On the conclusion of the proceedings at The Hague Court in the Pious Fund and Venezuela Indemnities cases, the Arbitrators drew up recommendations on matters of procedure which had arisen in the course of the trial.

In the Japanese Perpetual Leases and Muscat Dhows cases other points arose.

The different points are set out below under the Articles to which they apply.

(N.B.--The text of the part of the Convention relating to Arbitration is in the smaller type, the suggestions in the larger.)

TITLE IV. OF THE HAGUE PEACE CONVENTION. ON INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION.2

CHAPTER I.—On the System of Arbitration.

Art. XV. -International arbitration has for its object the settlement of differences between States by judges of their own choice, and on the basis of respect for law.

Art. XVI.-In questions of a legal nature, and especially in the interpretation or application of International Conventions, arbitration is recognised by the Signatory Powers as the most effective, and at the the same time the most equitable, means of settling disputes which diplomacy has failed to settle.

3

Art. XVII.-The Arbitration Convention is concluded for questions already existing 3 or for questions which may arise eventually. It may embrace any dispute, or only disputes of a certain category. Art. XVIII.-The Arbitration Convention implies the engagement to submit loyally to the Award.

Art. XIX.-Independently of general or private Treaties expressly stipulating recourse to arbitration as obligatory on the Signatory Powers, these Powers reserve to themselves the right of concluding, either before the ratification of the present Act or later, new Agreements, general or private, with a view to extending obligatory arbitration to all cases which they may consider it possible to submit to it.

CHAPTER II.—On the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

Art. XX.-With the object of facilitating an immediate recourse to arbitration for international differences, which it has not been possible to settle by diplomacy, the Signatory Powers undertake to organise a permanent Court of Arbitration, accessible at all times and operating, unless otherwise stipulated by the parties, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure inserted in the present Convention.

Art. XXI.-The Permanent Court shall be competent for all arbitration cases, unless the parties agree to institute a special Tribunal,

1 See these Recommendations in full, p. 273 et seq.

2 The text of the Convention used is the English official translation published in the British Report.

3 In reference to this Article, M. Beldiman, the Roumanian Plenipotentiary at the Conference, made the following declaration : "The Royal Government of Roumania declares that it cannot adhere to Article XVII. except with the reservation, to be placed in the minutes, that it has decided in no case to accept international arbitration for questions and difficulties anterior to the conclusion of the present Convention.

Art. XXII.-An International Bureau, established at The Hague, serves as record office for the Court.

This Bureau is the channel for communications relative to the meetings of the Court.

It has the custody of the archives, and conducts all the administrative business.

The Signatory Powers undertake to communicate to the International Bureau at The Hague a duly certified copy of any conditions of arbitration arrived at between them, and of any award concerning them delivered by special Tribunals.

They undertake also to communicate to the Bureau the Laws, Regulations, and documents eventually showing the execution of the awards given by the Court.

This Article leaves a number of essential matters untouched. In view of this circumstance, the Arbitrators in the Pious Fund case proposed the following addition to the Article:

Powers in litigation which have agreed to submit any dispute between them to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, shall immediately upon signature of the compromis, communicate it to the International Bureau, and request it to take the necessary measures for the installation of the arbitral tribunal;

The same Powers shall, after appointment of their Arbitrators, communicate their names to the International Bureau without delay;

The International Bureau, on its part and without delay, shall communicate to the Arbitrators so appointed the signed compromis, and the names of the members of the arbitral tribunal already appointed.

Art. XXIII.-Within the three months following its ratification of the present Act, each Signatory Power shall select four persons at the most, of known competency in questions of international law,' of the highest moral reputation, and disposed to accept the duties of Arbitrators.

The persons thus selected shall be inscribed, as members of the Court, in a list which shall be notified by the Bureau to all the Signatory Powers.

Any alteration in the list of Arbitrators is brought by the Bureau to the knowledge of the Signatory Powers.

Two or more Powers may agree on the selection in common of one or more members.

The same person can be selected by different Powers.

The members of the Court are appointed for a term of six years. Their appointments can be renewed.

In case of the death or retirement of a member of the Court, his place shall be filled in accordance with the method of his appointment.

Art. XXIV. --When the Signatory Powers desire to have recourse to the Permanent Court for the settlement of a difference that has arisen between them, the Arbitrators called upon to form the competent Tribunal to decide this difference, must be chosen from the general list of members of the Court.

Failing the direct agreement of the parties on the composition of the Arbitration Tribunal, the following course shall be pursued :

Each party appoints two Arbitrators, and these together choose an Umpire.

If the votes are equal, the choice of the Umpire is entrusted to a third Power, selected by the parties by common accord.

If an agreement is not arrived at on this subject, each party selects a different Power, and the choice of the Umpire is made in concert by the Powers thus selected.

The Tribunal being thus composed, the parties notify to the Bureau

1 This restriction to persons "of known competency in questions of international law has not been acted upon. Whether it is wise to appoint as members of a judicial tribunal persons who have had no legal training and experience is a question upon which it is difficult to express a general view based on actual practice.

In France the tribunals of commerce are an instance of the satisfactory working of lay judges. In Germany a mixed system was thought better. In England the jury co-operates even with the civil judge in the hearing of causes.

Lord Chief-Justice Alverstone, speaking at the Brussels Conference of the International Law Association in 1895, observed :

"The dream and aim of many of the most competent minds is that in order to realise the highest ideal, and to obtain the greatest amount of success, there must be established a permanent Court supported by civilised nations, to which Court all civilised nations will appeal, in lieu of adopting the terrible arbitrament of war. Speaking of the ultimate aim of this or any similar association, I do not dissent from this view, nor would I ask anyone to forego one jot of that ideal, or abstain from pressing it forward by advocacy or argument. I must, however, point out that there is an intermediate condition of things, no less important, no less demanded by events of everyday national life. I mean the reference to the arbitration of tribunals appointed ad hoc of questions which may from time to time arise. Those who have had personal experience in diplomatic work and in international relations, know that the nature of the questions which might be dealt with by arbitration is so various, that it by no means follows that a permanent tribunal of the kind indicated would be necessary, or even suitable, for the settlement of them all. The subject is so vast and so interesting that I with difficulty resist the temptation to enter fully into it, but I will briefly allude to three typical instances :—

1. Cases of boundary;

2. Cases of damage for an admitted wrongful act;

3. Cases of dispute involving questions of legal right.

Instances of all three can be found in the record of International Arbitration.

In the first case, viz. Boundaries, a small, impartial commission of military or naval men or travellers visiting the locus in quo, would be admitted to be the best tribunal. In the second, one or more commercial men of standing could settle, in a comparatively short period, the question of amount to the satisfaction of all parties. In the third, legal training, judicial knowledge, and power to appreciate legal arguments would be absolutely essential." Report of 17th Conference held at Brussels 1895, p. 38.)