New-York tribune., 1907-08-24
BRAZIL AT THE HAGUE.

The protest Of Brazil against the scheme for
permanent international court Of arbitration
appears to be based chiefly upon two grounds
To wit. that the proposed court is not needed.
since such tribunal was created at The Hague
by the convention of July -. 1899, and is now
in successful operation and that offensive dis
elimination, involving derogation of sovereignty,
is made in the division of countries into first
second third and other classes. While await
ing receipt of the full official text Of the pro-
posaI made by America, Great Britain and
Germany it is difficult to determine the pre-
else causes of Brazirs dissatisfaction with it,
but so far as can be seen must judge
her course to be mistaken under the influence
of miSapprehension of some sort
1t is quite true that so-called permanent
court of arbitration was constituted in 1899
and that il has served and is serving useful
purposes. Strictly speaking, however, it was
and is not so much permanent court as a
permanent bureau through which a special
court may be organized at any time. That
convention simply provided that each of the
sicnatOry powers should name not more than
four representatives TO be enrolled as mem
hers of the court. and that from that roll ar
bitratorS should be chosen whenever needed
The present proposal is for the creation OF an
actual bench of seventeen international judges,
who shall meet and hold court regularly once or
twice a year. That is an entirely different ar
rangement from the one OF eight years age and
Is intended not to supersede but to supplement
or, perhaps. rather to complement it. Under
the convention of 1899 each of the cOntesting
| parties to a case was and is sure of representa-
tion in the arbitral tribunal. while under the
system now proposed neither of them may be
| represented. since there will not be half as
! many judges in the whole court as there are
nations. The theory is that all disputes of n
political complexion will continue TO be sub
mtted to special tribunals under the act OF
1899. while those which are purely juridical may
| be submitted to the court. OF course, each
nation will reserve the right of deciding for
itself 10 which tribunal IT will submit any given
| case, and If Brazil prefers TO submit all cases
| in which she is interested TO the tribunal of
| 1899 she will have that privilege-provided she
| has or does come under the operation of that
| convention. of which she was not an original
| sIgnatory. But we cannot agree with her de-
nunciation of the proposed court as utterly
| useless being convinced that, on the contrary,
| it will be exceedingly useful.
The other ground of the Brazilian protest is
more delicate and may seem more plausible,
| though we are by no means persuaded of its
| sufficiency. 1t is not difficult to understand
| the sensitiveness of Il country at being placed
| i'm the second or third class of states while
others are in the first class But after all does
such classification amount to anything more
than the classification of cities and counties,
cording to their population. in New York and
| other states? If. as a matter OF convenience.
/ all cities of a million or more inhabitants are
| called first class all between million and n
| hundred thousand second class and all below
| a hundred thousand third class there is in such
nomenclature no derogaton of dignity or of
| sovereignty, but merely recognition of con-
| crete facts We take it that the same may
| be said of the proposed classification Of SOW
ereign states. There is, of course. principle
| of international law better established than
that .al sovereign states are equal in the eye
| .of international law. whatever may be their
| arelative power" That principle was pushed