"Proceedings for revision can only be instituted by a decision of the Tribunal expressly recording the existence of the new fact, recognizing in it the character described in the foregoing paragraph, and declaring the demand admissible on this ground. "The Compromis' fixes the period within which the demand for revision must be made. "ARTICLE LWI. The award is only binding on the parties who conclude the Compromis.' "When there is a question of interpreting a Convention to which Powers other than those concerned in the dispute are parties, the latter notify to the former the 'Compromis' they have concluded. Each of these Powers has the right to intervene in the case. If one or more of them avail themselves of this right, the interpretation contained in the award is equally binding on them. "ARTICLE LVII. Each party pays its own expenses and an equal share of those of the Tribunal." Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of International Differences, The 66 "It is with satisfaction that I am able to announce the formal notification at The Hague, on September 4, of the deposit of ratifications of the convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes by sixteen powers, namely, the United States, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, England, France, Germany, Italy, Persia, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Siam, Spain, Sweden and Norway, and the Netherlands. Japan also has since ratified the convention. "The administrative council of the permanent court of arbitration has been organized and has adopted rules of order and a constitution for the International Arbitration Bureau." President McKinley, annual message, Dec. 3, 1900, For. Rel. 1900, XXIV. For the list of members of the permanent court, see id. 795-797. "It will be observed that the conditions upon which powers not represented at the conference can adhere to the convention for the peaceful regulation of international conflicts is to form the subject of a later agreement between the contracting powers.' This provision reflects the outcome of a three days' debate in the drafting committee as to whether this convention should be absolutely open or open only with the consent of the contracting powers. England and Italy strenuously supported the latter view. It soon became apparent that under the guise of general propositions the committee. was discussing political questions of great importance at least to certain powers. Under these circumstances the representatives of the United States took no part in the discussion, but supported by their vote the view that the convention, in its nature, involved reciprocal obligations; and also the conclusion that political questions had no place in the conference, and must be left to be decided by the competent authorities of the powers represented there. "It is to be regretted that this action excludes from immediate adherence to this convention our sister republics of Central and South America, with whom the United States is already in similar relations by the Pan-American treaty. It is hoped that an arrangement will soon be made which will enable these states, if they so desire, to enter into the same relations as ourselves with the powers represented at the conference." Report of the American delegates to The Hague Conference, July 31, 1899, For. Rel. 1899, 513, 520. The convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes was signed by sixteen delegations, as follows: Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Greece, Mexico, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Persia, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Siam, Spain, Sweden and Norway, and the United States. Adjoined to the signatures of the United States delegation there was a reference to their declaration made in open conference on July 25th and recorded in the proceedings of that day. (For. Rel 1899, 513, 519.) With reference to article 1 of the programme of The Hague Conference, proposing the limitation of land and sea forces as well as of war budgets, the American delegates were instructed that, in comparison with the effective forces of other nations, those of the United States were so far below the normal that the question of their limitation could not be profitably discussed, and that the initiative on the subject should be left to the powers to which it might properly belong. The committee of the conference to which article 1 was referred, reported that the proposals on the subject presented by the Russian representatives for fixing the amounts of forces and of budgets, military and naval, for periods of five and three years, could not be accepted, and that a more profound study upon the part of each state concerned was to be desired. The American delegates, while coneurring in this conclusion, declared that in so doing they did not express any opinion as to the course to be taken by the States of Europe in relation to a matter which practically concerned them alone. For. Rel. 1899, 511, 512, 513-514. The Hague Conference adopted a resolution expressing the wish that the Governments therein represented, taking into account all the propositions that had been made, should study the possibility of an agreement concerning the limitation of armed forces on land and sea and of war budgets. The American delegates voted for this resolution, but a few powers abstained from voting. For. Rel. 1899, 513, 520. (4) SECOND INTERNATIONAL AMERICAN CONFERENCE, 1902. § 1087. In the Second International Conference of American States, which was held at the City of Mexico from October 22, 1901, to January 31, 1902, the subject of arbitration was much discussed. There appeared to be a unanimous sentiment in favor of " arbitrations as a principle," but a great contrariety of opinion as to the extent to which the principle should be carried. On this question three views were supported in the conference: "1. Óbligatory arbitration, covering all questions pending or future when they did not affect either the independence or the national honor of a country; 2. Obligatory arbitration, covering future questions only and defining what questions shall constitute those to be excepted from arbitration; and "3. Facultative or voluntary arbitration, as best expressed by The Hague convention." The delegation of the United States advocated the signing of a protocol affirming the convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes, signed