The Union daily times. [volume] (Union, S.C.) 1918-current, 1922-10-14

Statos curing the "a /, 1ssN
The award wss - kaswn today,
and the America bitrator, Chan
dlsr r. Anderson, = did not attepd
todAy's sitting, cq unicated to the
|ssetary seneral he tribunal and
ths Ssents Of Ncs1 and tho United
States his opiniouf ut tia terms of
subnnission had bs1 Violated and that
the tribunal had eesded It's juris-.
diction as eutlinS by the special
agreement. Motto &vas aerved by
William C. Denni the American
govsrnment's ago. that he reserved
TOR his goyernfne Fall the rights
"arising out Of e. plain and lnani-r
fest dspAst6rs Of q award from Tie
TERMS ia submis6 and fronSyths
esseutit Z error by which h III
invalidatsd. [.
The grounds On 1.ich the Ameri-
can arbitrator and 9snt claimed the.
terms Of snbmissiQ Had been violat-
ed were not presef n to the trib Jnal,
but it Was raid IL Hose conversant
with the case thst Of the principal
reasons was the Shged disregard Of
the provision Of - Hague conven-
ton Of 1907, req1}ng arbitrators to
state the reason1 for each award
made. From thu beginning of the
present trial, It IS said that both
sides to the arbit5Gffcn,s a. web as the
tribunal itself, agr9ed to be bound by
The Hague conyehtioa. =,
The present deSibion, covering AZ
large printed page does not give the
reasons for the 8&f3rd of each claim
ant, but recites IN reasons for the
Justice of general Eard, The awards
of each claimant Are given in fat
sum, including INT sst ct IN uhstated
rate. The msthod Whereby TIE sums
were arrived st + bot spsciiisd.
Chief ausant ;yeists sSf sontro-
versy through ehopt tribunal sitting
was what wss uisitiansS and
when. III was y by Uaitsd|
5s'lsa ~ ! s. saS
|ust, 1917, which was the only requisi-
tion order ever issued, merely re-,
fquisitioneA ships then completed and
materials for uncompleted vessels.
Norway, on the other hand, claim
ed that the United States requisition-
ed not only ships and materials, but
also contracts, and claimed compen-
sation for their marketable value.
Moreover, Norway claimed that the
requisition orders dsd not become eff.
fective until October s, 1917, at the
conclusion Of the negotiations be-
tween the United States and the spe-
cial Norwegian commission headed
by DR.. Fridtjof Nansen.
Even conceding that contracts were
requisitioned, the United States
claimed their value should be deter
mined as of August 8, 1917, and not
after prices were juggled upward by
the alleged manipulations of Chris
topher Hannevig, Norwegian SUD-
ject, who, the American counsel
claimed, speculated on ship contracts
oAo SASosCu odAhhy even
after the requisition order was issued,
through which to sell and resell con-
tracts, advancing prices perceptibly
with each transaction and indulging
in other alleged questionable trad
ings. Some Of the sHanGevig corpo-
rations In America have become bank
rupt since the warsy
Although Hannevig does not figure
in the list Of claimants, the United
States argued and Norway admitted
that he is largely lyyinterested in vir-
tuaily all the claims. The award
makes allowance for the dubious"
nature Of some acts Of Hannevig, but
does not mention to what extent.
The tribunal upheld Norway's con-
tentions, both rs -ssgards contracts
requisitioned and the date October
Is, 1917, ON which-the requisitioning
became effective, although the Snly