198 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 
agree between themselves, they establish a mixed 
commission or appoint an arbitrator or arbitrators. 
On such occasions the contending parties do not se- 
lect an arbitrator in consideration of his being power- 
ful, like an Emperor of the French or an Emperor of 
Germany, but because of confidence in the ‘impartial- 
ity of the arbiter, as when great States refer a ques- 
tion to relatively feeble Sovereigns, like the King of 
the Netherlands or the King of the Belgians, or to 
the Senate of a little Republic like Hamburg, or even 
to five individual judges, like the Arbitrators of Ge- 
neva, or to a single person like Sir Edward Thornton. 
Nay, j in further proof of the availableness of this 
method of settling national disputes, we have Great 
Britain and the United States, in spite of their own 
particular quarrel, each trusting the other in a ques- 
tion between either of them and another Power. 
The same disposition of mind on the part of mod- 
ern Governments, that is, the assumption that a se- 
lected international judge or arbitrator will decide 
impartially, whether he be powerful or weak, and of 
whatever nationality he may be, appears in the con- 
stitution of mixed commissions. Generally these 
commissions consist of two commissioners, one ap- 
pointed by each of the respective Governments, with 
authority given to the commissioners to select an um- 
pire to determine any differences which may arise be- 
tween them; or sometimes the umpire is agreed on 
by the two Governments. 
Now, in the very heat of our late controversies with 
Great Britain, we consented to accept the British 
