The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1914-12-05

obligatory. But II an outside Power offers IT,
either with or after a tender OF good Offices. or
II one OF the parties to the controversy suggests
IL TO the other and acceptance follows. there
arises. in n certain sense. a moral duty to abide
by the course by the mediator. II
It be not obviously unfair and inadmissabie.
IL appears from the "white-book" issued early
this month by the German Government that
prior to the general European war beginning
In August. 1914. the Emperor Joined Great
Britain I'm "mediatory action" at the Court Of
Vienna as between Russia and Austrfa-Hungary.
and that the Emperor did this at the request
OF Russia II Is currently reported that there
were other sincere efforts toward securing a
diplomatic settlement put forth. at or before
the same time. by several European Powers
Events. however. moved too quickly. From the
day when Austria-H Hungary formulated her
grievances against servia until war spread over
most OF Europe. there was no time given for
any hopeful attempt at mediation
Time Is the great innovator. II is also the
great pacifer. To secure time for a patient
examination OF points of dispute. with full OBJ
portunity for calm elaboration and reaection.
Judgment.
For this purpose the United States has re-
Gently made treaties with twenty Powers. with
provisions adequate to the purpose. Until there
mas been the lapse OF a year. giving time for a
iun inquiry s to the merits OF the controversy.
there can be no war. The treaties In question
are now pending before the Senate on a favor.
aDie report, and are between the United States
ana salvador, Guatemala. Panama. Honduras.
nicaragua, the Netherlands. Bolivia, Portugal
Persia. Denmark. Switzerland, Costa Rica. the
dominican Republic. Venezuela. Italy. Norway
Peru, Argentina. Brazil and Chile. Like con.
xehuons negotiated with Great Britain and
France have not yet been signed.
A similar result has been heretofore attained
IN several cases of Importance by the aid Of
commissions OF Inquiry.
This Is an appropriate mode of nroradur.
Wherever there is n substantial difference OF
opinion as to a matter of fact. the determination
OF which would naturally and properly govern
the disposition of the controversy. II Is aiso
punctilio.
II is not a time-saving method OF procedura
nor Is II meant to be. One of its best features
Is that IL cannot be pushed TO A hasty con.
eiusion. An opportunity is thus given for pas
slons to cool and evidence to turn up.
II does not itself assume to adiudicate the
rights OF the parties. II pronounces on facts.
NOT on the conclusions from them.
A Commission of Inquiry NAV. however
without FORGETTING the right TO its name be
given larger powers. The contending nations
may refer to its decision the ascertainment Of
the facts and also the question OF what action
II any the facts make reasonably ncumbent on
either party. II then becomes in some sort a
tribunal of arbitration.
The convention OF 1904 between Great
Britain and Russia. in relation to the Dogeer
bank incident. took this shape. Russia haI
nred on certain vessels. II they were enemy's
sutps' sue was 1usuhed- III they were British
fishing smacks. she was in fault and owed a
pecuniary reparation. The Commission. should
II md against her on the facts. was empowered
70 assess the damages and direct the payment
II did md against her, and did proceed to the
mai disposition OF the controversy In the mode
so authorized.
commissions OF Inquiry. as known to inter.
national law. are such only as are appointed bv
mutual agreement between both Of the parties
to a controversy.
Part probably Of the reason why the United