saying of railroad men, "provide the accommodation and the traffic will grow to meet it." to meet it." This would be as true in this instance. Much injustice now goes unpunished, for lack of an appropriate tribunal to which it can readily be referred.

Through years of peace we spend great sums annually in the maintenance of battleships in idleness, yet we make no complaint, for the priceless value of their presence at the crisis is ample justification for the disbursement. So here, whatever the cost, it is a negligible quantity when compared to the blessing of having the best appointed contrivance that human ingenuity can devise ready and prepared to settle amicably international disputes as they arise, and thus prevent recourse to the more wasteful and more expensive arbitrament of war. It is a business proposition with the figures in the profit and loss column all on the credit side.

THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE BETWEEN WAR AND ARBITRATION

We have in the modern world a struggle going on between two institutions, international war and international arbitration, a struggle which will end in the survival of the fittest; namely, the fittest having due regard to the conditions.

War has ever been with us. International arbitration has but lately been launched on the sea of strife. All the modern arguments are against war and in favor of arbitration. Yet war will not down at our bidding. For such persistence of an awful calamity against human sense and reason, there must be some good underlying cause, or causes. They are not far to seek. They are two. Human greed in the litigants and human imperfections in the caliber of judges. For judges are, after all, mere men, with the bias and imperfections of men. What litigant forced to accept the jurisdiction over him of our municipal judges does not ask as he enters the judicial chamber-is he honest? -is he capable?-is he impartial? And so when nations are involved, when the stakes are raised to the nth power, and the tremendous issues at stake mean much and more to millions of men; with how much the more anxiety and zealous care such questions are asked. And the answers must be absolutely and certainly favorable or even war with all its horrors, is a preferable substitute for submission of such quarrels to a wrong tribunal.

The two systems, then, are this day on their trial before men. No right-minded human creature is in doubt as to which system he prefers. Then every right-minded man should bend all his energies to giving the advantage in the race to the system of arbitration. This can only be done by establishing it in the best possible form, surrounded by the most favoring and favorable conditions.

The importance of this can hardly be overestimated. Perhaps it can best be shown by a statement of the development of the two systems and noting the parallelism to be drawn between war and arbitration in international law and trial by combat and trial by court or jury in municipal law.

THE USES OF WAR

War has had and may yet have its good issues. Its true function has been to weld families into tribes, tribes into nations and nations into larger sovereignties. It is probable that in the "grand scheme of things entire" it has not yet exhausted its proper activities. So long as the so-called inferior races exist, there must go on a somewhat different treatment of them than we accord to the superior, or else the unfit will inhabit the choice places of the earth, and crowd out the relatively more highly civilized. Either our treatment of the Indians was practically right, or we should now restore to the remaining tribes the inheritance of their fathers-a conclusion so practically absurd as to shake the premise from which it is derived.

But these conditions do not prevent the establishment of international arbitration among the nations of high civilization known as the world powers.

It is, however, possible that before the scheme of international arbitration shall take its place as a resolver of the disputes of men, wars shall go on until nations have been welded into sovereignties, divided only by lines of racial divergence. Should one race rule the earth and all the people therein, we would be threatened with civil wars breaking up the coalesced molecule into its component parts.

To avoid this perspective of future strife and carnage, the alternative is presented of now adopting a system of international arbitration. War and arbitration have come into direct competition and the fittest will survive-bearing in mind always that the fittest is not always the best, but the fittest having due regard to the environment. The

illustrations drawn from parasitic life make the meaning clear. Hence if we are to advance the cause of the institution we favor, we must make the environment as favorable as possible for its survival as the fitter of the two.

THE CONDITIONS NECESSARY TO MAKE ARBITRATION THE FITTER

INSTITUTION

Before any institution in the world can be superseded by another, that other must prove itself capable of producing better results. Before international arbitration can become the preferred method of settling national quarrels in place of war-the resort to brute forcemany conditions must concur.

First: The moral natures of men-and especially the natures of the politicians in high place guiding and directing national conduct-must have reached the point of not desiring national worldly advantage in lands, or goods, or influence, beyond what an impartial judge would award to the interests in dispute.

