Chapter III: of the convention for the pacific settlement of (1)

international disputes adopted at The Hague, and that it shall
determine, in so far as there shall be no agreement between
the parties, the justice, and the amount of the debt, the time
and mode of payment thereof.’ …

{719}

"The third convention relates to the opening of hostilities
and provides, in Article I, that the contracting powers
recognize that hostilities between them should not commence
without notice, which shall be either in the form of a formal
declaration of war or of an ultimatum in the nature of a
declaration of conditional war. This is to protect
belligerents from surprise and bad faith. Article 11 is meant
to safeguard the rights of neutrals. The state of war should
be notified without delay to neutral powers, and shall only
affect them after the receipt of a notification, which may be
sent even by telegram.’ …

"The fourth convention concerns the laws and customs of land
warfare, [and is] a revision of the convention of 1899. It is
highly technical and codifies in a humanitarian spirit the
warfare of the present.

"The fifth convention attempts to regulate the rights and
duties of neutral powers and of neutral persons in case of
land warfare. Short, but important, its guiding spirit is
expressed in the opening paragraph of the preamble, namely, to
render more certain the rights and duties of neutral powers in
case of warfare upon land and to regulate the situation of
belligerent refugees in neutral territory. …

"The sixth is the convention concerning enemy merchant ships
found in enemy ports or upon the high seas at the outbreak of
hostilities. Custom forbids the capture of enemy vessels
within the port of the enemy on the outbreak of hostilities
and allows them a limited time to discharge or load their
cargo and depart for their port of destination. The attempt
was made to establish this custom or privilege as a right. The
proposition, however, met with serious opposition and, instead
of the right, the convention states that it is desirable that
enemy ships be permitted freely to leave the port. The
convention, therefore, was restrictive rather than declaratory
of existing international practice. The same might be said of
another provision of the convention concerning the treatment
of enemy merchant ships upon the high seas. It may be said
that the expression of a desire is tantamount to a positive
declaration, but, strictly construed, the convention is not
progressive. It lessens rights acquired by custom and usage,
although it does, indeed, render the privilege granted
universal. The American delegation, therefore, refrained from
signing the convention.

"The seventh convention deals with the transformation of
merchant ships into ships of war, and it must be said that the
positive results of this convention are of little or no
practical value. The burning question was whether merchant
ships might be transformed into men-of-war upon the high seas.
As the transformation of merchant vessels into war vessels
upon the high seas caused an international commotion during
the recent Russo-Japanese war. Great Britain and the United
States insisted that the transfer should only be allowed
within the territorial jurisdiction of the transforming power.
Some of the continental states, on the contrary, refused to
renounce the exercise of the alleged right. The great maritime
states were thus divided, and as the question was too simple
and too plain to admit of compromise, it was agreed to drop it
entirely for the present. In order, however, that something
might remain of the careful and elaborate discussions of the
subject, a series of regulations was drawn up regarding the
transformation of merchant ships into vessels of war,
declaratory of international custom. … Indirectly, the
rightfulness or wrongfulness of privateering was concerned,
and inasmuch as the United States would not consent to abolish
privateering unless the immunity of private property be
safeguarded, the American delegation abstained from signing
the convention.

"The eighth convention relates to the placing of submarine
automatic mines of contact, a subject of present and special
interest to belligerents; while the interest of the neutral is
very general. … Mines break from their moorings and endanger
neutral life and property. The conference, therefore, desires
to regulate the use of mines in such a way as not to deprive
the belligerents of a recognized and legitimate means of
warfare, but to restrict, as far as possible, the damage to
the immediate belligerents. …

"The ninth convention forbade the bombardment by naval forces
of undefended harbors, villages, towns, or buildings. The
presence, however, of military stores would permit bombardment
of such ports for the sole purpose of destroying the stores,
provided they were not destroyed or delivered up upon request.
Notice, however, should be given of the intention to bombard.
In like manner, the convention permitted the bombardment of
such undefended places if provisions were not supplied upon
requisition to the naval force. Bombardment, however, was not
allowed for the collection of mere money contributions. …

"The tenth convention adapted to maritime warfare the
principles of the Geneva Convention of 1906. …

"The eleventh convention relates to certain restrictions in
the exercise of the right of capture in maritime war. It is a
modest document, but is all that was saved from the wreck of
the immunity of private property. The American delegation
urged the abolition of the right of capture of unoffending
enemy private property upon the high seas, but great maritime
powers such as Great Britain, France, Russia, and Japan were
unwilling to relinquish this means of bringing the enemy to
terms. …

"The twelfth convention sought to establish an international
court of prize, and there only remains the ratification of
this convention by the contracting powers in order to call
into being this great and beneficent institution. For years
enlightened opinion has protested against the right of
belligerents to pass final judgment upon the lawfulness of the
capture of neutral property, and it is a pleasure to be able
to state that the interests of the neutrals in the neutral
prize are henceforward to be placed in the hands of neutral
judges with a representation of the belligerents, in order
that the rights of all concerned may be carefully weighed and
considered. …

{720}

"The thirteenth convention concerns and seeks to regulate the
rights and duties of neutral powers in case of maritime war.
This is an elaborate codification of the rights and duties of
neutrals in which the conference essayed to generalize and
define on the one hand the rights of neutrals and the
correlative duties of the belligerents, and in the second
place to set forth in detail the duties of neutrals, thus
safeguarding the rights of belligerents in certain phases of
maritime warfare. … The result, however, was unsatisfactory to
some of the larger maritime powers, which prefer their present
regulations on the subject of neutrality or which were
unwilling to accept the modifications proposed. The United
States was not satisfied with certain provisions of the
convention, and reserved the right to study the project in
detail before expressing a final opinion. It therefore
abstained from voting and signing.

