Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-11-18
THE. P|OUS FUND CASE
Counsel Ralston Explains the
Recent Hague Arbitration.
INTERESTING PROCESS
THE PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED
BY THE COURTS RULINGS.
American Stenographers Won Praise
by Their Excellent Work Be-
fore the Tribunal

ing recently returned from The Hague,
where he represented the United States as
agent and also one Of the counsel in the
case of the Pious fund of the CALIFORNIA;
against Mexico. submitted by this country
and Mexico to arbitration was interviewed
today by Star reporter with relation to
the work of the court and it's final judg-
ment. In the course of his remarks Mr..
Ralston said:
The distinguishing feature of this ar
bitration. as contrasted with perhaps all
prior international arbitrations consisting
of number Of judges. lay in the fact that
by the protocol between the two countries
their respective citizens were ineligible to
Sit as members Of the court This placed
the five arbitrator in the position of
judges, owing no political allegiance to the
country naming them, and recognizing no
personal relation to either Of the litgants
which would be in any degree incompa tible
with the strict performance of judicial du-
ties. AS a consequence. no appeal to pas
sion or prejudice was INDUCED in by the
representatives. of either party. and the
whole proceedings were marked by a quite
unusual degree of decorum and courtesy.
Members of the Permanent Court.
"Our Judges were drawn from what Is
known as the permanent court of arbitra-
ton. BY the provisions of The Hague
peace convention of 1899. each signatory
power was authorized to name upon the
permanent court not to exceed four per-
sons: Several countries have named less
number. and one country. Siam, has even
named non-citizen. Mr.. Hollis of New
York. as Its representative. There are
about eighty members of the permanent
court. constituted as l have Indicated and
every one OF these gentlemen Is supposed
to be at the service of any nations involv-
ed In dispute. 1t was from this select
body. composed Of the most prominent jur-
lists. that the United States and Mexico
each chose two judges and these together
selected fifth. Their personalities are
somewhat interesting. Speaking first of
the two named by Mexico. Messrs. Asser
and Lehman. 1t is to be said Of Mr.. Asser
that he is a man sixty-four years of age
and graduate of the University at Leiden.
He has written a number of works OF i'm
portance. both locally to Holland and
internationally. He is now a member of
the council of state Of the Netherlands.
He Is Of Jewish extraction and universally
respected for his great ability. Mr.. Lob
man has served in judicial capacities. as
Wei as in the cabinet of the Netherlands,
and is now member of the lower house of
the states general. He also Is a writer of
distinction in the Netherlands.
The American Selections.
The United States named Sir Edward
Fry Of England and Prof de Martens of
Russia. Sir Edward Fry is well known by
name to American lawyers, and is the au-
thor of work on the subject Of specific
performance. He is quite as we'll known
in a scientific way, having made long and
acute studies OF certain phases of natural
history, particularly with relation to
mosseS- He represents the highest ideals
of the English judiciary.
Prof de Martens has figured in many
international affairs and is a writer of
em1nence on the subject of international
law. He enjoys the distinction of having
received degrees from American universe
ties, and has travelled In this country.
The Umpire.
THE umpire. Mr.. Matzen, has for many
years served as president of the upper
chamber Of the parliament of Denmark, al
though recently suffering defeat. His emf
nence Is attested by the fact that he was
the selection Of the other judges.
"All of the judges possessed an excellent
reading and tolerable speaking knowledge
of the English language, and therefore
while the official language of the court was
French, and while many Of the speakers
addressed the court in that language, the
Americans were permitted to speak in Eng
lish.
1.-The court itself was fortunate in hav-
Ing for its secretary Mr.. Ruyssenaers who
enjoys the permanent rank Of minister
plenipotentiary Of Holland He has served
In diplomatic capacities in Turkey. Portu-
gal and Belgium. and has the reputation Of
country. This reputation all who met him
were disposed to believe had been justly
earned.
How the Court Proceeded.
1.-The proceedings of the court were some
what different from those to which we had
been accustomed. Immediately upon the
judges entry the president, without any
formalty other than the stroke of the
gavel, pronounced the session open, and,
generally pursuant to previous understand
ing. recognized the Mexican or American
agent or one of the counsel. The order of
debates permitted the United States to
open the with as many counsel as
might seem desirable and Mexico to reply
similarly. the United States following with
brief answers to any points raised by Mex
leo, and Mexico concluding the debate.
This was in accordance with the usual Gus
tom prevailing in continental countries. but
different from the practice of our courts,
which allows the opening and closing de-
bates to the person having the Affirmative.
In all matters Of purely formal precedence
the United States agent was recognized
first, not because the United States brought
the action, but because the title 'Etats Unis
d Amerique alphabetically precedeS EtatS
Unis Mexicafn.
American Stenographers Ahead.
1.-The court had no official stenographer.
but the parties were given leave to employ
such as they might find desirable Pur-
two Englishmen, while two young ladies
of the American party acted for the United
States. In very short time the English
stenographers failed the Mexicans. who,
upon the request OF the Mexican agent,
were assisted by the young ladies in ques-
ton, whose presence in court attracted con-
siderable interest, and was spoken of by
one or more of the judges representing
the progressive spirit of American girls.
1.-The decision of the court was rendered
before what was regarded by those ac-
uuainted with the personnel one Of the most
distinguished audiences ever assembled at
The Hague. All of the diplomats credited
to the court were represented, and largely
accompanied by their families In addi-
ton, very many men and women of promi-
nence in the public affairs Of the Neither
lands attended, all displaying the utmost
possible interest In the court itself, as well
as in the outcome of the proceedings.
The Courts Decision.
1.-The decision. which In every respect but
one sustains the American contention, close
ly following the course Of reasoning present.
ed by us, laid down a number OF principles Of
present and future Importance in connec-
ton with International law.
1.-The broad proposition presented on be-
bolf of fha ITuited States was that rht+roI