Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-07-28
HAGUE DISCUSSES
DRAGO DOCTRINE
American Proposition Referred
for Examination.
1T WAS SUPPORTED BY JAPAN
Vote Brings About Very Interesting
Debate.
1T WAS SUPPORTED BY JAPAN
GEN. PORTER ANSWERS QUERIES
Talk Leads to Declarations in Favor
of a Permanent Arbitration Court.
Helps the Cause.

THE HAGUE. July 27-Thc vote on the
American proposition anent the Drago doc
trine is of greater import than at first sight
appears Apart from the actual vote the
discussion that preceded it led to most in
teresting declarations in favor of a perma-
nent court of general arbitration at The
Hague. which is also an American propo-
sItion. If all of these proposals are adopted
1T will be a great victory tor the United
States
The sitting of the committee in the after
noon began with statement from Keiroku
Tsuzuki head of the Japanese delegation
who said that Japan adhered to the Ameri-
can proposition far the employment
OF armed force was concerned but reserved
its vote on the question of obligatory arbi-
tration until all the elements of discussion
had been presented.
Senior Candamo declared that Peru sup
ported arbitration in the matter of con-
tractual debts, and would not offer any
opposition to such arbitration being ex-
tended to all pecuniary obligations.
Samad Khan of Persia, in eloquent
speech, addressed a lyrical hymn to the
American proposition. calling 1t the most
fragrant flower blOssoming from the con-
ference.
Pierie Huda Hudicourt of Haiti insisted
upon the humliatng nature of the practice
of occupying the territory of country mo-
mentariy in a state of financial embarrass-
ment and to remove these abuses, he said,
the American proposition had been formu-
lated.
Dr. CASTOR Carlin. head of the Swiss dele
CATION announced that Switzerland was
sat SIZED with the American proposition, if
it were given a more precise form.
Great Britain Assents.
DR. Alexandra Beldiman OF Roumania
said that Roumania would abstain from
voting because the proposition presented by
the United States was outside the limits of
the convention of 1899.
Sir Edward Fry recognized the difficulties
which international arbitration presented.
Nevertheless he added, the British dele
CATION had associated itself with the Amer
can and Portuguese proposals. England as
Sir Edward proceeded to show by exam
pies had always praCticed arbitration, and
in 1903 had signed treaties of this nature
with ten powers. The result of this prac-
tIca he continued. had not always been
conclusive but despite that, England be-
Ievas that the moment has come for the
conscience of the civilized world finally
10 find rxpress.on in this way.
Count TornieIi of Italy, in a lengthy
speech. said that the American proposition
seems somewhat ambiguous. In what cases
should recourse be had TO arms he asked
Why did prohibition only apply to cred
itors? The proposal he asserted, was dumb
regarding recourse to national courts. He
preferred that there be no recourse to arms
IL had been said that the American courts
were competent in the matter. but this was
not SO everywhere, nor had the question OF
public debts been sufficiently elucidated
Debts might be regarded as cOntractual
when guaranteed by certain banks
Views of Italy.
The cases to which the proposition APP
plies. continued the Italian delegate, must
b. specified but Gen. Porter, speaking for
the United States. had said that the propo-
sition did not include cases of violence or
confiscation or cases of d similar character.
and did not even mention case OF denied
justice.
Gen Porter had further affirmed claims
for petty sums not worth the expense of
arbitration. Must one then renounce the
protection of these debts on that account?
Italy had so many cmgrants interested
in this matter. said Count TOrnielii, that
he considered it his duty TO ask questions
on the subject
MARQUIS de Several of Portugal asso-
ciated himself with the American PROPOSE
tion. and Alexander Mercy Won .Kapos-
Mere stated that Austria did not oppose the
United States regarding the recovery Of
debts. and would accept. as well, in prin-
c.pIe the American proposition 4or the es-
Enlistment Of permanent court.
Gen. Porter Demands Vote.
Cen Horace Porter here demanded that
d vote be taken, but accepted the motion
of Or. Bcldiman TO separate this question
from The ARBITRATION convention. NJ Bour-
Eeois of France. the president, observed
that this was d point for the conference
TO decide. and it finally was agreed to take
vote as 10 whether the American propo-
s.Upu should be referred to an examining
commission. The motion on this question
was passed by a very large majority.
B-fore the vote on the proposition itelf
was taken many of the delegates explained
their reasons for voting or abstainng from
voting. Spain declared that she would
support the American proposition with the
same reserve as Italy. Chile Santo Do
minSo. Norway. Servia and Bulgaria took
the same attitude. Sweden abstained from
voting being absolutely against tn,
employ ment OF force Switzerland alb
Ca-liu that the proposition should be given
a more precise form.
France Russia and Siam accepted Bel
GUM abstaincd, as she regarded the ques-
tiou as not having been sufficiently eluci-
dated. Turkham Pasha. for Turkey. r.
ss-Ned his opinion until after the subject
had been more closely examined. Greece
accepted the proposition under the reserve
THAI the employment OF arms be excluded
Venezuela Reserves.
The Argentine Republic. through Dr.
Dracu declared its vote for the proposition
under the reserve that recourse to arms
should only occur in the case OF denied
justice and that public debts be excluded
rhc category. Nicaragua voted with the
same reservation. Mexico made the reserve
that diplomatic channels should not be EN-
plQyed for the recovery of debts until lega
reCoursES had been exhausted.
Venezuela made an absolute reserve OF
the whole question. Colombia accepted
with the same reserve as Mexico. but addaG
to the exclusion clause that of armed force
Ecuador made the reserve that arbitrator
only the of dpuiaC