"The fourteenth convention is a reenactment of the declaration
of 1899 forbidding the launching of projectiles and explosives
from balloons. The original declaration was agreed to for a
period of five years, and as this period had expired the
powers were without a regulation on the subject. The
reenactment provided that the present declaration shall
extend, not merely for a period of five years, but to the end
of the Third Conference of Peace."

Reprinted in
_Senate Document Number 433, 60th Congress, 1st Session._

Appended to these Conventions are the Resolutions or
Declarations of accepted Principles embodied in the "Final
Act"; and these are far from being the least important of the
fruits of the Conference. They need presentation in full.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST:
Final Act of the Second International Peace Conference.

"At a series of meetings, held from the 15th June to the 18th
October, 1907, in which the above Delegates [named in a
preamble] were throughout animated by the desire to realize,
in the fullest possible measure, the generous views of the
august initiator of the Conference and the intentions of their
Governments, the Conference drew up for submission for
signature by the Plenipotentiaries, the text of the
Conventions and of the Declaration enumerated below [named in
their order, as summarized above] and annexed to the present
Act:—

"These Conventions and Declaration shall form so many separate
Acts. These Acts shall be dated this day, and may be signed up
to the 30th June, 1908, at The Hague, by the Plenipotentiaries
of the Powers represented at the Second Peace Conference.

"The Conference, actuated by the spirit of mutual agreement
and concession characterizing its deliberations, has agreed
upon the following Declaration, which, while reserving to each
of the Powers represented full liberty of action as regards
voting, enables them to affirm the principles which they
regard as unanimously admitted;—

"It is unanimous—

"1. In admitting the principle of compulsory arbitration.

"2. In declaring that certain disputes, in particular those
relating to the interpretation and application of the
provisions of International Agreements, may be submitted to
compulsory arbitration without any restriction.

"Finally, it is unanimous in proclaiming that, although it has
not yet been found feasible to conclude a Convention in this
sense, nevertheless the divergences of opinion which have come
to light have not exceeded the bounds of judicial controversy,
and that, by working together here during the past four
months, the collected Powers not only have learnt to
understand one another and to draw closer together, but have
succeeded in the course of this long collaboration in evolving
a very lofty conception of the common welfare of humanity.

"The Conference has further unanimously adopted the following
Resolution:—

"The Second Peace Conference confirms the Resolution adopted
by the Conference of 1899 in regard to the limitation of
military expenditure; and inasmuch as military expenditure has
considerably increased in almost every country since that
time, the Conference declares that it is eminently desirable
that the Governments should resume the serious examination of
this question.

"It has besides expressed the following opinions:—

"1. The Conference calls the attention of the Signatory Powers
to the advisability of adopting the annexed draft Convention
for the creation of a Judicial Arbitration Court, and of
bringing it into force as soon as an agreement has been
reached respecting the selection of the Judges and the
constitution of the Court.

"2. The Conference expresses the opinion that, in case of war,
the responsible authorities, civil as well as military, should
make it their special duty to ensure and safeguard the
maintenance of specific relations, more especially of the
commercial and industrial relations between the inhabitants of
the belligerent States and neutral countries.

"3. The Conference expresses the opinion that the Powers
should regulate, by special Treaties, the position, as regards
military charges, of foreigners residing within their
territories.

"4. The Conference expresses the opinion that the preparation
of regulations relative to the laws and customs of naval war
should figure in the programme of the next Conference, and
that in any case the Powers may apply, as far as possible, to
war by sea the principles of the Convention relative to the
Laws and Customs of War on land.

"Finally, the Conference recommends to the Powers the assembly
of a Third Peace Conference, which might be held within a
period corresponding to that which has elapsed since the
preceding Conference, at a date to be fixed by common
agreement between the Powers, and it calls their attention to
the necessity of preparing the programme of this Third
Conference a sufficient time in advance to ensure its
deliberations being conducted with the necessary authority and
expedition.

"In order to attain this object the Conference considers that
it would be very desirable that, some two years before the
probable date of the meeting, a preparatory Committee should
be charged by the Governments with the task of collecting the
various proposals to be submitted to the Conference, of
ascertaining what subjects are ripe for embodiment in an
International Regulation, and of preparing a programme which
the Governments should decide upon in sufficient time to
enable it to be carefully examined by the countries
interested. This Committee should further be intrusted with
the task of proposing a system of organization and procedure
for the Conference itself.

"In faith whereof the Plenipotentiaries have signed the
present Act and have affixed their seals thereto."

{721}

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST:
Draft Convention recommended for the Creation of
a Judicial Arbitration Court.

The following are the more important provisions of the
"annexed draft Convention for the creation of a Judicial
Arbitration Court" which the Signatory Powers are asked, in
the first of the "Opinions" expressed above, to consider "the
advisability of adopting":

"Article I.
With a view to promoting the cause of arbitration, the
Contracting Powers agree to constitute, without altering the
status of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, a Judicial
Arbitration Court, of free and easy access, composed of Judges
representing the various juridical systems of the world, and
capable of insuring continuity in jurisprudence of
arbitration.

"Article II.
The Judicial Arbitration Court is composed of Judges and
Deputy Judges chosen from persons of the highest moral
reputation, and all fulfilling conditions qualifying them, in
their respective countries, to occupy high legal posts, or be
jurists of recognized competence in matters of international
law. The Judges and Deputy Judges of the Court are appointed,
as far as possible, from the members of the Permanent Court of
Arbitration. The appointment shall be made within the six
months following the ratification of the present Convention.

