The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1914-10-18

obligatory. But IL an outside Power offers It
either with or after tender OF good offices, or
If one of the parties to the controversy suggests
1t to the other and acceptance follows. there
arises. in certain sense. moral duty to abide
by the course recommended by the mediator. II
1t be not obviously unfair and inadmissable.
1t 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 in ''medatory action" at the Court Of
Vienna as between Russia and Austria. Hungary,
and that the Emperor did this at the request
of Russia. 1t 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 Hungary formulated her
grievances against Servia until war spread over
most of Europe, there no time given for
any hopeful attempt at mediation.
Time Is the great innoyator. 1t is also the
great pacifer To secure time for a patient
examination of points OF dispute. with full OPP
portunity for calm elaboration and reflection
is always to give some assurance of just
judgment.
For this purpose the United States has re-
Gently made treaties with twenty Powers. with
provisions adequate to the purpose. Until there
has been the lapse Of year. giving time for a
fuil inquiry as to the merits of the controversy
there can be no war. The treaties in question
are now pending before the Senate on favor
able report, and are between the United States
and Salvador, Guatemala Panama Honduras
Nicaragua, the Netherlands. Bolivia. Portugal,
Persia, Denmark, Switzerland, Costa Rtca the
dominican Republic, Venezuela. Italy, Norway
Peru, Argentina, Brazil and Chile. Like con.
yentions negotiated with Great Britain and
France have not yet been signed.
similar result has been heretofore attained
IN several cases OF Importance by the aid OF
Commissions Of Inquiry.
This is an appropriate mode OF procedure
wherever there is a substantial difference Of
opinion as to a matter of fact, the determination
OF which would naturally and properly govern
the disposition of the controversy. 1t is also
well adapted to disputes over matter of mere
ppnctilio
1t is not ume-saving method of procedure,
nor Is 1t meant to be. One of its best features
is that 1t cannot be pushed to hasty con-
ciusion. An opportunity is thus given for pas.
sions to cool and evidence to turn up
1t does not itself assume to adjudicate the
rights Of the parties. 1t pronounces on facts
not on the conclusions from them.
A Commission of Inquiry may. however,
without forfeiting the right to it's 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 incumbent on
either party. 1t then becomes in some sort
tribunal of arbitration.
The convention OF 1904 between Great
Britain and Russia, In relation to the Dogger
bank incident. took this shape. Russia had
fired on certain vessels. II they were enemy's
ships. she was justified. If they were British
fishing smacks, she was in fault and owed a
pecuniary reparation. The Commission. should
it find against her on the facts, was empowered
to assess the damages and direct the payment
1t did find against her, and did proceed to the
final disposition of the controversy In the mode
SO authorized.
Commissions of Inquiry, as known to inter
national law, are such only as are appointed by
mutual agreement between both Of the parties
to controversy.
Part probably of the reason why the United