BOARD OF EDITORS OF THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CHARLES NOBLE GREGORY, State University of Iowa. ROBERT LANSING, Watertown, N. Y. JOHN BASSETT MOORE, Columbia University. DAVID J. HILL, The Hague, European Editor. Managing Editor JAMES BROWN SCOTT, George Washington University. EDITORIAL COMMENT THE SECOND PEACE CONFERENCE OF THE HAGUE The second Hague peace conference is no longer a matter of speculation, it is now a certainty. Invitations have been issued to and accepted by the recognized states of the world, and chosen representatives of these states will meet at the Hague on the afternoon of June 15, 1907. The first conference was looked upon as an experiment and many there were who shook their heads in doubt. It did not wholly justify the hopes of its friends and well-wishers. It did not produce a general disarmament, neither did it succeed in limiting armaments nor in placing a limit upon the expenditures necessary to preserve peace by force. It did, however, discuss these great problems and relegated them, unsolved though they were, to the consideration of a future and perhaps more favorable conference. They are in the nature of unfinished business and will doubtless be considered and treated as such. If war was not abolished and the era of universal peace ushered in, a serious and successful attempt was made to give definiteness and consistency to the laws of war on land, and to the sick and wounded. upon the seas there were extended the humane principles of the Red Cross, which principles have done so much to mitigate the horrors incident to warfare. The crowning work of the conference was, however, the establishment of a tribunal to which litigant nations might resort for the peaceful and judicial settlement of difficulties which, if unsettled, might justify in the minds of some an appeal to the sword. If war cannot be abolished, unnecessary suffering should be eliminated, and difficulties between nations which might easily lead to war may be settled by the resort to a tribunal clothed with the power to examine the facts and on the facts as found to give redress. The first conference showed the possibility of discussing in the abstract questions of international importance. Great as was its service, it was but a first and conscious step in the line of progress. For the actual work accomplished by the conference of 1899 reference is made to the supplement in which the French and English text of the final act is given preceded by documents necessary to its intelligent understanding. The first conference looked forward at no distant date to a second meeting of the nations. As Europe seemed unwilling to take the initiative, President Roosevelt on October 21, 1904, gave voice to the universal desire of this country that a second conference might assemble in order to take up and advance the work so auspiciously inaugurated by the conference of 1899. The late John Hay as secretary of state, issued the following circular to the representatives of the United States accredited to each of the governments signatory to the acts of the Hague conference SIR: The peace conference which assembled at the Hague on May 18, 1899, marked an epoch in the history of nations. Called by his majesty the emperor of Russia to discuss the problems of the maintenance of general peace, the regulation of the operations of war, and the lessening of the burdens which preparedness for eventual war entails upon modern peoples, its labors resulted in the acceptance by the signatory powers of conventions for the peaceful adjustment of international difficulties by arbitration, and for certain humane amendments to the laws and customs of war by land and sea. A great work was thus accomplished by the conference while other phases of the general subject were left to discussion by another conference in the near future, such as questions affecting the rights and duties of neutrals, the inviolability of private property in naval warfare, and the bombardment of ports, towns, and villages by a naval force. Among the movements which prepared the minds of governments for an accord in the direction of assured peace among men, a high place may fittingly be given to that set on foot by the Interparliamentary Union. From its origin in the suggestions of a member of the British house of commons, in 1888, it developed until its membership includes large numbers of delegates from the parliaments of the principal nations, pledged to exert their influence toward the conclusion of treaties of ar`itration between nations and toward the accomplishment of peace. Its annual conferences have notably advanced the high purposes it sought to realize. Not only have many international treaties of arbitration been concluded, but, in the conference held in Holland in 1894, the memorable declaration in favor of a permanent court of arbitration was a forerunner of the most important achievement of the peace conference of the Hague in 1899. The annual conference of the Interparliamentary Union was held this year at St. Louis, in appropriate connection with the World's Fair. Its deliberations were marked by the same noble devotion to the cause of peace and to the welfare of humanity which had inspired its former meetings. By the unanimous vote of delegates, active or retired members of the American congress and of every parliament in Europe with two exceptions, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Enlightened public opinion and modern civilization alike demand that differences between nations should be adjudicated and settled in the same manner as disputes between individuals are adjudicated, namely, by the arbitrament of courts in accordance with recognized principles of law, this conference requests the several governments of the world to send delegates to an international conference to be held at a time and place to be agreed upon by them for the purpose of considering: 1. The question for the consideration of which the conference at the Hague expressed a wish that a future conference be called. 2. The negotiation of arbitration treaties between the nations represented at the conference to be convened. 3. The advisability of establishing an international congress to convene periodically for the discussion of international questions. And this conference respectfully and cordially requests the president of the United States to invite all the nations to send representatives to such a conference On the twenty-fourth of September, ultimo, these resolutions were presented to the president by a numerous deputation of the Interparliamentary Union. The president accepted the charge offered to him, feeling it to be most appropriate that the executive of the nation which had welcomed the conference to its hospitality should give voice to its impressive utterances in a cause which the American government and people hold dear. He announced that he would at an early day invite the other nations, parties to the Hague conventions, to reassemble with a view to pushing forward toward completion the work already begun at the Hague, by considering the questions which the first conference had left unsettled with the express provision that there should be a second conference. In accepting this trust, the president was not unmindful of the fact, so vividly brought home to all the world, that a great war is now in progress. He recalled the circumstances that at the time when, on August 24, 1898, his majesty the emperor of Russia sent forth his invitation to the nations to meet in the interests of peace, the United