I think I under very day millions would die for Him. stand something of human nature, and I tell you, all these were men, and I am a man; none else is like Him; Jesus Christ was more than man. I have inspired multitudes with such an enthusiastic devotion that they would die for me ... but to do this it was necessary that I should be visibly present with the electric influence of my looks, of my words, of my voice. When I saw men and spoke to them, I lighted up the flame of selfdevotion, in their hearts. . . .. Christ alone has succeeded in so raising the mind of man towards the Unseen, that it becomes insensible to the barriers of time and space. Across a chasm of eighteen hundred years, Jesus Christ makes a demand which is beyond all others difficult to satisfy. He asks for that which a philosopher may often seek in vain at the hands of his friends, or a father of his children, or a bride of her spouse, or a man of his brother. He asks for the human heart; He will have it entirely to Himself; He demands it unconditionally; and forthwith His demand is granted. Wonderful! In defiance of time and space, the soul of man, with all its powers and faculties, becomes an annexation to the Empire of Christ. All who sincerely believe in Him experience that remarkable supernatural love towards Him. This phenomenon is unaccountable; it is altogether beyond the scope of man's creative powers. Time, the great destroyer, is powerless to extinguish this sacred flame; time can neither exhaust its strength, nor put a limit to its range. This it is which strikes me most; I have often thought of it. This it is which proves to me quite convincingly the divinity of Jesus Christ." Here, surely," adds Canon H. P. Liddon, "is the commonsense of humanity." And this, I add, explains the position of the Christian worker for Peace, and his faith in its ultimate and universal triumph, when as the Hebrew poets foretold, nations shall beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning-hooks, and shall not learn war any more. INSTANCES OF INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENTS INVOLVING THE APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION. ABBREVIATIONS. R.-Recueil des principaux Traités, etc., by G. F. De Martens. N.R.-Nouveau Recueil, by G. F. De Martens and his Continuators. N.R.G.-Nouveau Recueil Général, etc., by G. F. De Martens and his Continuators. N.R.G., 2me Série.-Nouveau Recueil Général, deuxième Série, by G. F. De Martens and his Continuators. R.M.P.-Recueil manuel et pratique de Traités, Conventions et autres Actes Diplomatiques, par Ch. De Martens et F. de Cursy. P.I.-Pasicrisie Internationale: Histoire Documentaire des Arbitrages Internationaux, par H. La Fontaine. S.P.-Senate Paper, 54th Congress, 2nd Session, Document No. 116. H. of P.-Herald of Peace, Organ of the Peace Society. Moore.-History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to which the United States has been a Party, by John Bassett Moore, Washington, 1898. Hertslet's Treaties.-A Complete Collection of the Treaties and Conventions, etc., by Edward Hertslet, London. Hertslet, Map of Europe, etc.-The Map of Europe by Treaty, by Edward Hertslet, C.B., London, 1875, 4 vols. Hertslet, Map of Africa, etc.-The Map of Africa by Treaty, by Sir Edward Hertslet, K.C.B., Second and Revised Edition, London, 1896, 3 vols. Holland. The European Concert in the Eastern Question, etc., by Thomas Erskine Holland, D.C.L., Oxford, 1885. INVOLVING THE APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION. The modern era of Arbitration may be conveniently considered as commencing with the Jay Treaty of 1794. Disputes can be amicably settled either by Direct Agreement between the parties, by Agreement under the Mediation of another Power, or by reference to Arbitration. "The difference between a Mediator and an Arbitrator consists in this: that the Arbitrator pronounces a real judgment, which is obligatory, and that the Mediator can only give his counsel and advice." EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. Art. 2 of the Treaty of Recognition, signed at Paris Sptember 3rd. 1783, between GREAT BRITAIN and the newly-formed UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, began with the words :-" And that all disputes which might arise in future on the subject of the boundaries of the said United States may be prevented, it is hereby agreed and declared that the following are, and shall be, their boundaries, viz. : . Out of this Article sprang three Cases of Arbitration :— 1. GREAT BRITAIN and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in 1794. St. Croix River Boundary The object of this reference was to determine the River St. Croix, mentioned in the above Article of the Treaty of Peace, September 3rd, 1783, as forming the boundary line between Canada and the United Sats This was referred, by Art. 5 of the Juy Treaty, signed at London, November 19th, 1794, to a COMMISSION of three, who were to meet first at Halifax, N.S., "and then as they should arrange." The Commissioners were Mr. Thomas Barclay, of Nova Scotia, chosen by Great Britain, and Mr. David Howell, of Rhode Island, by the United States. After some delay and difficulty these agreed upon Judge Egbert Benson of the City of New York, as third Commissioner. Their first official meeting was held at Halifax on August 