. Perhaps I am the only person in high authority among all the peoples of the world who is at liberty to speak and hold nothing back. I am speaking as an individual, and yet I am speaking also, of

course, as the responsible head of a great Government, and I feel confident that I have said what the people of the United States would wish me to say.

May I not add that I hope and believe that I am in effect speaking for liberals and friends of humanity in every nation and of every programme of liberty? I would fain believe that I am speaking for the silent mass of mankind everywhere who have as yet had no place or opportunity to speak their real hearts out concerning the death and ruin they see to have come already upon the persons and the homes they hold most dear.

And in holding out the expectation that the people and Government of the United States will join the other civilized nations of the world in guaranteeing the permanence of peace upon such terms as I have named, I speak with the greater boldness and confidence because it is clear to every man who can think that there is in this promise no breach in either our traditions or our policy as a nation, but a fulfilment rather of all that we have professed or striven for.

I am proposing, as it were, that the nations should with one accord adopt the doctrine of President Monroe as the doctrine of the world: that no nation should seek to extend its policy over any other nation or people, but that every people should be left free to determine its own policy, its own way of development, unhindered, unthreatened, unafraid, the little along with the great and powerful.

I am proposing that all nations henceforth avoid entangling alliances which would draw them into competitions of power, catch them in a net of intrigue and selfish rivalry and disturb their own affairs with influences intruded from without. There is no entangling alliance in a concert of power. When all unite to act in the same sense and with the same purpose all act in the common interest and are free to live their own lives under a common protection.

I am proposing government by the consent of the governed; that freedom of the seas which in international conference after conference representatives of the United States have urged with the eloquence of those who are the convinced disciples of liberty, and that moderation of armaments which makes of armies and navies a power for order merely, not an instrument of aggression or of selfish violence.

These are American principles, American policies. We can stand for no others. And they are also the principles and policies of forward looking men and women everywhere, and of every modern nation and of every enlightened community. They are the principles of mankind and must prevail.

Corresponding Secretary of World Peace Foundation

N the 17th of January the ex- ter upon a new chapter of colonial U change of ratifications of a administration. What will be the

treaty between Denmark and circumstances under which the motthe United States had the effect ley and mottled population of the of transferring to American sover islands, less than 30,000 in number, eignty the West Indian Islands of will become nationals of the United St. Thomas, Santa Cruz and St. States? The question is the more John, which lie eastward of Porto appropriate to ask at the present Rico and substantially control the time because the status of Philippine Virgin Passage through the Lesser and Porto Rican citizens is just now Antilles. The other three maritime to the front, and consideration of routes through the bow of the West three such problems together may Indies,—the straits of Florida be- result in some changes of policy totween Florida and Cuba, the Wind- ward the human content of these ward Passage between Cuba and American dependencies. the Island of San Domingo and the Except for any treaty provisions Mona Passage between San Domingo as to the inhabitants of the islands, and Porto Rico,-are already sub- the United States will be entirely free stantially under the control of the to deal with the population of its new United States. To control the four West Indian possessions as it sees approaches through the West Indies fit. The attorney general of the to the Panama Canal, the United United States laid down the rule States is paying $25,000,000 to when he wrote in 1898: Denmark for three islands of an “When territory is acquired by treaty or area of 138 square miles.

conquest, or otherwise, its relation to the

nation acquiring it depends upon the laws The transfer of Danish island

of that nation, unless controlled by the interritory has been contemplated for strument of cession.” (22 Op. Atty. Gen.

150.) some fifty years, and in the meantime the price has been multiplied by The United States is neither in a five, notwithstanding the fact that position nor of an intention to interthe population and commerce of the pret such a rule harshly. In the case islands have tended to decrease. On of the West Indies it will probably the whole, however, Americans seem go even further than it did in the to consider the bargain a good one case of the cessions from Spain as a because it removes a potential base result of the war of 1898. The treaty of trouble.

of Paris of December 19, 1898, proWith the consummation of the vided : purchase, the United States will en- Art. IX. Spanish subjects, natives of the Sec. 7. That all inhabitants continuing to reside therein who were Spanish subjects on April 11, 1899, and then resided in Porto Rico, and their children born subsequent thereto, shall be deemed and held to be cit

izens of Porto Rico, and as such entitled to the protection of the United State; ... and they, together with such citizens of the United States as may reside in Porto Rico, shall constitute a body politic under the name of the People of Porto Rico.

Peninsula, residing in the territory over which Spain by the present treaty relinquishes or cedes her sovereignty, may remain in such territory or may remove therefrom, retaining in either event all their rights of property, including the right to sell or dispose of such property or of its proceeds; and they shall also have the right to carry on their industry, commerce and professions, being subject in respect thereof to such laws as are applicable to other foreigners. In case they remain in the territory they may preserve their allegiance to the Crown of Spain by making, before a court of record, within a year from the date of the exchange of ratifications of this treaty, a declaration of their decision to preserve such allegiance; in default of which declaration they shall be held to have renounced it and to have adopted the nationality of the territory in which they may reside.

The civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants of the territories hereby ceded to the United States shall be determined by the Congress.

It will be noticed that the treaty left it entirely at the election of the individual to determine which country he should choose and that the rights of those electing the American flag were left to the discretion of Congress. As a consequence the United States took on a new relation with nationals. Previous to that time American possessions had substantially consisted of states and territories, the inhabitants of both being citizens. But here were individuals who were not citizens, though they owed' allegiance to the United States.