Second: The horror of war with his "grim visage and fierce front" shall be ingrained to such an extent as to deter selfish action threatened with such dire consequences.

Third: The honesty, impartiality, learning and well balanced justice of the decisions rendered by tribunals of international arbitration shall be so apparent that the honest and just disputant can find no objection to delivering up his interests for disposal to such fair and capable hands.

The three essentials named need not all be realized in their entirety to produce a resort to international arbitration. As matters now stand, the decision "to arbitrate or not to arbitrate" is one of mixed policy, dependent chiefly upon the importance of the question involved, and next upon a due balancing of expediency, having regard to the second and third conditions above mentioned as they may exist for the particular case.

So far as concerns the first prerequisite, our moral natures in this, the beginning of the twentieth century, may be assumed to be much improved upon the conditions existing in Europe in the eighteenth century, which witnessed the successive partitions of Poland. Yet the insistence of Russia upon the continued occupation of Manchuria, in

violation of the treaty of Peking (1901), leading to the late RussoJapanese war, can hardly be cited in proof of this proposition.

Assuming, however, an improved moral nature in the nation which loves justice and abhors war, the difficulty of satisfactorily realizing the third prerequisite is the true bar to the customary adoption of international arbitration.

For it must be admitted that the decisions of international arbitrators, in the past, have been as full of human frailty, human prejudice, and human error, as other things that are human.

If, then, the cause of international arbitration is to be advanced, the best efforts of all men's minds must be directed to the improvement of these conditions, to the investigation of the causes of the mistakes and disappointments of the past, and to devising ways and means of obviating them so far as may be possible in the future.

THE PARALLEL BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

In international law, itself, the comparatively short time within which the struggle between war and arbitration has been going on furnishes us with scant materials from which to derive lessons of experience. Fortunately there exists so close an analogy between the evolution of international law and the evolution of municipal law that from the experience gained in the history of municipal law much may be learned as to the proper development of international law. For there is a curious parallelism between the development of persons and subject matter in the evolution of municipal law and the development of persons and subject matter in the evolution of international law.

Municipal law has, for its units, the persons within the state, and, for its field, the domain of the individual sovereignty and the relations of its persons within that domain.

International law has, for its units, the sovereign states themselves, and, for its field, the inhabited globe and the relations of its units within that space.

Municipal law has reached a comparatively high stage of development Its central powers have established tribunals to the arbitrament of which its units are compelled to submit their private quarrels. Thus we have compulsory arbitration in municipal affairs and the

absence of private war. will later show.

That this condition was not always thus, we

International law is in its infancy. It has no sovereign central power capable of forcing its units to submit their disputes to compulsory arbitration. And it has no tribunal instituted for the purpose of passing upon such disputes fixed and ready for the litigation when presented. Its units are free to accept or reject arbitration, are free to decide their quarrels by the sword-public war.

Yet in historic time within the domain of municipal law, or rather the sovereignty which should have acted and did not act, there long existed the system of private war for the settlement of disputes between men; just as there now exists, in international law, the system of public war for the settlement of disputes between nations. And the evolution of affairs whereby, within the systems of municipal law, private war has been superseded by compulsory court proceedings is a course of events which is perhaps prophetic of what is to happen in the domain of international law, when public war shall be superseded by the system of compulsory arbitration.

So the study of the struggle for existence between the early forms of settlement of disputes between men in municipal laws and the final survival of the fittest institution by the establishment of compulsory arbitration in the courts may help us the better to understand how to advance the cause of international arbitration, and how to make it the survivor and the fittest in its struggle for existence in international law with its competitor-war.

The struggle for existence in municipal law between private war and the courts; and later, between trial by battle and trial by court or jury in the courts themselves, foreshadowed this later struggle for existence in international law between war and international arbitration.

PRIVATE WAR VS. THE COURTS

Primitive society, whether founded on patriarchal or some other system, existed before the establishment of any institution similar to our courts for the settlement of disputes among its members. The triune structure of the social organism, chief, distinguished few, and undistinguished many, constituting the social organism formation in sociology, analogous to the germ, nucleolus and nucleus, constituting the cell formation in physiology, existed long before the differentiation