"Article III.
The Judges and Deputy Judges are appointed for a period of
twelve years, counting from the date on which the appointment
is notified to the Administrative Council created by the
Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International
Disputes. Their appointments can be renewed. Should a Judge or
Deputy Judge die or retire, the vacancy is filled in the
manner in which his appointment was made. In this case, the
appointment is made for a fresh period of twelve years.

"Article IV.
The Judges of the Judicial Arbitration Court are equal and
rank according to the date on which their appointment was
notified. The Judge who is senior in point of age takes
precedence when the date of notification is the same. The
Deputy Judges are assimilated, in the exercise of their
functions, with the Judges. They rank, however, below the
latter.

"Article V.
The Judges enjoy diplomatic privileges and immunities in the
exercise of their functions, outside their own country. Before
taking their seat, the Judges and Deputy Judges must swear,
before the Administrative Council, or make a solemn
affirmation to exercise their functions impartially and
conscientiously.

"Article VI.
The Court annually nominates three Judges to form a special
delegation and three more to replace them should the necessity
arise. They may be re-elected. They are balloted for. The
persons who secure the largest number of votes are considered
elected. The delegation itself elects its President, who, in
default of a majority, is appointed by lot. A member of the
delegation cannot exercise his duties when the Power which
appointed him, or of which he is a national, is one of the
parties. The members of the delegation are to conclude all
matters submitted to them, even if the period for which they
have been appointed Judges has expired.

"Article VII.
A Judge may not exercise his judicial functions in any case in
which he has, in any way whatever, taken part in the decision
of a National Tribunal, of a Tribunal of Arbitration, or of a
Commission of Inquiry, or has figured in the suit as counsel
or advocate for one of the parties. A Judge cannot act as
agent or advocate before the Judicial Arbitration Court or the
Permanent Court of Arbitration, before a Special Tribunal of
Arbitration or a Commission of Inquiry, nor act for one of the
parties in any capacity whatsoever so long as his appointment
lasts. …

"Article X.
The Judges may not accept from their own Government or from
that of any other Power any remuneration for services
connected with their duties in their capacity of members of
the Court.

"Article XI.
The seat of the Judicial Court of Arbitration is at The Hague,
and cannot be transferred, unless absolutely obliged by
circumstances, elsewhere. …

"Article XII.
The Administrative Council fulfills with regard to the
Judicial Court of Arbitration the same functions as to the
Permanent Court of Arbitration.

"Article XIV.
The Court meets in session once a year. The session opens the
third Wednesday in June and lasts until all the business on
the agenda has been transacted. …

"Article XVII. The Judicial Court of Arbitration is competent
to deal with all cases submitted to it, in virtue either of a
general undertaking to have recourse to arbitration or of a
special agreement.

"Article XXXII.
The Court itself draws up its own rules of procedure, which
must be communicated to the Contracting Powers. After the
ratification of the present Convention the Court shall meet as
early as possible in order to elaborate these rules, elect the
President and Vice-President, and appoint the members of the
delegation.

"Article XXXIII.
The Court may propose modifications in the provisions of the
present Convention concerning procedure. These proposals are
communicated through the Netherland Government to the
Contracting Powers, which will consider together as to the
measures to be taken."

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST:
The sequent International Naval Conference
at London in 1908-1909.

The action of the Peace Conference which contemplated the
establishment of an International Prize Court (embodied in the
Twelfth Convention described above) had a sequel in the next
year, resulting from the suggestion by the British Government
that, preliminary to the creation of such a court, the prior
holding of an International Naval Conference was desirable,
for the purpose which it explained in the following words:
"Having regard to the importance attached by his Majesty’s
Government to the setting up of that Court, they decided to
take the initiative in inviting the co-operation of the Powers
whose belligerent rights would be most directly affected, in
formulating in precise terms a set of rules relative to the
law of prize, which should be recognized as embodying
doctrines held to be generally binding as part of the existing
law of nations." In connection with this suggestion a list of
questions was submitted to the several Governments consulted,
"on which his Majesty’s Government, after careful examination,
considered that an understanding should if possible be
reached, and which would therefore appropriately constitute
the programme of a special naval conference to meet in
London."

{722}

The questions were as follows:

"(_a._)
Contraband, including the circumstances under which particular
articles can be considered as contraband; the penalties for
their carriage; the immunity of a ship from search when under
convoy; and the rules with regard to compensation where
vessels have been seized but have been found in fact only to
be carrying innocent cargo;

"(_b._)
Blockade, including the questions as to the locality where
seizure can be effected, and the notice that is necessary
before a ship can be seized;

"(_c._)
The doctrine of continuous voyage in respect both of
contraband and of blockade;

"(_d._)
The legality of the destruction of neutral vessels prior to
their condemnation by a Prize Court;

"(_e._)
The rules as to neutral ships or persons rendering ‘unneutral
service’ (‘assistance hostile’);

"(_f._)
The legality of the conversion of a merchant-vessel into a
war-ship on the high seas;

"(_g._)
The rules as to the transfer of merchant-vessels from a
belligerent to a neutral flag during or in contemplation of
hostilities;

"(_h._)
The question whether the nationality or the domicile of the
owner should be adopted as the dominant factor in deciding
whether property is enemy property."

