New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-12-02
BRITAIN WILLING
TO ARBITRATE
ON SEA LAW
Jansdowne and Bryce Say
Neutrals Must Not Be
Made Hostile.
ONE PEER URGES
ANCESTORS METHODS
r,c,aud Must Champion Rights
If Nations, Former Envoy to
limited States Tells Lords.

ro,don. Dec 1.-Britain's willing
% submit TO arbitration disputes
,s,b the United States over prize court
J.,,sions was asserted in the House
=. Lords to-day by the Marquis Of
r.,s6owne. minister without portfolio.
s,d viscount Bryce. ex-Ambassador TO
the United States.
"The Declaration Of London" said
IN. MARQUIS Of Lansdowne, "has no in
,srnational validity. and adoption Of
.be declaration by an Order in Coun
I'll does not involve the creation of ar
International tribunal. We have
sdopted the declaration only with very
considerable and important modifca-
tons. and we adopted It only partially
and for the guidance OF our own
courts.
"But. despite the fact that the Order
IN Council of March IL placed no obli-
ration on Britain to create an inter
national court, "the marquis continued.
at is right and reasonable that the
principle Of arbitration should be con-
templated.
"If that view requires any conhrma-
ton, II Is to be found IN the arbitra-
ton treaty concluded with the United
States last year. and, having agreed
to the unreserved submission OF dis
puts Of all kinds to examination BY
commission. as set out in that treaty,
it seems 70 me it would be illogical to
decline TO look to arbitration if there
was failure to arrive at an adjustment
regarding the decisions of our prize
courts"
Champion Law of Nations.
A great deal of the fabric Of interna-
tional law had been shattered. Lord
Bryce said. and the great task Of the
future would be to rebuild that shat
tered fabric. IL would be most unfortu-
nate, he said, if Britain were TO go be
yond what had been considered to be
settled international law and make her
own will and her own necessities the
luuEt Ol ntl dNAibHos AN PaSN VI ~
cessity had led to most atrocious
crimes.
I'VE come forward as the champions
Of international rights and the de-
tenders of international law" said
Lord Bryce, "and il would be mis-
fortune IL VIC were 70 depart from that
POSITION"
Tho discussion arose over a series
o. l. ions put by the Earl OF Ports
mog t Tho asked:
"if The Declaration of London is not
I'm force. why. in heavens name, could
we not fall back on the old sea laws
Of our ancestors, which gave them VIC
tory ?" and added:
The country wants to get rid Of all
this rubbish-the Declaration Of Lon
don and the Hague convention. We
want TO sweep away all judicial nice
ties and win this war by placing Brit
ish interests and the interests Of our
Allies as the only interests first and
supreme"
Sought Britaln's Stand.
The Earl of Portsmouth's questions
we're submitted with view to eliciting
the exact position Of Great Britain
with regard TO the Declaration of Lon
don and TO setting at rest or confirm
ing the reports that Lord Reading had
made an arrangement with the United
States government for the reference Of
claims TO an international tribunal az
ter the war.
On the latter point the Marquis Of
Lsnsdowne referred 10 the communi-
cation Of Sir Edward Grey. the For
eign Secretary, on July 81 last, stating
that IL was open TO Washington TO
claim that disputes in regard to the de-
cisions Of prize courts should be sub
mitted for review by an international
tribunal and remarked that Sir Ed
ward Grey's statement only committed
Great Britain 70 O resort to arbitration
a. a proper means for the liquidation
Of disputes. as provided In the srbitrs-
ton treaty concluded with the United
States last year.
Lord Lsnsdowne pointed out that
England was fighting in cooperation
with her Allies and that uniformity in
the conduct Of naval warfare was emil
nentiy desirable. II was no less desir-
able that the prize courts of the Allies
should have some principle laid down
for their guidance. The Declaration Of
London was ready 10 hand, and was
the only available summary OF views
held by a great number Of people in
regard 20 these questions, and II was
therefore adopted with notifications.
Questions After the War.
There were a great many questions,
taid the minister. which would have 10 {
be discussed after the war, and free
dom OF the seas might be discussed !
like the others. lie did not call to
mind an statement by Sir Edward /.
Grey that he was prepared to commit I
the government with regard 20 the 1
question of the freedom OF the seas
As 70 Sir Edward Grey's offer of l
July 81 70 refer disputes to arbitration, /
Lord Lansdowne said:
That doctrine. 10 which no sane cit |
Een OF this country could object In
principle, could be defended on the |
Ns