"The establishment of the permanent Tribunal of Chapter V Arbitration presents no insurmountable difficulties, and it may easily be the most important factor in the international problem before the Conference of The Hague. The difficulties which the magnanimous views and wishes of His Majesty the Emperor of Russia encountered in other respects are one more reason for us to turn our attention to the organization of Mediation and Arbitration. It is necessary to develop and consolidate the organic interests of peace. It is upon this subject that general attention the future. in all countries has been directed to this Conference, with hopes which cannot be disappointed without great and serious damage. The propositions which we shall formulate and upon which we hope to harmonize the States here represented will no doubt be modest. The future will develop and en-Looking to large those features of our work capable of such enlargement for the good of all peoples and for the progress of humanity. As for the delegates at this Conference, it will no doubt be one of the greatest sources of happiness in their life, to have coöperated in the accomplishment of this grand result the fraternal rapprochement of peoples and the stability of general peace." by M. Des After this general introduction, M. Descamps stated Suggestions that according to his views one of the most advan- camps. tageous features of the permanent tribunal of arbitration would be this, that the members designated by the different States could meet, say every three months. They would elect a President who should Chapter V Impossibility of having a President of the entire court. The critical moment of be re-eligible, and they would have the function of appointing from among their number a bench to sit in vacation. This would help the disposition of States who wanted to have recourse to the Tribunal on matters which might not seem to have sufficient importance to warrant a meeting of the entire court. To his view this simplification would present many advantages, by avoiding the necessity of constituting for each case a complicated and costly mechanism, and by such an arrangement the Peace Conference would have constituted a Court which would really be permanent, in place of a simple international tribunal. He expressed the ardent hope that these conclusions would be approved, especially by the delegates from England, Russia, and the United States. The particular suggestions of M. Descamps were not pressed, and the idea of having a President of the entire proposed court was found to be absolutely unacceptable to several of the continental Powers. The very questions of rank and precedence which the existence of such an exalted functionary might raise, were found to be by no means trifling. And it was felt that whatever advantages might accrue from such an emphasizing of the idea of permanence, they nevertheless seemed to be more than counterbalanced by the corresponding embarrassments. The critical moment of the discussion had now arrived, when Professor Zorn, on behalf of the German Empire, took the floor for the purpose of opposing the idea of a permanent tribunal. His speech was a model of diplomatic tact, being animated Chapter V throughout by the most conciliatory spirit and a lofty idealism. Professor Professor Zorn stated that he had listened with Speech of the greatest attention and with profound emotion to Zorn. the preceding declarations. He recognized to the fullest extent the solemnity of this hour, when the representatives of the greatest civilized Powers were called upon to pronounce judgment upon one of the gravest problems which could be presented to them, and he desired to express the sincere hope that the day would come when the noble wish of the Czar might be accomplished in its entirety, and when conflicts between States might be regulated, at least in the great majority of cases, by a permanent international court. At the same time, he added that, while he personally was animated by this wish and hope, it was not possible for him to give way to illusions; and this was, no doubt, the attitude of his Government. the German nent court. The German Government considered it necessary Objections of to emphasize the fact that the proposition now pro- Government posed and submitted to the judgment of this Com-to a permamittee was an innovation of a most radical character, and while it was a most generous project, it could not be realized without bearing with it great risks and even great dangers which it was simple prudence to recognize. He asked whether it would not be better to await, upon a subject of such profound. importance, the results of greater preliminary experience, for in a word he declared that in the opinion Chapter V Motion to strike out the provision. The original Russian proposal. of the German Government the plan for the permanent International Tribunal was at least premature. If the experience of occasional tribunals proved successful, and if they realized the hopes reposed in them, the German Government would not hesitate to coöperate to that end, and would now accept the experiment of arbitration having far greater scope than anything which had been in practice up to this day; but it could not possibly agree to the organization of the permanent Tribunal before having the preliminary benefit of satisfactory experience with occasional arbitrations. "In this situation," said Professor Zorn, "notwithstanding my intense desire to assist with all my might in bringing the work of this Committee to a successful conclusion, I regret to be compelled to move that Article 13 of the original Russian project be made the basis of further discussion instead of the plans for the permanent Tribunal, inasmuch as this Article accurately represents the views of the Imperial German Government upon the subject." Article 13 of the original Russian project was as follows: "With a view to facilitating recourse to arbitration, and the successful application of the principle, the Signatory Powers have agreed to set forth by common accord for cases of international arbitration, the fundamental principles which should be followed in the establishment of the arbitration tribunal, and the rules of procedure which should be followed during the course of the litigation, up to the rendering of the arbitral decision. The application of these fundamental principles, as well as of the Chapter V arbitral procedure referred to in the Appendix of the present article, may be modified by virtue of a special agreement between the States having recourse to arbitration." The motion made on behalf of the German Empire being preliminary in character, was immediately taken up and the Chairman briefly opened the discussion on the subject. M. Asser. M. Asser of the Netherlands recognized that it Speech of would certainly be useful to have experience, but according to him this experience had already been had, in the occasional arbitrations which had heretofore occurred. What was left to try was precisely the plans now proposed, for they all implied the establishment of a court which should be entirely voluntary. It seemed to him that the conclusion which Professor Zorn had arrived at need not be quite so absolute, and that without receding from the opinion which he had just stated, in a manner which had deeply impressed the Committee, he might still postpone further opposing the establishment of the permanent tribunal of arbitration, and might consent. to look upon it, according to the expression of Count Nigra, as a "temporary permanent tribunal." Professor Professor Zorn was not unmindful of the validity Reply of of M. Asser's argument, but he raised another objec- Zorn. tion. There was obviously a great difference between an occasional arbitration, and the institution of a tribunal permanently charged with exercising the rôle of an arbitrator according to a code of procedure and |