Responses to the British invitation by the greater naval
Powers were favorable, and the resulting International Naval
Conference had sittings in London from December 4, 1908, until
February 26, 1909. The Powers sending representatives to take
part in it were Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia,
Austria-Hungary, Italy, the United States, Japan, Spain,
Holland. A report of the proceedings and conclusions arrived
at was made public on the 22d of March. On two, only, of the
questions, proposed by Great Britain, no agreement was
reached, and these were left open,—namely; "the legality of
the conversion of a merchant-vessel into a war-ship on the
high seas, and the question whether the nationality or the
domicile of the owner should be regarded as the dominant
factor in deciding the character, neutral or enemy, of
property." Original differences on other questions were
compromised.

A serious difficulty in the undertakings of the Conference was
occasioned by the fact that the Constitution of the United
States is held to preclude any right of appeal from decisions
of its Supreme Court. What was done to overcome this
difficulty is explained in the report of the British Delegates
as follows: "The Conference was asked to express its
acceptance of the principle that, as regards countries in
which such constitutional difficulty arose, all proceedings in
the International Prize Court should be treated as a rehearing
of the case _de novo_, in the form of an action for
compensation, whereby the validity of the judgments of the
national courts would remain unaffected, whilst the duty of
carrying out a decision of the International Court ordering
the payment of compensation would fall upon the government
concerned. The proposal was further coupled with the
suggestion that the jurisdiction of the International Prize
Court might be extended, by agreement between two or more of
the signatory Powers, to cover cases at present excluded from
its jurisdiction by the express terms of the Prize Court
Convention, and that in the hearing of such cases that court
should have the functions, and follow the procedure, laid down
in the Draft Convention relative to the creation of a Judicial
Arbitration Court, which was annexed to the Final Act of the
Second Peace Conference of 1907.

"Great hesitation was felt in approaching these questions. It
was undeniable that they lay wholly outside the programme
which the Conference had been invited to discuss, and to which
the Powers accepting the invitation had expressly assented. It
was, however, not disputed that so much of the United States
proposal as related to the difficulties in the way of the
ratification of the Prize Court Convention was in so far
germane to the labours of the Conference, as these also were
avowedly directed to preparing the way for the more general
acceptance of the Prize Court Convention. As it must clearly
be desired by all countries interested in the establishment of
the International Prize Court that the United States should be
one of the Powers submitting to its jurisdiction and bound by
its decisions, the Conference thought it right,
notwithstanding its lack of formal authority, to go so far as
to express the wish (‘vœu’) which stands recorded in the final
Protocol of its proceedings, and of which the substance is
that the attention of the various Governments represented is
called by their delegates to the desirability of allowing such
countries as are precluded by the terms of their constitution
from ratifying the Prize Court Convention in its present form,
to do so with a reservation in the sense of the first part of
the United States proposal. On the other hand, the question of
setting up the Judicial Arbitration Court, which seemed to
have no necessary connexion with the Prize Court Convention,
was decided by all the delegations, except that which had
brought it forward, to be one which the Conference could not
discuss."

_Parliamentary Papers, 1909:
Papers by Command, 4554._
Also,
_London Times, March 22, 1909._

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST:
Central American Peace Conference at Washington.
General Treaty of Peace and Amity.
Convention establishing a Central American Court of Justice.

See (in this Volume)
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1907.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907-1908.
Waning of the Military Passion in France.

Two very striking indications of the cooling in the French
people of the militant passion which made them in former times
one of the most warlike of the European races have been
afforded within the past three years. The first appeared in
the winter of 1907, when a Paris newspaper of great
circulation collected votes from its readers on the question,
"Who was the Greatest Frenchman of the Nineteenth Century?"
Much interest in the query was excited, and more than
15,000,000 [votes] were said to have been cast.
{723}
From any prior generation the answer of a big majority would
undoubtedly have been, "Napoleon Bonaparte"; but the French of
the Twentieth Century have developed so different an estimate of
human greatness that Louis Pasteur, the Man of Science, led
the poll, receiving 1,838,103 votes; while Victor Hugo came
next below him, by somewhat more than a hundred thousand
votes, and Gambetta was put third in the list. Napoleon
received only the fourth place of honor in the estimate of
fifteen millions of the French of these days.

About a year later the same change was betokened in a hardly
less significant way, by a speech from the Prime Minister of
France. The occasion of the address was the inauguration of a
monument to M. Scheurer-Kestner, who had been vice-president
of the French Senate when the Dreyfus iniquities began to be
dragged out of darkness into light, and who was one of the few
men in public life then who strove heroically to have the
truth ascertained and justice done. Scheurer-Kestner was an
Alsatian, and this fact gave Premier Clemenceau an opportunity
to break silence on the sore subject of the loss of Alsace,
which French statesmen have not ventured to refer to since the
heart-breaking surrender of 1871. His breaking of that silence
was meant to break, and assuredly does break, the long
brooding of revengefulness in French hearts which has been a
menace to the peace of Europe for nearly 40 years.

"I do not fear," he said, "to call up the memory of that
bloody past. I am mindful of the responsibility which belongs
to my office, and I can speak without constraint of events
which have entered into history. I can proclaim feelings which
we cannot repudiate—which we cannot even hide without lowering
ourselves." And this is his open proclamation of the feeling
to which France has come, in its thought of Alsace:

"We received France issuing from frightful trial. To rebuild
her in her legitimate power of expansion as well as in her
dignity as a great moral person, we have no need either to
hate or to lie, nor even to recriminate. We look to the
future. Sons of a great history, jealously careful of the
lofty impulses native to us, in which the civilizing virtue of
France was fashioned, we can look in quiet of soul on the
descendants of strong races which for centuries have measured
themselves with the men of our lands in battlefields beyond
numbering. Two such great rival peoples, for the very honor of
their rivalry, have a like interest to keep their respect, the
one for the other."

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907-1909.
German Opposition to the "Navy Fever,"
in High Circles as well as Low.
Views of Herr Von Holstein and Admiral Galster.

