Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:09:38.222Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Convention for the Peaceful Adjustment of International Differences1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Amos S. Hershey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The First Hague Conference had as its main object a consideration of a “ possible reduction of the excessive armaments which weigh upon all nations,” or, at least, a discussion of the possibility of “ putting an end to the progressive development of the present armaments.” The conference early realized that even a limitation of the increase of military and naval expenditure was impracticable at that time, and devoted its chief energies to the secondary purpose for which it was called, viz., to discuss and devise “ the most effectual means of insuring to all peoples the benefits of a real and durable peace.”

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , January 1908 , pp. 29 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1908

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Professor Hershey was present at the Second Hague Conference as correspondent of the New York Evening Post and the Boston Evening Transcript.—Managing Editor.

References

2 The Czar’s Rescript of August 24, 1898.

3 Ibid.

4 Holls, Peace Conference, p. 8.

5 Article 16 of the Arbitration Treaty of 1899.

6 See an article by the writer in the New York Independent for September 13, 1906.

7 Article 8 of the Arbitration Treaty. This article was drafted by Mr. Holls,. secretary of the American delegation.

8 Hershey, The International Law and Diplomacy of the Russo-Japanese War,. pp. 347–348.

9 See Article 2 of the Arbitration Treaty of 1899.

10 Hershey, op. cit., ch. 8, passim.

11 Among the World’s Peace Makers, by Hayne Davis, page 180.

12 The first committee, designated as Comité A, and placed under the presidency of M. L. Bourgeois, was composed of Baron Marschall and Mr. Kriege, for Germany; General Porter and Mr. Scott for the United States; Mr. Drago for the Argentine Republic; Mr. Mgrey de Kapos-Mere and Mr. Lammasch for Austria-Hungary; Baron Guillaume, reporter, for Belgium; Mr. Ruy Barbosa for Brazil; Baron d’Estournelle3 de Constant and Mr. Fromageot for France; Sir Edward Fry for Great Britain; Mr. Streit for Greece; Count Tornielli, Mr. Pompilj, and Mr. Fusinato for Italy; Mr. Esteva and Mr. de La Barra for Mexico; Mr. Lange for Norway; Mr. Asser for the Netherlands; Mr. d’Oliveira for Portugal; Mr. de Martens for Russia; Mr. Milovanovitch for Servia; Mr. de Hammarskjöld for Sweden; Mr. Carlin for Switzerland.

The other committee, designated as Comité C, was placed under the presidency of Mr. Fusinato; it was composed of Mr. Kriege, Mr. Scott, Mr. Lammasch, Baron Guillaume, reporter; Mr. Fromageot, Sir Edward Pry, Mr. Crowe, Mr. Lange, and Mr. d’Oliveira. A third committee (B) considered the establishment of a court of arbitral justice.

13 By Mr. W. T. Stead in Le Courrier de la Conférence for July 4, 1907.

14 For the text of this article, see supra, p. 31.

15 Citation from the writer’s letter to the New York Evening Post for June 15, 1907.

16 On the Haitian proposition, see M. le Baron Guillaume’s Report, pp. 5 and 201, and Le Courrier de la Conférence for July 9, 1907.

17 See supra, p. 32.

18 See the Report of M. le Baron Guillaume, pp. 6 and 202.

19 In the Russian draft the word independence is substituted for the phrase vital interests.

20 For the Russian text, see Baron Guillaume’s Report, p. 195. The additions and variations of the Russian draft have been placed in italics. There is also an important omission of the phrase “ parties who have not been able to come to an agreement by diplomatic methods.”

21 For the views of Professor de Martens on commissions of inquiry, see the Report of Baron Guillaume, pp. 6–7; Première Commission, troisieme seance, pp. 3–4; Le Courrier de la Conférence for July 10, 1907; and Holls, op. cit., pp. 206–210.

22 Le Courrier de la Conférence for July 10, 1907; and Holls, op. cit., pp. 210–214.

23 From the writer’s letter to the New York Evening Post for June 15, 1907.

24 See infra, pp. 41–45.

25 See supra, p. 36.

26 Baron Guillaume’s Report, p. 19.

27 Holls, Peace Conference, p. 269.

28 Baron Guillaume’s Report, pp. 25–26, 176, 218, 219; Le Courrier de to Conférence for October 2, 1907; Holls, op. cit., pp. 267–269.

29 In the New York Independent for November 21, 1907.

30 This statement is not quite accurate, for a commendation of the Peruvian proposition by the writer appeared in the New York Evening Post for July 27, 1907.

31 In an article entitled “ The Coming Peace Conference at The Hague,” published in the New York Independent for September 13, 1906, the writer called attention to the importance of appointing a “ permanent committee to sit during the interim [i. e., between successive conferences] in order to watch over international interests, to use its influence in behalf of peace and the enforcement of law, and report upon desirable changes, or improvements in international law at the meeting of the following congress or conference.” This suggestion was scarcely noticed at the time.

32 A Russian amendment proposed to prohibit the practice altogether. It had the support of Great Britain and the United States. See Baron Guillaume’a Report, p. 36.

33 For the arguments pro and con, see the Report by Baron Guillaume, p. 42; Le Courrier de la Conférence for August 25, 1907; and Holls, op. cit., pp. 286–303.

34 Le Courrier de la Conférence for October 17, 1907.