In the case of Porto Rico, to the governmental system of which it is not improbable that the new possessions will be assimilated, an act of April 12, 1900, determined as follows:

There was no provision for eventual citizenship. The island has since been governed by a Governor and Executive Council, appointed by the President with the approval of the Senate, and a House of Delegates, 35 in number, who are elected by the people of Porto Rico. The executive power in the island is therefore entirely under the control of the United States, and the legislative power is partially under the control of Washington. For the Executive Council constitutes an upper house of the Legislative Assembly. All laws passed by the latter must be reported to Congress and accepted by it before coming final. The court system of the island is assimilated to the national court system of local and federal jurisdictions.

Acquisition of the three West Indian islands may have an effect upon Congressional legislation, now pending, which contemplates a larger measure of home rule for Porto Rico. If, as is probable, the islands are made dependent upon Porto Rico, they are likely to make their democratic influence felt. In fact, at a mass meeting held at St. Thomas on December 14, 1916, protest was phrased in this resolution:

e deemed and held to be cit

“The island does not desire to be governed by Porto Rico, but wishes to be permitted to manage its own affairs under the federal government, American citizenship to be accorded immediately on the transfer, the port to be free, and natives to be given

preference in appointments to government Vienna November 30, 1864, a treaty positions."

of peace was signed between Austria A committee is expected to sup- and Prussia on the one side and port these ideas in Washington, and Denmark on the other. By this the almost certain result will be con- treaty Schleswig and Holstein were ferring of American citizenship upon transferred by Denmark to the other Porto Ricans, whatever decision is two powers. By the peace of Prague taken respecting the three islands. of August 23, 1866, the Austro

A series of referenda or plebiscites Prussian war was closed and Austria both in the islands and in Denmark succeeded in having incorporated in previous to the ratification of the article 5 a palliation of her defeat in treaty of purchase called attention the stipulation that part of the to what has been in some quarters Danish territory secured by the two advocated as an invariably desirable powers from Denmark two years berequisite for the transfer of terri- fore was to be ceded to Prussia, tory from one state to another. The “with the condition that the populaislanders themselves voted in favor tion of the northern districts of of the transfer. Conservative opin- Schleswig shall be ceded to Denmark ion in Denmark itself was able in its if, by a free vote, they express a wish opposition to the sale to wreck one to be united to Denmark.” By a cabinet, thus forcing the question of treaty between Austria-Hungary and the transfer before the citizenry at Germany signed at Vienna on Octoan election. Denmark needed the ber 11, 1878, the proviso just quoted money and had found that the islands was annulled. were a liability rather than an asset. As a consequence, and in view of The Danish plebiscite was therefore the disparity between Denmark and successful in ratifying the sale. . the German Empire, Denmark's hope

There was nothing new in this of securing a plebiscite in Schleswigreference of the question to the peo- Holstein depends upon creating preple, for the same stipulation had cedents for such action. Such is the been made by Denmark on the previ- explanation of the series of pleous occasions when the sale had been biscites which apparently has given discussed.

a new recognition of the doctrine There was, however, an ulterior that no human being should be submotive for the stipulation. At ject to any state against his will.

A call for an International Congress of Socialists for June 8, 1917, at The Hague, has been issued by the National Executive Committee of the Socialist Party of the United States: "Convinced the time is ripe for the rebuilding of the Socialist International on the basis of a concerted, workingclass movement for immediate, just and lasting peace.”

“It is a fact, not generally appreciated, that the Pan-American Union is the only actual international official peace organization that has a permanent every-day existence, with a numerous working staff, and is controlled by the plenipotentiaries of a large group of nations."-John Barrett, Director-General of the Pan-American Union.


Lecturer on International Law, St. Louis University Law School

HILE the hope of world peace the authority of these great names

comes to us unfulfilled from would be more imposing than the in

remote ages, a retrospect of trinsic merits of the scheme itself.” the past two centuries shows an un- The plan was based upon the state doubted advance toward its realiza- of possession, as fixed by the treaties tion. One may say that the propa- of Utrecht, and the first article proganda which has been most effective vided for å perpetual alliance behas not been so much in the writings tween members of the European of publicists but, rather, in the League, for their mutual security progress of the physical arts and against civil as well as foreign war. sciences, emphasizing as no pen can The second article provided for the interdependence of nations and the maintenance of a general assemthe indivisibility of their welfare. bly of plenipotentiaries. By the And yet there are four names that third article each state was to restand out conspicuously during the nounce the right of making war first hundred years of this period, against the others and accept mesharing the fame of furnishing to diation and arbitration of the Genthe present nearly all of the prac- eral Assembly, three-fourths of the tical suggestions comprised within votes being necessary for a binding our present programs of peace. judgment.

The first is that of the Abbé The principal sovereigns and Saint-Pierre, who had been present states who were to compose the at the conference of Utrecht in 1713, league were: the King of France, the which terminated the bitter war of Emperor of Germany, the King of the Spanish Succession, and who be- Spain, the Emperor of Russia, the came deeply affected by the misery King of Great Britain, Elector of and waste with which the constantly Hanover, the Republic of Holland, recurring wars were afflicting Eu- the King of Denmark, the King of rope. In 1729 he published the Sweden, the King of Poland, Elector Projet de Paix perpetuelle, which, as of Saxony, the King of Portugal, the Wheaton remarks, “the benevolent Sovereign of Rome, the King of author, by a kind of pious fraud, Prussia, Elector of Brandenburg, attributed to Henry IV., and his the Elector of Bavaria and his cominister Sully, with the view of rec- states, the Elector of Palatine and ommending it to the adoption of the his co-states, the Swiss and their cosovereigns and ministers, to whom states, the Ecclesiastical Electors

« ПретходнаНастави »