How far the naval ambitions and costly naval policy of Germany
are supported by public opinion is much of a question. It is
certain that they are a cause of wide discontent in the
industrial classes, and no less certain that the weightiest
influence behind them is that of the Emperor, who stimulates
the exertions of a powerful Navy League. That there is an
effective disapproval of the policy in high political circles
has been shown lately by the publication of some expressions
on the subject by the late Herr von Holstein, who was for many
years the chief of the Political Department of the German
Foreign Office,—the mentor and prompter from behind the scenes
of several successive Chancellors of the Empire. In some
reminiscences of this important official, by an intimate
friend, Herr von Rath, who published them in September, 1909,
he is quoted as having, in 1907, denounced what he called
"navy fever" in Germany in these strong words;

"This dangerous disease is fed upon the fear of an attack by
England, which is not in accordance with facts. The effect
of the ‘navy fever’ is pernicious in three directions—in
domestic politics on account of the intrigues of the Navy
League, which also produce the greatest ill-feeling in South
Germany; in the finances on account of the prohibitive
expenditure; in foreign politics on account of the mistrust
which these armaments awake. England sees in them a menace
which keeps her bound to the side of France. At the same time,
even with taxation strained to the utmost limit, the
construction of a fleet able to cope with the united fleets of
England and France is entirely out of the question. From the
menace which everybody in England sees in German naval
construction the present Liberal Government in England will
not draw serious conclusions. It will be different when the
Conservatives come into power. The danger of war between
Germany on the one hand and England and France on the other is
even today playing a part in the political calculations of
other countries. Against armaments on land nobody will offer
any objection, because they are justified by the needs of
defence. In our naval armaments several Powers see a perpetual
menace.

"Even among Parliamentary Deputies there are many who condemn
the ‘navy fever,’ but no one of them will take the
responsibility of refusing to vote ships, a responsibility
which would recoil upon him in the event of a defeat at sea.
Anybody who to-day makes a stand against the prevailing ‘navy
fever’ is attacked from all sides as wanting in patriotism,
but a few years hence the justice of my opinion will be
established."

According to Herr von Rath, Herr von Holstein declared in
February, 1909, three months before his death, that the navy
question transcended all others in importance. He is said to
have watched with approval the campaign which is still more or
less vigorously carried on by Vice-Admiral Galster and others
against the "big ship policy," and to have said, with
reference to one of Admiral Galster’s pamphlets:—"The main
thing is to expose the lying and treacherous fallacy expressed
in the statement that every fresh ship is an addition to the
power of Germany—when every fresh ship causes England, to say
nothing of France, to build two ships."

The Vice-Admiral Galster here referred to contends that
submarines are more effective for defence than Dreadnoughts,
and he labors to persuade his fellow countrymen to be
satisfied with defensive armament, repudiating what creates
suspicion of offensive designs.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1908.
School Peace League, The American.

"The American School Peace League [organized in 1908] aims to
secure the cooperation of the educational public of America in
the project for promoting international justice and equity. …
It is hoped that every teacher in the country will subscribe
to the purposes of the League by becoming a member. Much of
the work will be done by committees, five of which have been
organized up to the present time. …

{724}

"The Committee on Meetings and Discussion aims to induce
educational associations throughout the country to place the
subject of internationalism on their programs. It also seeks
to stimulate literary and debating societies, in colleges and
schools, to study the subject. The Committee recommends to
educational associations the establishment of International
Committees, or Departments, for the purpose of making a
detailed study of the relation of the International Movement
to school instruction.

"The Committee on Publications intends to build up a body of
literature, dealing with the interrelation between peoples and
nations along political, industrial, and social lines. To this
end, the Committee purposes to issue, directly or indirectly,
a series of publications for the young, that may be used in
the geography, history, science, and literature classes; it
also intends to make a collection of the present songs which
illustrate the peace sentiment, and to stimulate the writing
of new ones.

"The Press Committee, which comprises some of the leading
educational editors of the country, is prepared to acquaint
teachers with the work of the League through the columns of
the educational magazines.

"The Committee on Teaching History will study the textbooks
with reference to the space devoted respectively to war and to
peace. It hopes to develop among teachers a sentiment which
shall lay emphasis on the arts of peace, and on the industrial
and social conditions of the people, rather than on campaigns,
battles, and other military details. It further aims to
arrange, if possible, courses in history to be given at summer
schools and teachers’ institutes, with special attention to
the growth of international friendship.

"The International Committee intends to make a constructive
study of international cooperation in activities which
particularly affect educational work."

_Mrs. Fannie Fern Andrews, Secretary.
Objects of the American School Peace League,_

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1908.
Evasion of the Conscription in Russia.

According to statistics published in the spring of 1909 by the
military organ, the _Russky Invalid_, the conscription of
1908 took place in the following circumstances. The annual
contingent had been fixed by the Duma at 456,481 men.
Altogether 1,281,655 conscripts were called up for
examination. Of this huge number 80,165 men failed to appear,
including 20,693 Jews, out of a total of 64,005 Jews
conscripted. The largest number of absentees was in the
provinces of Suwalki, Lomja, Plotzk, and Kovno. It is from
these provinces that a general exodus of Polish, Lithuanian,
and Jewish youths to America is noticeable. The actual number
found to be fit for military service in 1908 was 17,926 short
of the contingent fixed by the Duma. This deficiency was
composed of 943 Russians, 5,154 other Christians, 10,677 Jews,
1,082 Mahomedans, and 70 other non-Christians. The recruiting
stations noted a general falling off in the physique of the
conscripts.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
Changed Conditions in Europe making for Peace.