States and Spain had merely halted, in their struggle, to devise terms of peace. While at the present moment no armistice between the armies now contending is in sight, the fact of an existing war is no reason why the nations should relax the efforts they have so successfully made hitherto toward the adoption of rules of conduct which may make more remote the chances of future wars between them. In 1899 the conference of the Hague dealt solely with the larger general problems which confront all nations, and assumed no function of intervention or suggestion in the settlement of the terms of peace between the United States and Spain. It might be the same with a reassembled conference at the present time. Its efforts would naturally lie in the direction of further codification of the universal ideas of right and justice which we call international law; its mission would be to give them future effect. The president directs that you will bring the foregoing considerations to the attention of the minister of foreign affairs of the government to which you are accredited and, in discreet conference with him, ascertain to what extent that government is disposed to act in the matter. Should his excellency invite suggestion as to the character of the questions to be brought before the proposed second peace conference, you may say to him that, at this time, it would seem premature to couple the tentative invitation thus extended with a categorical programme of subjects of discussion. It is only by comparison of views that a general accord can be reached as to the matters to be considered by the new conference. It is desirable that in the formulation of a programme the distinction should be kept clear between the matters which belong to the province of international law and those which are conventional as between individual governments. The final act of the Hague conference, dated July 29, 1899, kept this distinction clearly in sight. Among the broader general questions affecting the right and justice of the relation of sovereign states, which were then relegated to a future conference, were: the rights and duties of neutrals; the inviolability of private property in naval warfare; and the bombardment of ports, towns, and villages by a naval force. The other matters mentioned in the final act take the form of suggestions for consideration by interested governments. The three points mentioned cover a large field. The first, especially, touching the rights and duties of neutrals, is of universal importance. Its rightful disposition affects the interests and well-being of all the world. The neutral is something more than an on-looker. His acts of omission or commission may have an influenceindirect, but tangible-on a war actually in progress; whilst, on the other hand, he may suffer from the exigencies of the belligerents. It is this phase of warfare which deeply concerns the world at large. Efforts have been made time and again, to formulate rules of action applicable to its more material aspects, as in the declarations of Paris. As recently as the twenty-eighth of April, of this year, the congress of the United States adopted a resolution reading thus: Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it is the sense of the congress of the United States that it is desirable, in the interest of uniformity of action by the maritime states of the world in time of war, that the president endeavor to bring about an understanding among the principal maritime powers with a view of incorporating into the permanent law of civilized nations the principle of the exemption of all private property at sea, not contraband of war, from capture or destruction by belligerents. Approved, April 28, 1904. Other matters closely affecting the rights of neutrals are: the distinction to be made between absolute and conditional contraband of war and the inviolability of the official and private correspondence of neutrals. As for the duties of neutrals toward the belligerents, the field is scracely less broad. One aspect deserves mention, from the prominence it has acquired during recent times; namely, the treatment due to refugee belligerent ships in neutral ports. It may also be desirable to consider and adopt a procedure by which states nonsignatory to the original acts of the Hague conference may become adhering parties. You will explain to his excellency the minister of foreign affairs that the present 435 overture for a second conference to complete the postponed work of the first conference is not designed to supersede other calls for the consideration of special topics, such as the proposition of the government of the Netherlands, recently issued, to assemble for the purpose of amending the provisions of the existing Hague convention with respect to hospital ships. Like all tentative conventions, that one is open to change in the light of practical experience, and the fullest deliberation is desirable to that end. Finally, you will state the president's desire and hope that the undying memories which cling around the Hague as the cradle of the beneficent work which had its beginning in 1899 may be strengthened by holding the second peace conference in that historic city. The replies to the circular were encouraging and showed as usual that the president had correctly interpreted the popular desire, but with a graciousness well-nigh unprecedented in world-politics he yielded the initiative to the emperor of Russia. The president most gladly welcomes the offer of his imperial majesty to again take upon himself the initiation of the steps requisite to convene a second international peace conference, as the necessary sequence to the first conference, brought about through his majesty's efforts, and in view of the cordial responses to the president's suggestion of October, 1904, he doubts not that the project will meet with complete acceptation and that the result will be to bring the nations of the earth still more closely together in their common endeavor to advance the ends of peace. The Czar Nicholas, freed from the embarrassment of a war at the extremes of his empire, immediately devoted himself to the self-imposed mission of peace. On the twelfth of April, 1906, Baron Rosen submitted to the secretary of state a tentative programme for the work of a second conference. The document in full reads as follows: Mr. Secretary of State: When it assumed the initiative of calling a second peace conference, the imperial government had in view the necessity of further developing the humanitarian principles on which was based the work accomplished by the great international assemblage of 1899. At the same time, it deemed it expedient to enlarge as much as possible the number of states participating in the labors of the contemplated conference, and the alacrity with which the call was answered bears witness to the depth and breadth of the present sentiment of solidarity for the application of ideas aiming at the good of all mankind. The first conference separated in the firm belief that its labors would subsequently be perfected from the effect of the regular progress of enlightenment among the nations and abreast of the results acquired from experience. Its most important creation, the International Court of Arbitration, is an institution that has already proved its worth and brought together, for the good of all, an areopagus of jurists who command the respect of the world. How much good could be accomplished by international commissions of inquiry toward the settlement of disputes between states has also been shown. |