Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1910-01-06
INTERNATIONAL
ARBITRATION
Secy. Knox Addresses Circular
Note to the Powers as
To Prize Court.
FOR GREATER JURISDICTION.
Proposes Tint 1t be Invested With
Court of Arbltral Justicc-No
Replies Yet Received.

Washington, Jan. 5.-With a view OF
making international arbitration judi
cial In fact as we'll as In theory, Secy-
Knox has addressed circular note to
the powers proposing that the juris-
diction OF the international prize court,
| authorized in 1907, by The Hague peace
conference, be extended so as to make
1t court of arbitral justice.
This note was dated Oct is, 1909.
No responses have been received. a
statement explaining the contents OF
the note and reasons the proposal was
made was given out tonight by Secy.
| Knox.
The international prize court was to
be composed of 10 judges. eight to be
chosen from the larger maritime coun-
tries, Germany, Austria Hungary,
France. Great Britain. Italy, Japan and
| the United States, to serve six years.
| Other Judges were to be chosen from
| other nations and were to sit for
longer or short period as determined
| by the maritime standing of their re-
spective countries.
KNoX'S STATEMENT.
In his statement, Secy. Knox says:
"The advantage of investing the prize
court With the functions OF court of
arbitral justice needs no argument, be-
cause 1t is obviously easier to utilize
an existing body than to create a now
institution. and. as the judges of tho
prize court must necessarily be versed
lr, lat los
be entrusted with any question sus-
ccptible to arbitration.
"The proposition has the very great
advantage of providing the nations
with permanent court of arbitration
for the peaceful settlement of contro-
versies in times of peace; whereas the
prize court. as such. pre-supposes a
state of war. for without war the
capture OF property Is Illegal.
utilizing the method of composition
of the prize court by thus investing it
with the Jurisdiction and functions of
court of arbitral justice would con-
stitute this latter a tribunal, and the
world would thus have for the states
freely conSenting to and accepting the
proposition, one international judiciary
to adJudge cases arising In peace as
we'll as controversies springing from
war. The court would thus be per-
manently constituted and would In
reality be permanent; obvlating the de-
lay involved In the creation of a tenn
porary tribunal and developing inter-
national law by a series of carefully
considered preccdents by judges care
fully chosen and acting under sense
of judicial responsibility.
Arbitration would not merely be, as
both Hague conferences have said. the
most efficacious and most equitable
method of settling disputes which di-
plomacy has failed to adjust, but would
be Judicial in fact as we'll as in theory"
OVERCOMING OBJECTIONS.
Secy. Knox proposed that nations
confronted with constitutional objec-
tions in the matter of direct appeal
from their national courts to the prize
court might present instead Of the
Judgment OF their national courts, the
question involved in the capture at
issue; that the proceedings in such a
case should be In the nature of re-
trial de novo and that the judgment of
the International prize court should be
limited to the award of damages for
illegal capture.
AS constituted by The Hague confer
ence the prize court was to be court
of appeals, either from the original ma
tions court in which the case was tried
IIOul lilo JuuB VI ieS oPPcihoec
court
"The United States has not sub
mitted Judgment of Its court to inter-
national tribunals" explained Secy.
Knox, although 1t has frequently pre-
sented questions involved in Its courts
| to mixed commissions and has promptly
paid the awards when the decision OF
| the mixed commission has taxed the
United States with liability not found
n
| court of the United States might raise
a delicate and difficult question of con-
| stitutional law and render difficult il
| not impossible the ratification of the
prize court by the United States.
"The difficulty is one OF form rather
| than substance, for, whether the prin-
| ciplc involved in the judgment be decid-
| ed or the judgment of national court
be submitted. the result will be the
, same, namely: decision upon the
| legality of the capture"