See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1909.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST:
International School of Peace.
Mr. Ginn’s Great Fund for Peace Propagandism.

Members of the various Boston peace organizations took part
last evening [December 15] in the formation of an
International School of Peace. The idea originated with Edwin
Ginn, the publisher, and the ‘house warming’ took place at No.
29 Beacon Street, where a room was appropriately adorned for
the occasion with the flags of many nations and large
portraits of Sumner and Cobden and other great international
leaders.

"Mr. Ginn welcomed the company in a speech wherein the motives
and experience which prompted him to found the school were set
forth. He explained what he hoped of the organization, how he
had for years appealed to various millionaires to unite with
him in some larger provision than any which existed for the
systematic education of the people in peace principles, the
response to which had been disappointing.

"Mr. Ginn felt that some large beginning must be made by
somebody; and so he had appropriated $50,000 a year to the
work from now on, and provided in his will that the bulk of
his estate, after proper provision for family and friends,
should go to this cause, which he felt to be the greatest and
most necessary cause in the world. This action had brought him
multitudes of letters, he said, and clearly awakened much
interest; and if it prompted others to do much more than he
could do, that was what he wanted. The friends of the cause,
especially its wealthy friends, had been strangely asleep to
the pressing need for this work of popular education. It must
be thoroughly organized to reach the schools and colleges, the
churches and newspapers and business men. He gave
illustrations of the awful cost and waste of the present
military system, which he said violated every principle of
good business, political economy, and common sense. …

‘The room is not only a bureau for the office force, but a
reading-room and library, where the latest information
touching the progress of the movement will always be furnished
to teachers, preachers, and all who are interested. Regular
conferences upon the different aspects of the movement will
also be held there."

_The Boston Transcript,
December 16, 1909._

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
The Second National Peace Congress in the United States,
assembled at Chicago.

The Second National Peace Congress in the United States held
its session in Chicago, May 3-5, 1909. The attendance was
large, the speaking of high quality and the prevailing spirit
earnest in its repudiation of all reasoning or feeling that is
tolerant of the barbarism of war. Respectful attention was
given to an address by the German Ambassador to the United
States, Count Bernstorff, who defended the attitude of his
Government on the question of a limitation of armaments, but
the expressions of the Congress on the subject were not toned
to agreement with his plea. Among its resolutions was the
following:

"Resolved, That no dispute between nations, except such as may
involve the national life and independence, should be reserved
from arbitration, and that a general treaty of obligatory
arbitration should be included at the earliest possible date.
Pending such a general treaty, we urge upon our government,
and the other leading Powers, such broadening of the scope of
their arbitration treaties as shall provide, after the example
of the Danish Netherlands treaty, for the reference to the
Hague Court of all differences whatever not settled otherwise
by peaceful means."

{725}

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
The Annual Lake Mohonk Peace Conferences in the United States.

The annual Peace Conferences at Lake Mohonk, in the United
States, have been held with regularity. At the Fifteenth,
convened in May, 1909, a strong resolution was adopted, asking
the Government of the United States to consider "whether the
peculiar position it occupies among the nations does not
afford it a special opportunity to lead the way towards …
carrying into effect the strongly expressed desire of the two
Peace Conferences at The Hague, that the governments examine
the possibility of an agreement as to the limitation of armed
forces by land and sea, and of war budgets."

Privately during the Conference there was discussion of the
suggestion that if four or five of the great Powers—England,
Germany, France, Italy, the United States, and Japan, and
perhaps Spain and Russia—could join in establishing a Supreme
Court of the nations, to which they would refer their
difficulties, other nations would be compelled by the course
of events to accept the tribunal and its decisions, and to
come into participation in it on such terms as might later be
agreed upon.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
Exchange of Parliamentary Visits between France and Sweden.

Seventy-six members of the French Parliament, representing the
international arbitration group, visited Stockholm in July,
1909, under the leadership of Baron d’Estournelles de
Constant. The visit was paid in return for one made by the
members of the three Scandinavian Parliaments to Paris some
time before.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
A World Petition for a General Treaty
of Obligatory Arbitration.

At the annual meeting of the International Peace Bureau at
Brussels, October 9, 1909, the following resolution was
adopted, expressing approval of the world-petition to the
third Hague Conference in favor of a general treaty of
obligatory arbitration:

"_Whereas_, Public opinion, _if recorded_, will
prove an influential factor at the third Hague Conference; and

_Whereas_, The ‘world-petition to the third Hague
Conference’ has begun to successfully establish a statistical
record of the men and women in every country who desire to
support the governments in their efforts to perfect the new
international order based on the principle of the solidarity
of all nations;

_Resolved_, That the Commission and the General Assembly
of the International Peace Bureau, meeting at Brussels October
8 and 9, 1909, urgently recommend the signing of the
‘world-petition to the third Hague Conference.’"

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
Evasion of Military Service in France.
Spread of Anti-Militarism.

According to returns of the recruiting for the French Army,
published in the summer of 1909, there appears to be a steady
increase in the evasion of service by young men at the times
they are required by law to enter it. "Since 1906, when the
number of refractory recruits amounted to 4,567, the figures
have slowly risen, until they have now reached 11,782. The
_soldat insoumis_ may be punished in France by
imprisonment of from one month to one year. But on about an
average of every two years during the last 20 years Parliament
has regularly voted an Amnesty Bill in favour of deserters and
recalcitrant recruits or reservists." This is one supposed
cause of the increasing evasions; but a more important
influence working with it is the propagandism of anti-military
doctrines, preached passionately by Gustav Hervé, accepted
widely, it is said, among the primary teachers of the country,
as well as in the ranks of the workingmen. The General
Confederation of Labor is reported to be distributing annually
some thousands of "soldiers’ manuals" in which desertion is urged
as a duty to humanity at large.

