New-York tribune., 1910-01-16
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
IAN INTERNATIONAL COURT"


nent criticism without t>dcscendins to an
impertinence which as between man and
man ought TO be punished by spanking,
request the learned writer Of the editorial
IAN International Court to furnish the
readers of The Tribune with the truth
| about the International arbitrations Of
the Middle Ages which he says every
schoolboy should know
| First, does he not know that private war
prevailed during this period. and that Eu-
rope was divided into hundreds Of small
political states. enjoying the right to wage
war or to arbitrate their differences, that
In Germany alone where one state row ex-
lists, there were over three hundred prac-
tically independent political communities?
Second. does he not know that with the
establishment of the great modern states in
the succeeding centuries these innumerabls
small states were absorbed, and that 1t was
not till the nineteenth century that the for
eign commerce of the modern states ex-
panded to take their nationals abroad and
bring them into those controversies which
have given rise to the presentation Of diplo-
matte claims? Third, does he not know
that the numerous arbitrations of interna-
tional boundaries in the nineteenth century
have been in respect to boundaries outside
of Europe which were delimited by imper-
feet descriptions in the treaties made at the
end of the great wars waged for territory
In the eighteenth and early part Of the
nineteenth centuries? Fourth. does he not
know that Merignhac points out that ''in
arbitrations anterior to the seventeenth
century 1t is often very difficult. sometimes
impossible, clearly TO separate cases cf me-
diation from those of arbitration either
because the ternlnology was not very def
mite or the expressions used were equivocal,
or because the distinction was not clear TO
the minds of the negotiators"? Finally,
can the writer, who is addressing me, see
from these four propositions that the term
international" which he employs when he
says, International arbitration prevailed
widely i'll the Middle Ages has an entirely
different concept from the term 'interna-
tional' as used to-day? Can he see that
both the diplomatic claims and the boun-
dary disputes. which furnish the great
mass of legal differences (settled by arpi-
tration) between states in the nineteenth
century had practically no existence in The
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries-the
period in which he says International arbi-
tration almost disappeared from interna-
tional practice?
Further. what authority has the writer
of this editorial for stating that after the
lapse of arbitration in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries it was Washington,
Hamilton and Jay who made Its revival
effective in 1794'?
Not a word as to arbitration can be
found in the instructions by which Wash
ington authorized Jay to settle the differ
ences with England in 1884, and Jay in for
warding the treaty which ne had negotiated
with Grenviile '.deplores the fact mat he
had been forced to resort to this imperfect
0f 90 far
as the evidence goes. the implication is that
it was Grenville and the English govern
ment who stood up for International arbi-
tration in 1874.
Lastly, we have the spectacle of a person
who. processing knowledge of International
arbitration, solemnly quotes one authority
TO the effect that there were 1856 arbitra tons
in the nineteenth century and another au-
thority that there were AL arbitratons dur
ing the same general period. Arc there no
facts to be considered? Are Moore and
Darby in the same class as authorities?
Does not Darby's list show upon its face
that he introduces all sorts of diplomatic
conferences as ''arbitrations'? Instead of
using the valuable space of The Tribune to
tell its grown-up readers that 1.-TWO and
two make four" would it not be more en-
Tightening TO answer these questions by a
discriminating statement of the facts?
The criticism of my first letter was that
the editorial "An International Court
contained % inaccurate and misleading
statements OF fact, CD overemphasized the
important part of the United STATES Ia
the development of international arbitra-
tion, (3), granting the relative impor-
tance of the part" played by our country
gave vent to an undue exultation which
disregarded its peculiarly advantageous po-
sition. l had no noticn that In inviting a
reply from the learned writer | should ex-
pose myself to his Spanish proverb," but
perhaps 1 should have taken warning from
that German proverb, He who touches a
peaceful kitten in the dark may discover
that he has stirred up all ordinary poecat."
G. w. SCOTT.
New York. Jan. IL. 1910
Tour correspondent seems to be one of
those persons who think that they should
be free to direct all sorts of false in
situations. impudence and abuse at
newspaper and yet remain exempt from
even temperate rehuke. 1t Is a queer
kink of human nature, but We suppose it
must now and then be humored. LAS
between man and man. his former fool
ish and impertinent letter might properly
have been tossed into the waste papev/
basket but as we tolerantly gave It puX
Hcity and an answer the incident maybe
closed by similarly disposing of his< sec
ond and like effusion.
To his labored first" second"
third" fourth and finally" we re-
ply. Yes, we know those things. Pr
what have they TO do with the caseq
Political conditions were different in ths
Middle Ages from what they are nov
and arbitration correspondingly was diff.
ferent. But arbitration was then WIDELY
practised, and all this explanation Of IT'S
circumstances does not disproys nor az
feet our proposition.
AS to his further" We are unit.
willing to give Grenville all due credit
but II was Hamilton who in suppr,rs.....
the Jay treaty declared that ut would
be horrid and destructive princ,nIa
that nations could not terminate a dis
pute by am!cable agreement, or
by submission TO arbitration"
Lastly" we purposely cited yarv,,r
authorities In order to show that. how
ever widely they differed I'm thar 60.