at The Hague, July 29, 1899, as the best practicable plan for securing unanimity of action and beneficial results. Α A plan was finally adopted in the nature of a compromise. protocol looking to adhesion to The Hague convention was signed by all the delegations except those of Chile and Ecuador, who are said, however, afterwards to have accepted it in open conference. By this protocol authority was conferred on the Governments of the United States and Mexico, the only American signatories of The Hague convention, to negotiate with the other signatory powers for the adherence thereto of other American nations so requesting. Besides, the President of Mexico was requested to ascertain the views of the different governments represented in the conference regarding the most advanced form in which a general arbitration convention could be drawn up that would meet the approval and secure the ratification of all the countries in the conference, and afterwards to prepare a plan for such a general treaty and if possible to arrange for a series of protocols to carry it into effect; or, if this should be found to be impracticable, then to present the correspondence with a report to the next conference. A project of a treaty of compulsory arbitration was signed by the delegations of the Argentine Republic, Bolivia, Santo Domingo, Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Besides the protocol and the project of treaty above mentioned, a project of treaty was adopted covering the arbitration of pecuniary claims. This project was signed by the delegations of all the countries then represented in the conference, viz: Argentine Republic, Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Hayti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Salvador, the United States, and Uruguay. By this project the signatories obligated themselves for a term of five years to submit to arbitration, preferably to the permanent court at The Hague, all claims for pecuniary loss or damage which might be presented by their respective citizens, and which could not be amicably adjusted through diplomatic channels, when such claims were of sufficient importance to warrant the expense of arbitration. It is provided that the treaty shall be binding on the states ratifying it, from the date on which five of the signatory governments shall have ratified it. It was ratified by Guatemala April 25, 1902; by Salvador May 19, 1902; by Peru October 29, 1903; by Honduras July 6, 1904; and by the United States January 28, 1905. It was therefore proclaimed by the President of the United States March 24, 1905, as binding on the five ratifying states above specified. (5) SUBSEQUENT MEASURES. § 1088. "There seems good ground for the belief that there has been a real growth among the civilized nations of a sentiment which will permit a gradual substitution of other methods than the method of war in the settlement of disputes. It is not pretended that as yet we are near a position in which it will be possible wholly to prevent war, or that a just regard for national interest and honor will in all cases permit of the settlement of international disputes by arbitration; but by a mixture of prudence and firmness with wisdom we think it is possible to do away with much of the provocation and excuse for war, and at least in many cases to substitute some other and more rational method for the settlement of disputes. The Hague court offers so good an example of what can be done in the direction of such settlement that it should be encouraged in every way.. Last year the Interparliamentary Union for International Arbitration met at Vienna, six hundred members of the different legislatures of civilized countries attending. It was provided that the next meeting should be in 1904 at St. Louis, subject to our Congress extending an invitation. Like The Hague Tribunal, this Interparliamentary Union is one of the forces tending towards peace among the nations of the earth, and it is entitled to our support. I trust the invitation can be extended," President Roosevelt, annual message, Dec. 7, 1903, For. Rel. 1903, xIx. "The Peace Conference which assembled at The Hague on May 18, 1899, marked an epoch in the history of nations. Called by His Majesty the Emperor of Russia to discuss the problems of the maintenance of general peace, the regulation of the operations of war, and the lessening of the burdens which preparedness for eventual war entails upon modern peoples, its labors resulted in the acceptance by the signatory powers of conventions for the peaceful adjustment of international difficulties by arbitration, and for certain humane. amendments to the laws and customs of war by land and sea. A great work was thus accomplished by the conference, while other phases of the general subject were left to discussion by another conference in the near future, such as questions affecting the rights and duties of neutrals, the inviolability of private property in naval warfare, and the bombardment of ports. towns, and villages by a naval force. "Among the movements which prepared the minds of governments for an accord in the direction of assured peace among men, a high place may fittingly be given to that set on foot by the Interparliamentary Union. From its origin in the suggestions of a member of the British House of Commons, in 1888, it developed until its membership included large numbers of delegates from the parliaments of the principal nations, pledged to exert their influence toward the conclusion of treaties of arbitration between nations and toward the accomplishment of peace. Its annual conferences have notably advanced the high purposes it sought to realize. Not only have many international treaties of arbitration been concluded, but, in the conference held in Holland in 1894, the memorable declaration in favor of a permanent court of arbitration was a forerunner of the most important achievement of the Peace Conference of The Hague in 1899. "The annual conference of the Interparliamentary Union was held this year at St. Louis, in appropriate connection with the World's Fair. Its deliberations were marked by the same noble devotion to the cause of peace and to the welfare of humanity which had inspired its former meetings. By unanimous vote of delegates, active or retired members of the American Congress, and of every parliament in Europe with two exceptions, the following resolution was adopted: |