THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

First annual assemblage, League to Enforce Peace, May 27, 1916:

I am sure that I speak the mind and wish of the people of America when I say that the United States is willing to become a partner in any feasible association of nations formed in order to realize these objects and make them secure against violation. . . .

I came only to avow a creed and give expression to the confidence I feel that the world is even now upon the eve of a great consummation, when some common force will be brought into existence which shall safeguard right as the first and most fundamental interest of all peoples and all governments, when coercion shall be summoned not to the service of political ambition or selfish hostility, but to the service of a common order, a common justice and a common peace.

Diplomatic note to belligerent powers, December 18, 1916:

Each wishes itself to be made secure in the future, along with all other nations and peoples, against the recurrence of wars like this and against aggression of selfish interference of any kind. Each would be jealous of the formation of any more rival leagues to preserve an uncertain balance of power amidst multiplying suspicions; but each is ready to consider the formation of a league of nations to insure peace and justice throughout the world. . . .

In the measures to be taken to secure the future peace of the world the people and Government of the United States are as vitally and as directly interested as the Governments now at war. Their interest, moreover, in the means to be adopted to relieve the smaller and weaker peoples of the world of the peril of wrong and violence is as quick and ardent as that of any other people or Government. They stand ready, and even eager, to co-operate in the accomplishment of these ends, when the war is over, with every influence and resource at their command.

PREAMBLE TO THE PROGRAM.

Throughout five thousand years of recorded history, peace, here and there established, has been kept, and its area has been widened, in one way only. Individuals have combined their efforts to suppress violence in the local community. Communities have co-operated to maintain the authoritative state and to preserve peace, within its borders. States have formed leagues or confederations or have otherwise co-operated to establish peace among themselves. Always peace has been made and kept, when made and kept at all, by the superior power of superior numbers acting in unity for the common good.

Mindful of this teaching of experience, we believe and solemnly urge that the time has come to devise and to create a working union of sovereign nations to establish peace among themselves and to guarantee it by all known and available sanctions at their command, to the end that civilization may be conserved, and the progress of mankind in comfort, enlightenment and happiness may continue.

PROGRAM OF THE LEAGUE.
THE DEFINITE PROPOSALS.

We believe it to be desirable for the United States to join a league of nations binding the signatories to the following:

1 Printed with the approval of the World Peace Foundation.

INTERNATIONAL COURT.

First: All justiciable questions arising between the signatory powers, not settled by negotiation, shall, subject to the limitations of treaties, be submitted to a judicial tribunal for hearing and judgment, both upon the merits and upon any issue as to its jurisdiction of the question.

COUNCIL OF CONCILIATION.

Second: All other questions arising between the signatories, and not settled by negotiation, shall be submitted to a council of conciliation for hearing, consideration and recommendation.

SANCTIONS.

Third: The signatory powers shall jointly use forthwith both their economic and military forces against any one of their number that goes to war, or commits acts of hostility, against another of the signatories before any question arising shall be submitted as provided in the foregoing.

The following interpretation of Article Three has been authorized by the Executive Committee:

"The signatory powers shall jointly employ diplomatic and economic pressure against any one of their rumber that threatens war against a fellow signatory without having first submitted its dispute for international inquiry, conciliation, arbitration or judicial hearing, and awaited a conclusion, or without having

1907

POWERS RATIFYING ARBITRATION.

CONFERENCES TO DEVELOP LAW.

Fourth: Conferences between the signatory powers shall be held from time to time to formulate and codify rules of international law, which, unless some signatory shall signify its dissent within a stated period, shall thereafter govern in the decisions of the Judicial Tribunal mentioned in Article One.

HISTORICAL LIGHT ON THE LEAGUE TO ENFORCE

PEACE.

The program of the League to Enforce Peace was drawn up as a practical program. It makes its way in the minds of men and women just because it is practical and possible of realization. It is a reasonable plan, and is so recognized by innumerable American citizens and even by the governments of belligerent nations. To show that such confidence is not based upon untried theories but rests upon a large body of international experience is the purpose of this summary. What use has already been made of the several principles involved in this program? Here is the answer:

PART I.

