misci:llani:ous claims. io7 



One of tlie earliest of our conventions of tbis nature 

 Avas contained in the Treaty of 1818, in execution of 

 an article of the Treaty of Ghent [1S15], by ^vhich 

 the United States and Great Britain stipulated to re- 

 fer a certain (juestion of indeiiiniLies to sonic friv-nd- 

 ly Sovereign or State. Afterward the Emperor of 

 Kussia was selected as such arbitrator, and rendered 

 an award against Great Britain, in general terms, by 

 reason of which it became necessary to provide by a 

 second treaty [1822] for the appointment of a com- 

 missioner aad arbitrator on the part of the United 

 States, and a commissioner and arbitrator on the })art 

 of Great Britain, to assemble at Washington and as- 

 sess damacres under the umpiraixe of the ^Minister of 

 the mediating Power accredited to the United States. 

 This exnmple is curious and instructive, seeing that 

 the debtor Government, so to speak, — Great Britain, — 

 in order to give eflect to its engagement at Ghent 

 entered into three successive international compacts 

 with the United States,— one to appoint an arbiter, 

 another to name him, and a third to give elTect to his 

 award. There co\ild be no better illustration of the 

 moral force of treaties of arbitration in the estimation 

 of modern States. 



TENDENCY OF KEASON AND JUSTICE TO PREVAIL OVEll 



FOIICE. 



These many examples, it seems to me, tend to man- 

 ifest the increasing: desire of modern nations to tcr- 

 minate all their controversies, if possible, by friendly 

 means rather than by force. Where they can not 



