tively by the nations present at the Hague Conference, from among whom tribunals might be formed for the determination of such controversies as parties concerned might agree to submit to them. No nation was required to submit its dispute to the court; and the court was not in permanent session, its proponents apparently fearing the possibility of a court in session with no cases referred to it. This first court was but an experiment, and its future depended wholly upon the willingness of the contracting nations to make use of the machinery thereby provided.

To the credit of the nations, it may be stated that from the very beginning they adopted a favorable attitude toward the court. Not only were cases soon presented to it, but within five years thirty-three treaties on the principles adopted at The Hague were made among European states, by the terms of which these states bound themselves to submit to the Hague court all disputes over questions of law or over the interpretation of treaties, providing such questions did not involve the vital interests, independence, or honor of these states.

The continued desire of statesmen in advanced countries to forward the cause of international peace led President Roosevelt as early as the autumn of 1904 to sound the nations with respect to the practicability of holding another international conference at The Hague. It was not until after the close of the Russo-Japanese war, however, that the time seemed opportune. The conference finally assembled June 15, 1907, and remained in session until October 18 of the same year.

This Second Hague Conference was scarcely more fruitful than the First Conference. The European nations were frankly sceptical of any results, and certain of them again were jealous and suspicious. Nothing was accomplished toward disarmament, or toward limitation of armaments, Germany again. being the most prominent objector. And the deliberations over the extension of arbitration yielded no practical results. The Conference's most important work lay in the adoption of conventions to regulate methods of warfare, as one respecting the

opening of hostilities, one affecting the laying of automatic submarine contact mines, one defining the rights and duties of neutrals in land warfare as well as in naval warfare, and one creating an International Prize Court. These results were far below the hopes of the leaders of the movement.

Unsatisfactory as the results seemed, the Conference gave added impetus to the conclusion of arbitration treaties between nations. The United States took the lead in these treaties, negotiating twenty-five in the years between 1908 and 1910.

The next great step forward was taken by President Wilson. He recommended to the nations of the world provisions that all questions whatsoever which failed to be settled by diplomacy should be submitted to an international commission for investigation and report. This commission was to be chosen as follows: each of the parties to the dispute was to select one of its own nationals and one member from another country, and the two parties were to agree jointly upon a fifth member. It was further provided that the parties to the dispute should refrain from a declaration of war or from any act of hostility during the progress of investigation, and from any increase of armament or military preparation. This plan was presented to thirty-nine nations, and quickly accepted in principle by thirty-five of them. By the end of 1914, treaties embodying these principles had been signed with these thirtyfive states, including such powers as Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and Japan.

The World War, of course, sharply interrupted this development of an international peace movement and judicial settlement of disputes between nations. Throughout the war, however, the minds of thinking men were bent upon projects for making such a world catastrophe impossible in the future, and their plans were commonly directed toward a fuller and more perfect development of the international court idea. It is not remarkable, therefore, that in the covenant of the League of Nations, included in the final treaty of peace, is to be found,

among articles bearing upon international arbitration, the following:

COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE

ARTICLE 14. The Council shall formulate and submit to the Members of the League for adoption plans for the establishment of a Permanent Court of International Justice. The Court shall be competent to hear and determine any dispute of an international character which the parties thereto submit to it. The Court may also give an advisory opinion upon any dispute or question referred to it by the Council or by the Assembly.

In accordance with this article, the council of the League of Nations appointed an advisory committee of jurists which sat at The Hague in 1920 and formulated a plan for the establishment of such a court. This plan with a few modifications was adopted by the assembly of the League on December 13, 1920.

The court thus established holds annual sessions at The Hague and is "composed of a body of independent judges, elected regardless of their nationality from amongst persons of high moral character, who possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial offices, or are juris-consults of recognized competence in international Law." The court consists of fifteen members, eleven judges and four deputy judges, elected for nine years by the assembly and by the council of the League of Nations. Its jurisdiction comprises "all cases which the parties refer to it and all matters specially provided for in treaties and conventions in force." 2 Cases are brought before the court ordinarily by a written application addressed to the registrar; hearings are public unless specially ordered secret; and careful minutes are kept of the proceedings. Questions are decided by a majority of the judges, and the judgment is final and without appeal. "An application for revision of a judg

'Art. 2 of Statute for the Permanent Court of International Justice. 'Ibid., Art. 36.

ment can be made only when it is based upon the discovery of some fact of such a nature as to be a decisive factor, which fact was, when the judgment was given, unknown to the court and also to the party claiming revision, always provided that such ignorance was not due to negligence. The application for revision must be made at latest within six months of the discovery of the new fact. No application for revision may be made after the lapse of ten years from the date of the sentence." 1

The judges of this court were elected September 14 and 15, 1921. Included among the number was John Bassett Moore, a distinguished jurist of the United States. The court met June 15, 1922, for its first annual session. Three cases were at once presented to it, all having to do with labor problems and all calling for interpretations of the Treaty of Versailles. Opinions were duly handed down on these cases, and the court adjourned. In November, the President of the Court summoned an extraordinary session of the court for January 8, 1923, to consider a matter referred to it by the Council of the League of Nations concerning a difference between the British and French governments regarding French nationality decrees in Tunis and Morocco (French zone).

On February 24, 1923, interest of the people of the United States was directed toward the nature and functions of this court by a message from President Harding recommending the adhesion of the United States to the special "Protocol of Signature." This protocol reads as follows:

PROTOCOL OF SIGNATURE

The Members of the League of Nations, through the undersigned, duly authorized, declare their acceptance of the adjoined Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, which was approved by a unanimous vote of the Assembly of the League on the 13th of December, 1920, at Geneva.

1

Consequently, they hereby declare that they accept the jurisIbid., Art. 61.

diction of the Court in accordance with the terms and subject to the conditions of the above-mentioned Statute.

The present Protocol, which has been drawn up in accordance with the decision taken by the Assembly of the League of Nations on the 13th of December, 1920, is subject to ratification. Each Power shall send its ratification to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations; the latter shall take the necessary steps to notify such ratification to the other signatory Powers. The ratification shall be deposited in the archives of the Secretariat of the League of Nations.

The said Protocol shall remain open for signature by the Members of the League of Nations and by the States mentioned in the Annex to the Covenant of the League.

The Statute of the Court shall come into force as provided in the above-mentioned decision.

Executed at Geneva, in a single copy, the French and English texts of which shall both be authentic.

December 16, 1920.

The President recommended that reservations be attached to the acceptance of the court by the government of the United States, as follows:

1. That such adhesion shall not be taken to involve any legal relation on the part of the United States to the League of Nations or the assumption of any obligations by the United States under the covenant of the League of Nations constituting Part I of the treaty of Versailles.

2. That the United States shall be permitted to participate through representatives designated for the purpose and upon an equality with the other states members respectively of the council and assembly of the League of Nations in any and all proceedings of either the council or the assembly for the election of judges of the Permanent Court of International Justice or for the filling of vacancies.

3. That the United States will pay a fair share of the expenses of the court as determined and appropriated from time to time by the Congress of the United States.

4. That the Statute for the Permanent Court of International Justice adjoined to the Protocol shall not be amended without the consent of the United States.