The First Article of the League Program.

AN INTERNATIONAL COURT.

All justiciable questions arising between the signatory powers, not settled by negotiation, shall, subject to the limitations of treaties, be submitted to a judicial tribunal for hearing and judgment, both upon the merits and upon any issue as to its jurisdiction of the question.

The principle here involved has long been in operation internationally under the name of arbitration. This article contemplates its development into an international court. The extent to which nations are already committed to this practice is most encouraging.

1. The Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, signed on July 29, 1899, affirms:

"In questions of a legal nature, and especially in the interpretation or application of international conventions, arbitration is recognized by the signatory powers as the most effective, and at the same time the most equitable, means of settling disputes which diplomacy has failed to settle."

2. The provision was repeated in the revised convention of the Second Hague Conference in 1907, and has been ratified by the following powers:

3. Arbitration, in order to be appreciated, as a pacific force, must be considered from several points of view.

I. ARBITRATION CASES, or the trial of actual controversies submitted to tribunals chosen by the disputants;

II. ARBITRATION TREATIES, providing for this method of settling international disputes;

III. ARBITRATION COURTS, which, owing to the success of arbitrations and the negotiation of arbitration treaties, have made great headway in the past twenty years.

I. ARBITRATION CASES.

The settlement of disputes by arbitration has become well known since the famous Jay treaty of 1794 between the United States and Great Britain. That treaty, however, simply reintroduced the principle into practice, for arbitration had been employed extensively by the ancient world and in Europe, after the collapse of the Roman Empire. A partial list of arbitrations by periods follows:

2003 4774

959

2 The figure for ancient Greece is taken from Marcus Niebuhr Tod, "International Arbitration Amongst the Greeks." 3 The figure for the period from 80 to 1794 is estimated from data, which is incomplete. The archives of Poland alone from the 13th to 16th centuries record a round hundred arbitrations.

4 The figure for 1794 to 1900 is the total of W. Evans Darby's descriptive and reference list, published as an integral supplement to his "International Tribunals," and issued separately under the title of "Modern Pacific Settlements."

war.

The

other two treaties were between Austria-Hungary and Great Britain and between Austria-Hungary and Portugal, respectively."

There are in addition to the foregoing many treaty articles which provide for the arbitration of questions arising from the subject matter of the treaties in which they are included. Such provisions are called compromisory clauses, and at the outbreak of the war were included in 145 treaties, dealing with 74 of the subjects most frequently regulated by international agreement."

III. ARBITRATION COURTS.

The impulse given to methods of pacific settlement of international disputes by the convening of the Hague Conference of 1899 has resulted in the establishment, or the effort to establish, several courts. These are:

1. A PERMANENT COURT OF ARBITRATION, established at The Hague by conventions signed July 29, 1899. The court is accessible at all times" and competent for all arbitrations," but the actual trial court must be selected for each case from a panel in which the 44 states party to the convention have each designated four nationals. It has tried 15 cases and has three pending.

2. THE CENTRAL AMERICAN COURT OF JUSTICE, established by convention signed at Washington on December 20, 1907, and now located at San José, Costa Rica. Its function is virtually that of a supreme court for the five states of Central America, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Salvador. Nine matters have been handled by the Court.

3. COURT OF ARBITRAL JUSTICE, provided for by the Final Act of the Second Hague Conference, signed on October 18, 1907, but not actually established. The draft convention providing for its organization was designed to create a permanent court of 15 members to supplement and improve the panel system in effect in the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

The figure for 1900 to date is estimated from data collected by this office, which is incomplete. More than 50 arbitrations occurred in the years from 1900 to 1903.

• For details concerning treaties see "Arbitration Engagements Now Existing in Treaties, Treaty Provisions and National Constitution." (World Peace Foundation, Pamphlet Series.)

7 For details concerning compromisory clauses, see Christian L. Lange, "L'Arbitrage obligatoire en 1913. Relevé des stipulations conventionnelles en vigueur en 1913 instituant le recours obligatoire à l'arbitrage international," 309-335, 343-352.

