Page images
PDF
EPUB

"But," he declared, "I know a country which quite recently took the hand of an assassin in the Near East."

The passage was immediately translated for M. Briand, who first smiled at the reference to the Angora treaty between France and the Turkish Nationalists, and then retorted: "Yes, but we made his acquaintance in London.”

This reference to the fact that the Kemailists were invited to London to confer with the Allies last spring provoked laughter. The French Premier refrained from other comment.

Lloyd-George declared the Allies had reached a point where they must act decisively and broadly if the economic structure of Europe was to be saved. He again said the present meeting of the Supreme Council was the most important that had been held since the armistice, and that the public opinion of the world demanded that the Allies take wider responsibilities to revive Europe.

It has been suggested, he continued, that Great Britain was suggesting this course in order to escape her obligations; but he declared this was untrue, and that England was prepared to carry out all her obligations. Asking permission to speak frankly on the subject of German reparations, Mr. LloydGeorge said:

"This is impossible unless it can be by general agreement of the Allies. Failing this, the fruits of peace will rot ungathered."

"The Allies," he continued, "must make allowances for each other's opinions. Too much has been heard of individual claims and interests. All the Allies have just claims. It is recognized, then, that all have suffered and sacrificed-some, it is true, more than others. All the sacrifices are not recorded in evidences of devastation. Although formidable, this is the least part of the havoc and devastation wrought by the war."

For two or three days the world rang with reports and speculations as to the outcome of the Genoa dealings, one account stating that it was generally expected that BritishGerman working agreements would be developed. This thought was predicated upon the proposition that the British hold German rehabilitation to be essential to recovery of the nations to the east of Germany. It was even said that Great Britain and Germany would dominate the Conference-and it is possible that theory had much to do with subsequent events in France.

On January 10 dispatches came from Cannes that the Anglo-French treaty was formulated in a rough draft, the purpose being to give France protection against Germany, in order to procure her assent to the broad rehabilitation plans that were in mind, and incidentally to pave the way for adjustment of the difficulties between her and Great Britain over submarines, which had arisen in the Washington Conference, when France insisted upon having the right to at least 90,000 submarine tonnage. There was talk that Italy wanted to be made a party to the treaty, and it was suggested in many quarters that the treaty might ultimately be enlarged to include Germany and, indeed, all the nations of Europe, thus to establish the status quo securely.

M. Briand was quoted in an Associated Press dispatch of January 10 as having said:

The only question discussed was whether, in order to preserve the peace of Europe, it would not be useful for France and Great Britain to associate themselves and guarantee in the general interests the Franco-German frontier, and whether, in the event of Germany trying to avenge herself, it would not be well if she knew she would be faced by the combined forces of France and Great Britain.

Mr. Lloyd-George and I thought it possible and desirable. Those were the sole bases of our discussion; there were no others.

Personally, I have broader views, but Great Britain is only willing to bind herself to guarantee the Franco-German

frontier. I then thought of a system of political ententes applicable to the whole of Europe, in virtue of which all the powers would bind themselves to recognize the respective frontiers and not attack each other. Added to the fundamental Franco-British accord, this vast system would constitute an obstacle to further conflagrations for the whole of Europe.

Within 24 hours, however, there were signs of storm. Information reached M. Briand at Cannes that serious opposition had appeared in Paris, where his opponents had been pressing him hard for weeks, on the ground that his policy was not sufficiently vigorous in defense of French interests, in procuring the maximum payments that could be got from Germany, and in withstanding what many of the French believed to be a tendency on the part of the British to overshadow and thrust them aside. On the morning of January 11 M. Briand left Cannes for Paris, but before taking his departure he obtained from Mr. Lloyd-George modifications in their agreements, designed to increase the benefits to France. What they were was not revealed, though there was evident hope that they would suffice to stem the adverse tide in Paris.

