502 INTERNATIONAL LAW 



who met on May 18, 1899, in the " Maison au Bois " certainly did not 

 anticipate that a work endowed with life would spring from their 

 deliberations. 



Two months later, namely, July 9, 1899, thanks to the sincerity 

 and energy of a few men, thanks to the atmosphere created by per- 

 sistent peace-lovers, a convention for the peaceful settlement of 

 international conflicts was entered into. It is divided into three 

 chapters devoted respectively to good offices and mediation, to 

 international commissions of inquiry, and to arbitration. 



Arbitration was thus solemnly proclaimed as the normal and 

 best mode of reaching a solution regarding differences between 

 nations. Since then that procedure has become familiar to the public 

 everywhere, and the expression, often misunderstood in the past, 

 has taken its full value and acquired a rare force of penetration. 



The official staff of diplomacy did not hesitate, nevertheless, to 

 ignore the arbitration court. They were inspired by the hope of 

 allowing the new institution to die through desuetude and to bury 

 it beneath indifference and silence. But the United States of 

 America, by their firm attitude, furnished to the arbitration court 

 the opportunity of passing upon its first cause, and the difference 

 relating to the California Pious Fund will remain, owing to that fact, 

 a celebrated case under the law of nations, as famous as that of the 

 Alabama controversy. Since then the conflict between Venezuela 

 and a large number of powers, that between Japan and Germany, 

 between France and Great Britain, have brought before the bar of 

 the arbitration court most of the nations of the first rank in the 

 order of their population and economic standing. 



As has been said above, despite the fact of its existence and despite 

 its activity, the arbitration court is not an international tribunal. 

 Therefore the jurists and peace-lovers have taken up again their 

 propaganda with new vigor: Recourse to this international juris- 

 diction must be compulsory, all nations must be able to appeal to 

 its high intervention, and, finally, its competency must extend to all 

 future conflicts, whatever their nature. 



It is possible even now for the states which have not been ad- 

 mitted to take part in the deliberations of 1899, owing to a voluntary 

 and unjustifiable forgetfulness, for which they may never be suffi- 

 ciently blamed, to profit from the advantages of the convention relat- 

 ing to arbitration, as shown by Article xxvi thereof, which states 

 that the court of arbitration is open to states not signatory which 

 are in conflict with signatory states. It is under this provision that 

 Venezuela was admitted to be heard before the arbitration court. 

 Besides, Article xix authorizes states to conclude arbitration 

 treaties of greater scope than the arbitration convention of 1899. 

 Moreover, it is permissible for all states to conclude arbitration 