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909 (October).
American Proposal that the Prize Court now established be
also a Court of Arbitral Justice.

By reference to the proceedings of the Second Peace Conference
at The Hague, as set forth above, it will be seen that the
Conference gave favorable consideration to a draft Convention
for the creation of a "Judicial Arbitration Court" (the text
of which draft is given at the end of said proceedings), and
that the Conference went so far as to declare the
"advisability of adopting … and of bringing it into force as
soon as an agreement has been reached respecting the selection
of the judges and the constitution of the Court." It will be
seen, also, that the Conference adopted measures for the
creation of an International Prize Court, preliminary to which
an International Naval Conference was held in London from
December 4, 1908, until February 26, 1909. At that Conference
a suggestion was made that "the jurisdiction of the
International Prize Court might be extended, by agreement
between two or more of the signatory Powers, to cover cases at
present excluded from its jurisdiction by the express terms of
the Prize Court Convention, and that in the hearing of such
cases that Court should have the functions and follow the
procedure laid down in the draft Convention relative to the
creation of a Judicial Arbitration Court, which was annexed to
the Final Act of the Second Peace Conference, of 1907."

In line with this suggestion, it was made known, in the later
part of the past year, that the Government of the United
States, through its State Department, had proposed in a
circular note to the Powers, that the Prize Court should be
invested with the jurisdiction and functions of the proposed
Judicial Arbitration Court. The difficulties in selecting
judges for that contemplated Court, which caused the creation
of it to be postponed in 1907, would thus be happily
surmounted, and, as remarked by Secretary Knox, there would be
at once given "to the world an international judicial body to
adjudge cases arising in peace, as well as controversies
incident to war."

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1909.
Attitude of the Workingmen.

At the Twentieth International Congress of Miners, held in
Berlin, in May, 1909, there were strong declarations for
disarmament, and one Belgian delegate, M. Maroille, said
significantly: If it were better organized the International
Federation of Miners could by itself render wars impossible.
They need not do anything violent or illegal; they had only to
remain quiet, so very quiet that war could not be carried on.

{726}

WAR.

See (in this Volume)
Red Cross Society.

WARD, SIR JOSEPH GEORGE:
Prime Minister of New Zealand.

See (in this Volume)
NEW ZEALAND A. D. 1906-1909.

WARD, SIR JOSEPH GEORGE:
At the Imperial Conference of 1907.

See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE: A. D. 1907.

WARD, SIR JOSEPH GEORGE:
Testimony on the Working of Woman Suffrage in New Zealand.

See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

WARSAW, DISTURBANCES IN.

See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905, and 1905 (FEBRUARY-NOVEMBER).

WASHBURN, Reverend. Dr. George:
President of Robert College.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: TURKEY, &c.

WASHINGTON, BOOKER T.:
His work at Tuskegee Institute.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906.

WASHINGTON: A. D. 1908.
Meeting of International Congress on Tuberculosis.

See (in this Volume)
PUBLIC HEALTH. TUBERCULOSIS.

WASHINGTON MEMORIAL INSTITUTION, THE.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901.

WATER POWER TRUST:
Threatened in the United States.
Precautionary Measures taken.

See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.

WATERS AND WATER POWER, CONSERVATION OF.

See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY.

See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL, &c.:
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904-1909.

WATERWAYS COMMISSION AND WATERWAYS TREATY.

See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY).

WATKINS, THOMAS H.:
On the Anthracite Coal Strike Arbitration Commission.

See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902-1903.

WATSON, J. C.:
Premier of Australia.

See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1903-1904.

WATSON, Thomas E.:
Nomination for President of the United States.

See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER),
and 1908 (MARCH-NOVEMBER).

WAZEER, GRAND.

See (in this Volume)
MOROCCO: A. D. 1903.

WEALTH:
Its Concentration in Great Britain.

In a speech made in Parliament, on a motion to graduate the
Income Tax, March 24, 1909, Mr. Chiozza-Money, who speaks with
considerable authority on such subjects, made the following
statements: "Statistics were available in Somerset House
showing the product of the graduated scale of death duties
imposed by Sir William Harcourt in 1894. Of the 700,000
persons who died annually, only about 80,000 left sufficient
property to need an inquisition by Somerset House. Out of the
80,000 persons nearly the whole of the property was left by
27,000 persons; and £200,000,000 worth of property was left by
about 4,000 persons each year. This was not only a curious
fact, but it was a constant fact in relation to this problem.
He also showed that there had arisen a tendency among rich
persons to devise part of their property before death in order
to escape the death duties, with the result that a good deal
of wealth did not come under the review of Somerset House.
What he described as his own conservative estimate of the
wealth of the United Kingdom was a total of about
£11,500,000,000. Of that sum five millions of persons owned
£10,900,000,000. One-ninth of the population owned 95 per
cent. of the entire capital stock of the United Kingdom. Thus
the whole of the country regarded as a business undertaking
was in the hands of a handful of people. Taking the income of
the country at 1,800 millions a year, there were about five
million persons who took one-half and 39 millions the other
half. Of the five million persons who took 900 millions of
income about 1¼ million persons, or 250,000 families, took 600
millions out of the 900 millions. From this state of facts the
most terrible inequalities resulted, evidences of which could
be seen along the Embankment and other parts of Westminster
almost within a stone’s throw of that House."

WEALTH PROBLEM, THE.
The Question of a Progressive Taxation.