But on the afternoon of the next day, January 12, the world was thrilled with a sense of crisis when the wires carried word from Paris that M. Briand had resigned as Premier of France under exciting circumstances. Arriving in Paris after a night on the train, he had gone into session with his Cabinet, some of the members of which had indicated opposition to his arrangements with Mr. Lloyd-George. Tired though he was, he had succeeded in bringing the Cabinet critics around to his point of view. Then, showing even more signs of weariness, he had faced the Chamber of Deputies. Dispatches from Paris, following his appearance in the Chamber, sta that M. Briand again had overcome opposition with wh was described as a blunt review of his work, and an invitation to the Deputies to "take it or leave it." But, ar.ntly, the signs of deep-seated antagonism were so strong that M. Briand feared that he would be under constant fire and that fact, coupled with his weariness, caused him to bring the scene to an abrupt conclusion, with a statement that he was through.

His resignation was given President Millerand that afternoon, and M. Poincare was called upon to organize a Cabinet. He accepted, but had more difficulty than he anticipated in gathering the material for the Ministries that he wanted. About the time that he had completed his Cabinet he saw Mr. Lloyd-George in Paris, and, following that interview, the whole future movement in Europe was left in doubt. While the meeting was amicable, it appeared that M. Poincare gave Mr. Lloyd-George to understand that he believed negotiations in the future should be carried on through the Ambassadors, as before the war, instead of in the Supreme Council, and intimations were received that while France would go through with the understandings arrived at with M. Brind for the Genoa Conference, it was doubtful whether show. ould take an active part. Very significant was the stat ment that M. Poincare had told Mr. Lloyd-George, as he frequently has stated in the past, that Germany must pay to the full extent of her ability before there is any letting up, and that she has not done that as yet. Some weeks must lapse, it is probable, before the real steps in Europe's moves respecting the economic situation are plain to the eyes of the world.

[blocks in formation]
[graphic]

.. PRICE TWENTY CENTS

(Adopted by the American Peace Society May 27, 1921)

The American Peace Society, mindful of the precepts of its founders-precepts which have been confirmed by the experience of the past hundred years-recurs, in these days of storm and stress at home and of confusion and discord abroad, to these precepts and its own traditions, and, confessing anew its faith in their feasibility and necessity, restates and resubmits to a hesitant, à suffering, and a war-torn world:

That the voluntary Union of States and their helpful co-operation for the attainment of their common ideals can only be effective if, and only so far as, "The rules of conduct governing individual relations between citizens or subjects of a civilized State are equally applicable as between enlightened nations";

That the rules of conduct governing individual relations, and which must needs be expressed in terms of international law, relate to "the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety"; and

That these concepts, which are the very life and breath of reason and justice, upon which the Law of Nations is founded, must be a chief concern of nations, inasmuch as "justice," and its administration, "is the great interest of man on earth."

Therefore, realizing the conditions which confront the world at the termination of its greatest of wars; conscious that permanent relief can only come through standards of morality and principles of justice expressed in rules of law, to the end that the conduct of nations shall be a regulated conduct, and that the government of the Union of States, as well as the government of each member thereof, shall be a government of laws and not of men; and desiring to contribute to the extent of its capacity, the American Peace Society ventures, at its ninety-third annual meeting, held in the city of Washington, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and twenty-one, to suggest, as calculated to incorporate these principles in the practice of nations, an international agreement:

I. To institute Conferences of Nations, to meet at stated intervals, in continuation of the first two conferences of The Hague; and

To facilitate the labors of such conferences; to invite accredited institutions devoted to the study of international law, to prepare projects for the consideration of governments, in advance of submission to the conferences; in order

To restate and amend, reconcile and clarify, extend and advance, the rules of international law, which are indispensable to the permanent establishment and the successful administration of justice between and among nations.

II. To convoke, as soon as practicable, a conference for the advancement of international law; to provide for its organization outside of the domination of any one nation or any limited group of nations; to which conference every nation recognizing, accepting, and applying international law in its relations with other nations shall be invited and in which all shall participate upon a footing of equality.

