1914] Settlement of International Disputes 211 



the invitation to the Government at Ottawa, the Canadian Govern- 

 ment accepted the invitation, and this acceptance was communicated to 

 the American Government. The American part of the board was ap- 

 pointed in 1903, and the Canadian in 1903 and 1905; and work was be- 

 gun with all convenient speed on the Sault Ste. Marie Channel, the 

 Chicago Canal, the Minnesota Canal, etc. This board has done an 

 immense amount of very valuable work already. 



The Treaty of 1909 was really at the instance of that Board." 



Signed January 11, 1909, this "Waterways Treaty" provides "for 

 the establishment and maintenance of an International Joint Commission 

 of the United States and Canada — three appointed by each Government 

 — which Commission should (Article VIII) have jurisdiction over and 

 pass upon all cases involving the use, obstruction or diversion of the 

 waters between the United States and Canada. But Article IX con- 

 tains an agreement that all matters of difference between the countries 

 involving the rights, obligations or interests of either in relation to the 

 other or to the inhabitants of the other along the frontier shall be referred 

 to this Commission for inquiry and report. Article X provides that any 

 questions or matters of difference involving the rights, obligations or 

 interests of the United States or of Canada, either in relation to each 

 other or to their respective inhabitants, may be referred for decision to 

 this International Joint Commission. If the Commission be equally 

 divided, an Umpire is to be chosen in the manner provided by Act 45 

 of the Hague Convention of October 18, 1907." 



It will be seen that "every dispute involving the rights, obligations 

 or interests of the United States or of the Dominion of Canada either in 

 relation to each other or to their respective inhabitants" may be referred 

 to the Commission by the consent of the two countries. 



" It is hard to see how a more comprehensive clause could be framed; 

 and if the Treaty had provided that such dispute 'shall' be referred, the 

 work would be perfect. As it is, the Dominion must give consent through 

 the Dominion Cabinet. That is an easy task. We have a Government 

 which is united — it must be united or it could not stand — and which 

 in this instance does not need to go to Parliament for authority." 



It is not always the case that a Canadian Parliament will consent to 

 an international agreement made by the Government; then the Govern- 

 ment must take the opinion of the electorate (a recent example will occur 

 to everybody) , but in this instance the Government may act without the 

 consent of Parliament. 



"But in the United States the action must be by and with the advice 

 and consent of the Senate; and sometimes, as it is well known, trouble 

 arises in the Senate about confirming treaties. 



Each reference to the Commission will or may be but equivalent to 

 making a new treaty. Had the provision been that the consent might 



11— 