"At this moment we are passing through a period of great
unrest—social, political and industrial unrest. It is of the
utmost importance for our future that this should prove to be
not the unrest of mere rebelliousness against life, of mere
dissatisfaction with the inevitable inequality of conditions,
but the unrest of a resolute and eager ambition to secure the
betterment of the individual and the nation. … It is a prime
necessity that if the present unrest is to result in permanent
good the emotion shall be translated into action, and that the
action shall be marked by honesty, sanity, and self-restraint.
There is mighty little good in a mere spasm of reform. The
reform that counts is that which comes through steady,
continuous growth; violent emotionalism leads to exhaustion.

"It is important to this people to grapple with the problems
connected with the amassing of enormous fortunes, and the use
of those fortunes, both corporate and individual, in business.
We should discriminate in the sharpest way between fortunes
well won and fortunes ill won; between those gained as an
incident to performing great services to the community as a
whole, and those gained in evil fashion by keeping just within
the limits of mere law-honesty. Of course no amount of charity
in spending such fortunes in any way compensates for
misconduct in making them. As a matter of personal conviction,
and without pretending to discuss the details or formulate the
system, I feel that we shall ultimately have to consider the
adoption of some such scheme as that of a progressive tax on
all fortunes, beyond a certain amount, either given in life or
devised or bequeathed upon death to any individual—a tax so
framed as to put it out of the power of the owner of one of
these enormous fortunes to hand on more than a certain amount
to any one individual; the tax, of course, to be imposed by
the National and not the State Government. Such taxation
should, of course, be aimed merely at the inheritance or
transmission in their entirety of those fortunes swollen
beyond all healthy limits."

_President Roosevelt,
Address at the Laying of the Corner Stone of the
Office-Building of the House of Representatives,
April 14, 1906._

WEAVER, JOHN: MAYOR OF PHILADELPHIA.

See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.

{727}

WEEKLY REST DAY.

See (in this Volume)
SUNDAY OBSERVANCE.

"WE FREES."

See (in this Volume)
SCOTLAND: A. D. 1904-1905.

WEI-HAI-WEI:
Strategic Worthlessness of the Port.

See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (FEBRUARY).

WEKERLE, ALEXANDER: PRIME MINISTER OF HUNGARY.

See (in this Volume)
AUSTRIA HUNGARY: A. D. 1905-1906, and 1908-1909.

WELSH COERCION ACT.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: ENGLAND: A. D. 1902.

WERMUTH, Herr:
Secretary of the German Imperial Treasury.

See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1908-1909.

WEST AFRICA:
White Colonization impossible in Present Conditions.

See (in this Volume)
AFRICA.

WEST INDIES, DANISH:
Failure of Projected Sale to the United States.

See (in this Volume)
DENMARK: A. D. 1902.

WESTERN FEDERATION OF MINERS.

See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION. UNITED STATES: A. D. 1899-1907.

WET, C. R. de.

See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1901-1902.

WEYLER, GENERAL Y NICOLAU:
Suppression of Strike at Barcelona.

See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: SPAIN.

WEYLER, GENERAL Y NICOLAU:
Spanish Minister of War.

See (in this Volume)
SPAIN: A. D. 1901-1904.

WHITE, HENRY:
American Delegate to the Algeciras Conference'
on the Morocco Question.

See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1905-1906.

WHITE HOUSE, THE:
Its Restoration.

See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902 (MAY-NOVEMBER).

WHITE MOUNTAIN FOREST, PRESERVATION OF THE.

See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES: UNITED STATES.

WHITE SLAVE TRADE, MOVEMENT FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF THE.

The movement for the suppression of what is now described as
the White Slave Traffic, and which has grown into an important
international organization, appears to have had its beginning
in the formation of a committee at London, in 1880, "for the
purpose of exposing and suppressing the [then] existing
traffic in English, Scotch and Irish girls for foreign
prostitution." This committee presented a memorial on the
subject to Lord Granville, then Secretary for Foreign Affairs,
setting out a statement of facts which "revealed the existence
of systematic abduction to Brussels, and elsewhere on the
Continent of Europe, of girls who were English subjects, and
who, having been induced to go abroad under promise of
obtaining employment or respectable situations, were on
arrival taken to the office of the ‘Police des Mœurs’ for
registration as prostitutes." The memorialists craved Lord
Granville’s influence "in favour of measures which would
render it impossible that British subjects, however humble,
should in the future be subjected to such infamy and
degradation, including the loss of their personal liberty."

Such measures were taken, Parliament passing an Act which
became law in 1885, with so much effectiveness that "the
traffic was at once checked. The miscreants who were engaged
in it were dismayed by its provisions, and within five years
after the Act had come into operation the Burgomaster of
Brussels, which had been the head-quarters of the traffic,
questioned as to the effect produced by that measure, in April
1890 wrote as follows: 'Comme suite à votre lettre du 15
courant, j’ai l’honneur de vous faire connaître que depuis
1880 aucune fille de nationalité Auglaise n’a été inscrite aux
registres de Bruxelles.’ While, however, the traffic, so far
as the United Kingdom was concerned, was thus almost
extinguished, it seems to have increased and spread in certain
districts of Eastern Europe to an extent which attracted the
serious and alarmed attention of the Governments and public
authorities of the countries immediately concerned. About the
year 1898 the National Vigilance Society, headed by the late
Duke of Westminster, then its President, resolved ‘to open
definite measures for its mitigation—if possible, its
suppression.’ This organization was fortunate in having for
its Secretary and chief administrative officer Mr. William
Alexander Coote, a man of remarkable energy and
determination."