ARBITRATION IN THE GREEK WORLD. 



295 



set up a monument to commemorate the boundary between the two 

 states. To all appearance it was Enlil, " king of the lands, father 

 of the gods," who expressed his divine will, and Me-silim (his name 

 means "the voice of peace," or the like) communicated it to the 

 contending states. 



The lesson for us would seem to be, that the code of honour in 

 heathen Greece in such matters was higher than in Christian 

 Europe at the present time — and this not only in arbitration, but 

 also in the declaration of war, when that unfortunate necessity 

 arose ; they regarded invasions without notice rather as robberies 

 than as lawful wars. We have sadly fallen off from that high 

 ideal. 



I will ask you to return a most hearty vote of thanks to our 

 lecturer for his engrossing paper, which I am sure we have all 

 listened to with great interest, and greatly appreciate for its 

 learning and originality. There is one remark which I should like 

 to make concerning it, and that is, that certain of the details which 

 he has given treat of the subject at first hand, thus placing their 

 accuracy beyond the shadow of a doubt. 



The Author : I should like to offer to the Council and members 

 of the Victoria Institute my sincerest thanks for their kindness in 

 giving me this opportunity of submitting to their judgment and 

 criticism this paper, which embodies in a short form some of the 

 conclusions reached in a branch of study which has been of great 

 interest to myself, and also for the cordial reception which has been 

 given to what I have said. In especial let me thank you, Mr. Chair- 

 man, for the fresh light you have thrown upon the early document 

 to which I referred. I can claim no knowledge either of the monu 

 ment itself or of the language in which it is inscribed, and am greatly 

 indebted to you for your remarks about it and for the corrections 

 you have made in that account of the text to which I had recourse. 

 To answer in detail the various questions raised in the discussion 

 would take me too long, and would carry me far beyond the limits 

 of the subject to which I have confined myself in my paper. One 

 point only I should like to emphasize afresh, that the recrudescence of 

 feuds which have been previously settled, once or several times, by 

 arbitration is no proof of the failure of the experiment. Arbitration 

 may be regarded as a medicine employed to heal a disease of the 

 body politic. In most cases of which we have record the cure was 