III. To establish an Administrative Council, to be composed of the diplomatic representatives accredited to the government of the State in which the conference for the advancement of international law convenes; which representatives shall, in addition to their ordinary functions as diplomatic agents, represent the common interests of the nations during the interval between successive conferences; and to provide that

The president of the Administrative Council shall, according to diplomatic usage, be the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the country in which the conference convenes ; An advisory committee shall be appointed by the Administrative Council from among its members, which shall meet at short, regular, and stated periods;

The chairman of the advisory committee shall be elected by its members:

The advisory committee shall report the result of its labors to the Administrative Council;

The members of the Administrative Council, having considered the report of the advisory committee, shall transmit their findings or recommendations to their respective governments, together with their collective or individual opinions, and that they shall act thereafter upon such findings and recommendations only in accordance with instructions from the governments which they represent.

IV. To authorize the Administrative Council to appoint, outside its own members, an executive committee or secretary's office to perform such duties as the conference for the advancement of international law, or the nations shall from time to time prescribe; and to provide that

The executive committee or secretary's office shall be under the supervision of the Administrative Council;

The executive committee or secretary's office shall report to the Administrative Council at stated periods.

V. To empower the Administrative Council to appoint other committees for the performance of such duties as the nations in their wisdom or discretion shall find it desirable to impose.

VI. To furnish technical advisers to assist the Administrative Council, the advisory committee, or other committees appointed by the council, in the performance of their respective duties, whenever the appointment of such technical advisers may be necessary or desirable, with the understanding that the request for the appointment of such experts may be made by the conference for the advancement of international law or by the Administrative Council.

VII. To employ good offices, mediation, and friendly composition wherever feasible and practicable, in their own disputes, and to urge their employment wherever feasible and practicable, in disputes between other nations.

VIII. To organize a Commission of Inquiry of limited membership, which may be enlarged by the nations in dispute, to which commission they may refer, for investigation and report, their differences of an international character, unless they are otherwise bound to submit them to arbitration or to other form of peaceful settlement; and To pledge their good faith to abstain from any act of force against one another pending the investigation of the commission and the receipt of its report; and

To reserve the right to act on the report as their respective interests may seem to them to demand; and

To provide that the Commission of Inquiry shall submit its report to the nations in controversy for their action, and to the Administrative Council for its information.

IX. To create a Council of Conciliation of limited membership, with power on behalf of the nations in dispute to add to its members, to consider and to report upon such questions of a non-justiciable character, the settlement whereof is not otherwise prescribed, which shall from time to time be submitted to the Council of Conciliation, either by the powers in dispute or by the Administrative Council; and to provide that

The Council of Conciliation shall transmit its proposals to the nations in dispute, for such action as they may deem advisable, and to the Council of Administration for its information.

X. To arbitrate differences of an international character not otherwise provided for, and in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, to submit them to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, in order that they may be adjusted upon a basis of respect for law, with the understanding that disputes of a justiciable nature may likewise be referred to the Permanent Court of Arbitration when the parties in controversy prefer to have their differences settled by judges of their own choice, appointed for the occasion.

XI. To set up an international court of justice with obligatory jurisdiction, to which, upon the failure of diplomacy to adjust their disputes of a justiciable nature, all States shall have direct access-a court whose decisions shall bind the litigating States, and, eventually, all parties to its creation, and to which the States in controversy may submit, by special agreement, disputes beyond the scope of obligatory jurisdiction.

XII. To enlarge from time to time the obligatory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of International Justice by framing rules of law in the conferences for the advancement of international law, to be applied by the court for the decision of questions which fall either beyond its present obligatory jurisdiction or which nations have not hitherto submitted to judicial decision.

XIII. To apply inwardly international law as a rule of law for the decision of all questions involving its principles, and outwardly to apply international law to all questions arising between and among all nations, so far as they involve the Law of Nations.

XIV. To furnish their citizens or subjects adequate instruction in their international obligations and duties, as well as in their rights and prerogatives;

To take all necessary steps to render such instruction effective; and thus

To create that "international mind" and enlightened public opinion which shall persuade in the future, where force has failed to compel in the past, the observance of those standards of honor, morality, and justice which obtain between and among individuals, bringing in their train law and order, through which, and through which alone, peace between nations may become practicable, attainable, and desirable.

