South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1919-06-22

80
withdraw from the league on tao
years notice.
International Court.
S. Sen. Root objected that the
covenant contained no agreement
that an international court OF arbi-
tration. such as was referred 10 in
I Article XIV. shall be established. The
~phraseology Of this article has been
so reformed as q meet this objec-
tion. by providing that the council
shall formulate and submit 10 the
members OF the league for adoption.
plans for the establishment OF a per-
manent court OF international JUS
tice." Cart. XIV.)
T.. Sen. Root. while commencing
the provisions relating 10 arbiti alton
or investigation Of disputes between
nations which may threaten the
peace OF the world. particularly those
OF Articles N, XII and XVI of the
original covenant. as being well de-
vised," and TO be regarded as free
from any just objection so far as they
relate 10 the settlement Of political
questions at which they are really
aimed" as having beer developed
naturally from the international
practice Of the past ana as cOnSti-
tuting "A great step forward " be-
cause they create an lnst.-nt,o2
through which the puoiic opinion OF
mankind. condemninE unjust agrees
sion and unnecessary war. may re-
ceive, effect and exert lis power for
the preservation OF eac instead Of
being dissipated IT, fruitless protest
or la-mentation.' still held that they
were open 10 serious objection. IN
that Article XIII was merely an
agreement 20 arbltrate when the par
ties chose 20 a~rbitrate. and that
neither the council. nor the body Of
delegates, 10 whom disputes were 10
he submitted under Article XIV Of
the covenant, was in any sense a
judicial body or an arbitral body.
and was bound 20 recommend what
il deemed 10 be expedient for the
time. He said hat that method was
admirable for dealing with political
questions. but wholly unsuited for
dealing with questions OF right under
the law of nations: and he. therefore.
urged that the provisions be changed
to make the arbitration Of justiciable
questions obligatory under the sys-
tenn established by the Hague con
ference or before the proposed court
OF arbitral justice, or some other
especially constituted tribunal. He
defined justiciable disputes TO be
those concerning the Interpretation
of "A treaty. as to [y question of in
ternational law. as 20 the existence OF
any fact which. if established. would
constitute a breach of any interna-
tional obligation. or as 10 the nature
and extent Of the r%eparation 10 be
made for any such breach" The
amendments embodied in the revised
covenant partly, but not wholly. meet
this criticism.
International Arbitration.
BY Article XII Of the original cove
nant, the members of the league
agreed in no case to resort 10 war
without previously submitting the
questions and matters involved eth
er TO arbitration or TO inquiry by the
executive council and until three
months after the award by the arbi-
traitors or the recommendation by
the executive council, and that even
then they would not resort TO war as
against a member of the league
which should comply with the award
Of the a~rbitrators or the recommen-
dalton of the council (Which. by Ar
ticle XIV must be unanimous). Ar
ticle XII. as revised. goes further. BY
it, all the members OF the league
agree that if there should arise be-
tween them any dispute likely 10
lead 10 a rupture, they will submit
the matter either 10 arbitration or TO
inquiry by the council" and that in
no case will they resort 10 war until
three months after the award by the
arbitrator pr the report by the coun-
ell. Here, therefore, is a definite
binding covenant upon the part OF
all nations, members of the league.
TO submit TO arbitration or inquiry
any dispute between any of them
likely 10 lead 10 rupture.
BY the revised Article NH. while
the members OF the league do not
agree absolutely to submit justiciable
disputes To arbitration. as distin-
guished from inquiry by the council.
they do agree 10 submit TO arbitra-
ton any dispute which shall arise
between them which they recognize
10 be suitable for submission 10 arbi-
t~ration, and which cannot be salts
fdctorily settled by diplomacy" And
they expressly declare disputes as
10 the Interpretation OF a treaty. as
10 any question of international law.
as TO the existence of any fact which
II established could constitute a
breach OF any international obliga-
ton. or as 10 the extent and nature
OF the %reparation 10 be made for any
such breach TO be among those
which are generally suitable for sub
mission TO arbitration" The dis
putes embraced in this d~eclSratiOn
are precisely those which Sen. Root
included in his definition OF disputes
OF "A %justihablc character. The re-
vised article further provides tina
for the consideration of any such
dispute the court OF arbitration 10
which the case is referred shall be
the court agreed on 10y the parties
10 the dispute or stipulated in any
convention existing between them"