President Taft of the United States in 1911 added a new meaning and possibility for usefulness to this principle. The Administration sought a formula that would provide for the peaceful setlement of all disputes, and found it in treaties signed with France and Great Britain on August 3, 1911. These provided, first, that all disputes of a legal character (that is, justiciable disputes) should be arbitrated, and, secondly:

"The High Contracting Parties further agree to institute as occasion arises, and as hereinafter provided, a Joint High Commission of Inquiry to which, upon the request of either party, shall be referred for impartial and conscientious investigation any controversy between the parties within the scope of Article I, before such controversy has been submitted to arbitration, and also any other controversy hereafter arising between them even if they are not agreed that it falls within the scope of Article I.”

Those treaties were not brought into force, but the succeeding Wilson Administration, on the initiative of Secretary of State Bryan, proceeded to seek substantially the same end by a little different method. Leaving the existing arbitration treaties as they were, the Secretary of State sought to provide in addition for the employment of the Commission of Inquiry. The various powers were approached, and 35 of them expressed themselves as willing to negotiate treaties. At present 30 of these "Treaties for the Advancement of Peace" have been signed, and negotiations with other countries are under way. They differ slightly in their wording, but all read substantially as follows:

The High Contracting Parties agree that all disputes between them, of every nature whatsoever, to the settlement of which previous arbitration treaties or agreements do not apply in their terms or are not applied in fact, shall, when diplomatic methods of adjustment have failed, be referred for investigation and report to a permanent International Commission, to be constituted in the manner prescribed in the next succeeding article; and they agree not to declare war or begin hostilities during such investigation and before the report is submitted."

The United States is obligated to follow this procedure with practically all the rest of the world. Twenty treaties of this type are at present in force with the following states:

AMERICAN CONCILIATION TREATIES, IN FORCE.

(Dates are those of the exchange of ratifications, from which the treaties remain in force for five years.)

Bolivia, January 8, 1915

Brazil, October 28, 1916

Chile, January 19, 1916 China, October 22, 1915 Costa Rica, Nov. 12, 1914 Denmark, January 19, 1915 Ecuador, January 22, 1916 France, January 22, 1915 Great Britain, Nov. 10, 1914 Guatemala, October 13, 1914

Honduras, July 27, 1916 Italy, March 19, 1915 Norway, October 21, 1914 Paraguay, March 9, 1915 Peru, March 4, 1915 Portugal, October 24, 1914 Russia, March 22, 1915 Spain, December 21, 1914 Sweden, January 11, 1915 Uruguay, February 24, 1915 Ten treaties have been signed and await formal ratifications before coming into force. Treaties of the United States in this condition have been signed with the following:

AMERICAN CONCILIATION TREATIES, SIGNED. (Dates indicate when each treaty was signed.) Argentine Republic, July 24, 1914

Dominican Republic, Febru-
ary 17, 1914

Greece, October 13, 1914
Netherlands, December 18,

Pnama, September 20, 1913 Persia, February 4, 1914 Salvador, August 7, 1913 Switzerland, February 13, 1914

Venezuela, March 21, 1914

The United States made the proposal concerning such treaties to all countries maintaining diplomatic relations with the Washington government. The rest of the world has accepted the principle to the extent indicated by the Hague Convention which is quoted above, while the principle itself has been substantially provided for in many other treaties. This is particularly true of Latin America, where conciliation has been extensively employed.

III. PERMANENT COUNCIL THE NEXT STEP.

It is evident that the American treaties have already organized the principle of the Commission of Inquiry into a method of pacific settlement. Moreover, those treaties, by their success and the evident welcome they have received among the states of the world, make possible a still further advance. The League to Enforce Peace aims to make this next step a council of conciliation which shall be a permanent international body. This might mean a panel of commissioners appointed by each state, from which disputants might select a commission for a given case. Or a still more developed form might mean a smaller permanent council, selected in a manner acceptable to