PA 1

VOL. 84

Advocate of Peace

ADVOCATE OF PEACE

Edited by ARTHUR DEERIN CALL

Published since 1834 by

FEBRUARY, 1922

THE AMERICAN PEACE SOCIETY

(1815-1828)

Suite 612-614 Colorado Building, Washington, D. C. (Cable address, "Ampax, Washington") PUBLISHED MONTHLY, EXCEPT SEPTEMBER

Sent free to all members of the American Peace Society. Separate Subscription Price, $2.00 a year. Single copies, twenty cents each.

Entered as Second-Class Matter, June 1, 1911, at the Post-Office at Washington, D. C., under the act of July 16, 1894. Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3. 1917, authorized August 10, 1918.

It being impracticable to express in these columns the divergent views of the thousands of members of the American Peace Society, full responsibility for the utterances of this magazine is assumed by the Editor.

WHAT IS THIS "NEW STATE OF MIND"?

[ocr errors]

RESIDENT HARDING presented the six treaties, together with a declaration, and the twelve resolutions negotiated by the Conference on the Limitation of Armament to the Senate, Friday, February 10. He also handed to the Senate the official report of the American delegation. In the official report it is pointed out that competitive armament is the result of a state of mind in which a national expectation of attack by some other country causes preparation to meet the attack. To stop competition it is necessary to deal with the state of mind from which it results. A belief in the pacific intentions of other powers must be substituted for suspicion and apprehension. The report goes on to say that the FourPower Treaty itself is an expression of that "new state of mind."

This phrase, "new state of mind," will bear further examination. There is a variety of reasons for feeling that it exists. It is a new state of mind that has provided for a commission of jurists to consider amendment of the laws of war. Not that such states of mind have not existed before; many an international conference has tackled this problem. But amid the shambles of war those old states of mind had passed away. The lugubrious task of polishing up laws of war requires a new state of mind. This new state of mind is at hand. The commission of jurists will make use of it. To be sure, the jurisdiction of this commission of jurists is to be limited; but the new state of mind has arrived.

No. 2

Then, a number of Far Eastern questions proved insoluble. The original plans for these questions went awry. A new state of mind was found necessary. This new state of mind was invoked, with the result that there is to be set up a board of reference for certain Far Eastern questions.

Again, nations outside China have been making, interpreting, and executing their own laws within certain sections of that land. These extraterritorial joy-rides became so numerous and embarrassing that a new state of mind was found necessary. The result is that a commission has been provided to investigate and make recommendations looking toward modifications of these extraterritorial activities in China.

Furthermore, a new state of mind has decided that foreign post-offices in China shall be withdrawn not later than January 1, 1923. A new state of mind proposes to set up a commission to study and recommend respecting the withdrawal of foreign troops from China. A new state of mind purposes to restore China's rights in wireless stations. A new state of mind has dealt with the unification of railroads in China, the reduction of China's military forces, with existing commitments. of China or with respect to China, with the Chinese Eastern Railway.

But still more important, a new state of mind has given to us the six treaties: a treaty between the United States, the British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan, limiting naval armament; a treaty between the same five powers relating to the use of submarines and noxious gases in warfare; the Four-Power Treaty between the United States, the British Empire, France, and Japan, relating to insular possessions and insular dominions in the Pacific Ocean, accompanied by a declaration relating to mandated islands and the domestic jurisdiction. of respective powers; the treaty between the same four powers supplementing the Four-Power Treaty, signed February 6, 1922, setting forth that the treaty does not apply to the mainland islands of Japan; the treaty between all nine powers represented in the Conference relating to principles and policies to be followed in matters concerning China; and the treaty between the same nine powers relating to the Chinese customs tariff. These are all accomplishments due to the new state of mind.

It would be difficult to over-emphasize the importance or the inevitable results of this new state of mind. Competitive preparation for war has been greatly reduced.

