contracting parties. The plaintiff State could set the court in motion upon its own initiative, without calling to its aid the members of the Union, just as each member of the American Union can file its bill in the Supreme Court without the aid, and indeed without the knowledge, of the other States of the American judicial union. The employment of physical force either to hale a nation into court or to execute against it the judgment of the international tribunal has not been mentioned. The sheriff did not antedate the judge, nor did he come into being at the same time. He is a later creation, if not an afterthought. He is necessary in disputes between individuals; he is not necessary—at least, he is not a part of the machinery of the Supreme Court in the trial of disputes between States of the American judicial union and in the execution of its judgments against States. It may be that an international sheriff may prove to be necessary, but nations shy at physical force, especially if they understand that it is to be used against them. The presence of the sheriff armed with force, that is to say, of an international police, would make an agreement upon an international court more difficult, and if an international sheriff should prove to be unnecessary his requirement as a prerequisite to the court would delay the constitution of this much-needed institution. If the sheriff is needed, or if some form of compulsion is found advisable in order to procure the presence of the defendant State before the international tribunal, and to execute the judgment thereof when rendered, it is the part of wisdom to allow the experience of nations to determine when and how the force shall be created and under what circumstances and conditions it is to be applied. We should not unduly complicate a problem already sufficiently complex by insisting that the international court shall be, in its beginning, more perfect than is the Supreme Court of the United States after a century and more of successful operation. X. The creation of an enlightened public opinion in behalf of peaceable settlement in general, and in particular in behalf of the foregoing nine propositions, in order that, if agreed to, they may be put into practice and become effective, in response to the appeal to that greatest of sanctions, "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind." If for physical force we would substitute justice, we must create a public opinion in favor of justice, as we must create a public opinion in behalf of any and every reform which we hope to see triumph. The more difficult the problem, the greater the need that we set about it, and the sooner we begin the better it will be for the cause which we champion. There are many who advocate short-cuts to international justice, and therefore to international peace, just as there are many who advocate short-cuts to knowledge; but the pithy reply of Euclid to his royal but backward pupil is as true today as it was when uttered centuries ago, that there is no royal road to learning. To change the standard of conduct, and as a preliminary to this to change the standard of thought, is indeed a difficult task; but if mankind is to prefer the test of justice to the test of force, we must educate mankind to a belief in justice. If we succeed, justice will prevail between nations as between men; if we fail, justice may partially prevail between men, as it largely does today, but not between and among the nations. The problem before us is therefore one of education from a false to a true and an ennobling standard. If public opinion can be educated in one country, it can be educated in other countries, and we can confidently look forward to a public opinion in all countries-universal, international, and as insistent as it is universal and international. A mere statute, we know by a sad experience, will not make men virtuous, and a mere treaty-for a treaty is an international statute— will not make the nations virtuous. We have failed in the one, and we are doomed to failure in the other attempt, for nations, composed of these very men and women, are not to be reformed by statute any more than the men and women composing them. Without public opinion the statute-national or international— is a dead letter; with public opinion the statute-national or international-is a living force. With public opinion all things are possible; without public opinion we may hope to do nothing. Were Archimedes living today, and if he were speaking of things international, he would declare public opinion the lever that moves the world. In speaking of public opinion, Mr. Root has recently and impressively said: There is but one power on earth that can preserve the law for the pro- · tection of the poor, the weak, and the humble; there is but one power on earth that can preserve the law for the maintenance of civilization and humanity, and that is the power, the mighty power, of the public opinion of mankind. Without it your leagues to enforce peace, your societies for a world's court, your peace conventions, your peace endowments are all powerless, because no force moves in this world until it ultimately has a public opinion behind it. The thing that men fear more than they do the sheriff or the policeman or the State's prison is the condemnation of the community in which they live. The thing that among nations is the most potent force is the universal condemnation of mankind. And even during this terrible struggle we have seen the nations appealing from day to day, appealing by speech and by pen and by press, for the favorable judgment of mankind, the public opinion of the world. That establishes standards of conduct. May we not, on the eve of an International Conference, say with Washington on the eve of the International Conference of 1787: "Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. The event is in the hands of God." XIX Provision of Law Declaring the International Policy of the United States. Enacted by the Sixty-fourth Congress1 AUGUST 29, 1916 It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States to adjust and settle its international disputes through mediation or arbitration, to the end that war may be honorably avoided. It looks with apprehension and disfavor upon a general increase of armament throughout the world, but it realizes that no single nation can disarm, and that without a common agreement upon the subject every considerable power must maintain a relative standing in military strength. - In view of the premises, the President is authorized and requested to invite, at an appropriate time, not later than the close of the war in Europe, all the great Governments of the world to send representatives to a conference which shall be charged with the duty of formulating a plan for a court of arbitration or other tribunal, to which disputed questions between nations shall be referred for adjudication and peaceful settlement, and to consider the question of disarmament and submit their recommendation to their respective Governments for approval. The President is hereby authorized to appoint nine citizens of the United States, who, in his judgment, shall be qualified for the mission by eminence in the law and by devotion to the cause of peace, to be representatives of the United States in such a conference. The President shall fix the compensation of said representatives, and such secretaries and other employees as may be needed. Two hundred thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated and set aside and placed at the disposal of the President to carry into effect the provisions of this paragraph. 1 Provision of the Act making appropriations for the naval service for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and seventeen, and for other purposes. Statutes at Large of the United States, vol. 39 (64th Congress), p. 618. INDEX ADAMS, JOHN QUINCY. On the independence of South American Nations.. ALLIANCES, AMERICAN ATTITUDE TOWARD Washington's Farewell Address PAGE 35 Jefferson's Inaugural Address, 1801 Message of President Polk, 1845... Address of Secretary Blaine before First Pan American Conference, 1889.. 14787 Instructions of Secretary Root to American delegates to Second Hague Conference. 67 AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW Declaration of Rights and Duties of Nations, 1916...... -Commentary 115 106 108 ARBITRATION OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES Invitation of Secretary Blaine to First Pan American Conference, 1881.. Historical résumé of American proposals and attitude. Proceedings at First Hague Conference. Report of American delegates... .14 19 47 56 70 Report of American delegates to Second Hague Conference on Permanent Court.. 86 98 Report of American delegates on Court of Arbitral Justice. -Commentary Declaration in naval appropriation bill, August 29, 1916.. 100 107 117 123 ARMAMENTS Not needed in America. Address of Secretary Blaine before First Pan American Russian circular calling Hague Conference to consider. August 12, 1898. Resolution of First Hague Conference. 1899..... .61,68 Instructions of Secretary Root to American Delegates to Second Hague Conference. 67 Declaration in naval appropriation bill, August 29, 1916.. 123 BALANCE OF POWER, PRINCIPLE EXCLUDED FROM AMERICA Message of President Polk, 1845 Address of Secretary Blaine before First Pan American Conference, 1889. BOURGEOIS, LÉON. Address on retention of Hague Court of Arbitration.. 118 BUCHANAN, JAMES. Presidential message applying Monroe Doctrine to Mexico, 1858.. 12 BUTLER, CHARLES HENRY. American delegate to Second Hague Conference. 78 |