Chapter V Speech of certain rules determined in advance. Besides, the German Delegate wished to remind the Committee that the Russian Government had modified its first project. The German Government had accepted the original Russian project and no other, as the basis of the work of the Conference. He could therefore not to-day accept this experimental establishment of a permanent tribunal, even provisionally: first, because such an establishment had not, according to his view, been foreshadowed in the initial programme of the Russian Government; and secondly, because practically it was very probable that a provisional permanent tribunal would not be long in becoming definitely and actually permanent. Under these circumstances the German Delegate insisted upon his motion. Count Nigra of Italy appealed directly to the spirit Count Nigra. of conciliation which the German Delegate had so clearly shown, and in a brief speech of great force and beauty he called attention to the consequences of a negative decision, upon a question which interested all civilized humanity to so great a degree. The hopes and aspirations with which public opinion. was waiting for the results of our labors had become so great that it would be positively dangerous to disappoint them entirely, by rejecting the idea of a permanent tribunal. If to all these aspirations the Conference returned a curt non possumus, the dissatisfaction and disappointment would be tremendous. In such a case the Conference would incur most grave responsibilities before history, before the peoples represented here, and before the Chapter V Emperor of Russia. In conclusion Count Nigra earnestly requested the German Delegate not to refuse categorically to go on with the discussion, but to refer the question once more to his Government. Professor Zorn responded that he recognized the Provisional force of Count Nigra's remarks to their fullest the German extent, and that he would therefore not abstain from tive. coöperating further with the work of the Committee in the direction of the permanent tribunal, although it must be clearly understood that he could by no means bind his Government. This declaration of Professor Zorn was entered upon the minutes, it being well understood that it reserved his entire liberty of action and ultimate decision. cooperation of representa M. de M. de Martens made the following statement on Statement by behalf of Russia: "When the Russian Government Martens. formulated its first proposals concerning arbitration. it doubtless had in view the general outlines of the project which was distributed, but this project was nothing but an outline, and necessarily required many amendments and additions, and some of these had now been presented on behalf of the Russian Government." He had always thought, without going into the details of the question, that this was the time and place to provide for the procedure and for the establishment of arbitral tribunals, always giving to the Powers in litigation complete liberty in choice of arbitrators. The Russian Government considered that its duty was complete when it suggested to the Chapter V Speech of Powers the result of its reflections without wishing to impose its opinion upon any one. There were provisions in all of the projects under discussion which naturally would give rise to the fears expressed by Professor Zorn, but these were misunderstandings which it ought to be easy to dispose of during the discussion which was sure to arise. Might it not be possible, for example, to adopt at the head of all the provisions about the permanent tribunal an article recognizing the absolute liberty of the parties in litigation to make their own free choice. It might be expressed as follows: "In the case of a conflict between the signatory or adhering Powers they shall decide whether the controversy is of a nature to be brought before a tribunal of arbitration, constituted according to the following Articles, or whether it is to be decided by an arbitrator or a special tribunal of arbitration." The Chairman thought that as the Committee were agreed in declaring that the permanent tribunal of arbitration should not be obligatory upon any one, and as we were all in accord upon this principle, it might be best to reserve the question as to whether it should be expressed in a preliminary article or otherwise. The Committee being of the same opinion as the Chairman upon this point, M. Odier of Switzerland wished to adhere expressly to the declarations previously made by M. Descamps and Count Nigra in favor of the establishment of the permanent tribunal of arbitration. There had arisen in the world more than a hope it was an expecta tion and public opinion was convinced, especially Chapter V on the question of arbitration, that important results would come from this Conference. It was not possible to deny that practically we had it in our power to take at this moment a new and decisive step forward, in the road of general human progress. If we recoil or reduce to insignificant limits the innovations which every one expects from us, we would cause a universal disappointment of which the responsibility would rest forever upon us and upon our Governments. The one important innovation which we can present to humanity at large is the establishment of a permanent institution which will always be in evidence before the eyes of the world, a tangible result, so to speak, of the progress which had been made. While recognizing the force of the objections raised on behalf of Germany, M. Odier, therefore, cordially joined in the wish expressed by Count Nigra that the German Delegate would once more refer the question to his Government. Professor Professor Lammasch of Austria-Hungary also Speech of wished to express his opinion and his reserves. Lammasch. Notwithstanding the fact that the circular of Count Mouravieff had made no mention whatever as to the possibility of the establishment of the permanent tribunal, he had not opposed the acceptance by the Committee of the project of Lord Pauncefote as the basis of the discussion, but he was not empowered to act so far as to declare that Austria-Hungary was ready to indorse the establishment of a permanent tribunal. This institution Chapter V Speech of might, indeed, be established in many ways, some of which might be objectionable, according to the further decisions of the Conference. Professor Lammasch concluded by saying that he accepted the project of Lord Pauncefote as the basis of the discussion, in order not to delay or hinder the very important work of the Committee, and that he was ready to take part in the discussion with all possible good will, but under the express reserve that his participation in the debate could have no other character than that of a preliminary examination of the question, and that it could not for the present in any way commit his Government. This discussion and reserve of Professor Lammasch was duly entered upon the minutes. Mr. Holls, on behalf of the United States of America, made a declaration, of which the following is a summary: "I have listened with the greatest attention to the important exchange of opinion which has just taken place between the representatives of different great European States. It has seemed proper to me, representing, as it were, a new Power, that precedence in the discussion should naturally be given to the delegates of the older countries. This is the first occasion upon which the United States of America takes part under circumstances so momentous in the deliberations of the States of Europe, and having heard, with profound interest, the views of the Great European Powers, I consider it my duty to my Government, as well as to the Committee, to express upon |