22nd, 1796. Their Award was given on October 25th, 1798, at Providence, Rhode Island, in favour of the United States, which had contended that the Schoodiac River was intended under the name of the St. Croix. It was signed by each of the Commissioners. References Moore, I. 1-43, V. 4720-4726; P.I., pp. 1, 2; Revue de Droit Int., 1874, VI. 117, 118; Calvo, II. 549; Schoell. I. 458, 459, II. 49; Chalmers, II. 528538; De Garden, IV. 332-334; R.M.P., I. 312; R., II. 497, III. 555; N.R., III. 519, V. 640; Hertslet, Complete Collection, etc., IX. 761; Id., North American Boundary, etc.. 1838, Appendix p. 2; Treaties and Conventions between the United States and Other Powers 1776-1887, p. 382; Jenkinson, Recueil des Traités. III. 410, etc.; S.P., p. 1; Dreyfus, p. 155, 156; Mérignhac, p. 47; Carnazza-Amari, II. 566. 2. GREAT BRITAIN and UNITED STATES, in 1794. Recovery of Debts. Impediments to the Recovery of certain sums due to British subjects were caused by various State Acts passed during the late war which continued to bar recovery after its conclusion. By Art. 6 of the Jay Treaty, November 19th, 1794, the question of the Compensation of Creditors was referred to five CoxMISSIONERS, two appointed by each Government and a fifth "by the unanimous voice of the other four." The Commissioners so appointed were Thomas Macdonald and Henry Pye Rich, for Great Britain, and Thomas Fitzsimmons, of Pennsylvania, and James Innes, of Virginia, tor the United States. On the death of the last named, Samuel Sitgreaves, of Pennsylvania, was appointed to succeed him. The first meeting of the Commissioners was held in Philadelphia on May 18th, 1797, when Mr. John Guillemard, of London, was chosen the fifth Commissioner. The Commissioners proceeded to the examination of Claims. For a time the proceedings were harmonious, but, on February 5th, 1799, a rupture occurred between them, the American Commissioners withdrew, and on July 20th their final meeting and rupture took place. Further negotiations between the two Governments followed, and, by a Convention, signed January 8th, 1802, Art. 6 of the Jay Treaty was anoulled, and the sum of £600,000 was accepted by Great Britain in settlement, which sum was duly appropriated and paid by the United States Government. References: Moore, I. 271-298, V. 4720-4728; P.I., pp. 3. 4; Schoell, II. 49, 50: Hertslet. Complete Collection, etc.. IX. 761; R., suppl., III. 202; Treaties and Conventions, etc., 1776-1787, pp. 382, 398; Am. State Papers, For. Rel., I. 51, 190-238, 472-503, 11, 62, 67, 383-427; Ĵ. Adams's Works, III. 300, 301; Revue de Droit Int. 1874, VI. 118; Calvo, 11. 549; S.P., p. 1.; etc. 3. GREAT BRITAIN and UNITED STATES, in 1794. Maritime Seizures and the Rights and Duties of Neutrals. Various mutual claims, arising from losses and damages sustained "by reason of irregular or illegal captures or condemnations of their vessels and other property," during the war, were by Art. 7 of the Jay Treaty, November 19th, 1794, referred to five COMMISSIONERS, exactly as in the previous Article. The Commissioners were John Nicholl, LL.D. (afterwards Maurice Swaby, LL.D.) and Jolin Anstey, for Great Britain, and Christopher Gore and William Pinkney, for America; Colonel Trumbull was chosen, finally, by lot, as the fifth. The Commissioners held their first meeting on August 16th, 1796, then they took an office in Gray's Inn, London, and i-sued notices of business; they continued to meet until July 20th, 1799, but difficulties having arisen in regard to the interpretation of Art. 6 of the Jay Treaty, their work was for a time interrupted. By the Convention of January 8th, 1802, the Powers of the Commissioners were confirmed, they resumed their work on January 15th, and continued until February 24th, 1804, when the proceedings of the Board were brought to a close, all the business before it having been completed. By this time Awards had been given to the amount of 11,650,000 dollars (i.e. £2,330,000) in favour of America, and 143,420-14 dollars (i.e. £28,685. 13s. 1d.) in favour of Great Britain, the claims presented numbering 478 and 58 respectively. Am. References: Moore, I. 299-319, V. 4720-4728; P.I., pp. 4-6; Schoell, II. 50 4 SPAIN and UNITED STATES, in 1795. Maritime Captures. Claims were made against Spain for depredations committed upon American ships during the war between Spain and France. These Claims were, by Article 21 of the Treaty of Friendship, Limits and Navigation, signed at San Lorenzo el Real, on October 27th, 1795, referred to a COMMISSION of three members, oue to be appointed by each Government and the third by these conjointly. The Commissioners were Joseph Yguat Piarez for Spain, Matthew Clarkson for America, and Samuel Breck, chosen by them, as third Commissioner. The Commission met in Philadelphia in the summer of 1797; their sittings were then interrupted, but were afterwards resumed, and continued until December 31st, 1799, the date of the last of their Awards. These were 40 in number and reached a total of 325,440-075 dollars. References: Moore, II. 991-1005, V. 4796-4798; P.I., pp. 79, 736: Am. State Papers, For. Rel.. I. 45, 48, 141, 142, 277, 423-469, 533-546. II. 283, IV. 530; Annual Register XXXVIII. (1795) 297; Adams's Hist. of U.S., I. 348, 349; Treaties and Conventions, 1776-1887, pp. 1013, 1014; MS. Dom. Let., X. 38, 77, 257. etc. |