A new feeling of peaceful security has begun to take its place. A belief in the pacific intentions of other powers

THE TRIBUNAL OF THE WORLD

Permanent Court of International Justice was

is much more apparent than heretofore. The aggravat-Tinaugurated in the Palace of Peace amid many

flags, the pealing of bells, and accompanied by services in all the churches at The Hague, February 15. No little space was given to this event in the columns of the American press. Holland, the home of Hugo Grotius,

ing Anglo-Japanese Alliance is no more. The possibilities in a friendly conference have been brought home to the consciousness of us all. Shantung is to be returned to China as a result of direct agreement between the two powers. The most unsatisfactory of the so-called twenty-founder of the science of international law, is one nation one demands made by Japan upon China have been withdrawn. Japan has made hopeful and explicit declarations regarding the territory of eastern Siberia. The dispute between us and Japan over the island of Yap has been composed in a treaty now before the Senate. The world's burden of armaments is to be appreciably diminished. The madness in the competitive race is over. The bankrupt nations may now go about the business of recouping their losses, of paying their debts,

and of doing something worth while toward the upbuilding of civilization.

But, in our judgment, no one of these things, indeed, not all of them together constitute the most hopeful thing in the new state of mind. The most constructive and encouraging fact brought home to us by the Conference is the return with unanimity to constitutional methods. To have met as a conference of delegates in a quasi-legislative capacity without entering into any entangling alliance in the sense used by Thomas Jefferson; to have adopted rules, regulations, laws with no threat of armed force; to have sent these rules, regulations, laws to the accredited representatives of the people of the various powers for ratification with no hint of bayonets; to have agreed in terms of solemn friendship to abide by these rules, regulations, laws, when finally adopted by the representatives of the people, with no sovereignty endangered; to have accomplished all these in a time of peace for the promotion of the common good, with no violence to the American Constitution and no lessening of personal liberty or national independence anywhere, is to have brought the world back again to the methods of law and order and a desirable peace. This, we fondly believe, is the new state. of mind par excellence. A physical and a moral disarmament? Yes, in a measure. But, of far greater importance, the world has been headed again toward those constructive achievements-health, happiness, will to create upon which must rest any warless world that is to be. It is not a negative thing that bids us hope. It is a process of fulfillment in a world of law and justice, an old state of mind come to life again, a sense of the importance of legal processes that stamps the "new state of mind" with a new interest and lends to it a new sheen.

capable of appreciating the importance of the event. Queen Wilhelmina, who had given a reception at the royal palace in honor of the judges, the Queen Mother, the Prince Consort, the whole diplomatic corps; Jonkheer van Karnebeek, Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs, who had also given a reception in honor of the judges, and other distinguished persons were present. Many cablegrams from around the world were received. Count Uchida, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan, cabled the judges as follows:

"This surely is a great step towards the realization of the ideal of universal peace, and Japan, which yields to none in its love of peace and justice, rejoices profoundly. Therefore I have the honor to express, in the name of the imperial government, my sincere wishes for the development of the new institution."

Readers of the ADVOCATE OF PEACE do not need to be reminded of the attitude of the American Peace Society toward this most significant accomplishment. It is well that the court has been established with appropriate ceresilk and velvet gown, specially designed for the court, mony and solemnity. Each judge, clothed in his black

took his oath, in the order of rank, as follows:

"I hereby solemnly declare that I will always exercise impartially and conscientiously the duties conferred upon me as judge of the Permanent Court of International Justice."

This first meeting was held in the great Hall of Justice, with its walls of carved oak and its appropriate setting and atmosphere.

The eastern and western worlds are represented upon the bench. The personnel consists of men qualified for the highest judicial offices in their respective lands, "jurisconsults of recognized competence in international law."

The representative of the United States is John Bassett Moore, and the others present in The Hague for the meeting are: The President, or Chief Justice, Bernard Cornelius Johannes Loder, Holland; Dr. Rafael Altamira Y. Crevea, Spain; Commendatore Dionisic Anzilotti, Italy; Viscount Robert Finlay, Great Britain; Dr. Max Huber, Switzerland; Didrik Nyholm, Denmark: Dr. Yorozu Oda, Japan, and Dr. Andre Weiss, France. The other two judges, Dr. Ruy Barbosa, of Brazil, and

« PreviousContinue »