The recently concluded arbitration between the United States and the Netherlands relative to the ownership of the Island of Palmas, which resulted in the decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration that this bit of territory belongs to the latter country, involved points of interest to the international lawyer out of all proportion to the importance of the res.1 In this respect it would of course be no novelty in the annals of national jurisprudence. In addition to many interesting matters of arbitral procedure, the case involved most of the international substantive law of real property, if it may be so called.

The treaties negotiated between the Soviet Republics and the Western and Oriental nations are numerous and varied. The official records of the Commissariat for Foreign Affairs make a distinction between political treaties, agreements on questions of law, conventions regarding disputed frontiers, economic agreements, liaison, transportation and public health agreements.

A clearer definition of the scope and purposes of the Pan American Union and a reaffirmation of faith and confidence in the purposes of the institution and the principles which it represents, are among the outstanding accomplishments of the Sixth International Conference of American States, which met at Habana from January 16 to February 20,1928. The discussions by the committee appointed to consider the organization of the Union demonstrated anew the interest of the representatives of the twenty-one Republics in the institution and their desire to make it of the greatest possible influence in cementing the bonds of economic, social and cultural union between the nations of the Western Hemisphere. Throughout the proceedings it was clearly evident that all the delegates were animated by these motives. Differences of opinion that developed were not of a fundamental character, affecting the existence of the Union itself, but related to the extent of the powers to be granted to the institution and to matters of internal organization. At the same time the results of the deliberations definitely settled the doubts and possible misunderstandings that had previously existed with respect to the extent of the political authority that the Union might exercise.

More than seven years have now passed since the treaty creating the Permanent Court of International Justice was opened for signature at Geneva.1 For more than six years, the court has been at work,2 and it is now holding its fourteenth session. In this period, it has handed down eleven judgments and fifteen advisory opinions, and has thus made a substantial contribution to the better ordering of the international life of our time.3 Few if any informed people had envisaged such a large measure of usefulness for the court before it was established, and most of us had not dared to hope that in such a short time it would have builded its foundations so firmly. As an agency for the extension of the application of law in international affairs, the court now holds an assured position, and it offers promise of large influence toward reducing international friction in the future. It now seems improbable that the world will ever again be willing to be without this or a similar tribunal, and if its present organization is not to be deemed as final, it seems clear that the existing court must serve a,s the basis of any future attempt to achieve a better administration of international justice according to law.

The readers of the American Journal of International Law may like to have a brief account of the constitution of this tribunal and of its work up to the end of its last sitting in May, 1928.

Although from the point of view of scientific jurists, it may be true that the awards of the tribunal, limited as it is to the interpretation of a single instrument, cannot be said to be of importance as laying down or even developing any general principles of international law, the practical importance of the decisions has been great, and thus the work of this piece of international mechanism is of interest to students of international affairs.

The Sixth International Conference of American States which met at Havana on January 16, 1928, adopted a resolution, proposed by the Argentine delegation, recommending to the Governing Board of the Pan American Union “ the calling of a special conference of representatives of the Union, to be held at such place and date as it may designate, for the purpose of studying in its amplest scope the problem of the Inter-American protection of trade marks.” 1 The conclusions of that conference are to be forwarded, through the medium of the Pan American Union, to the consideration of the different governments without the need of a later reference to the Seventh International Conference of American States.