Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 32.djvu/864

828 828 HARVARD LAW REVIEW Not for a long time could the courts prevent private warfare. In England, and all over Europe, it persisted through the Middle Ages. The law had to compromise with the deep rooted feeling in favor of settUng disputes with the sword. Trial by battle was adopted as a legal procedure; duelling flourished more or less openly. The former was not legally aboHshed in England until 1819, and is said to have been practiced in the American colonies.^^ Yet even while the fighting continued, the courts served their purpose in preventing more widespread bloodshed. The fact that the law was often defied, as it is to-day in semiciviUzed regions, did not prevent its being effective; in the main the law held its course and prevailed. In Iceland, as a direct result of Njal's re- forms, in the constitution and procedure of the courts, they be- came so much more effective that soon the right to decide one's disputes by. combat, which popular feeling had forced the courts to recognize, was formally abohshed.^^ In short, the repression of private warfare was there and every- where gradual, but met with considerable success from the first establishment of* the courts, and more and more as they grew stronger. In all probability, war between nations will likewise be repressed only gradually; international tribunals will not for a long time, if ever, be completely successful in preventing war. Yet that may not prevent their effecting their purpose in great and ever- increasing measure. II The difficidty of obtaining a fair trial is another objection fre- quently made to international tribunals. It is said that nations technically neutral are apt to be more favorably inclined toward some countries than toward others, or to be in fear of some power- ful neighbor, so that their representatives are likely to be con- trolled by influences in favor of one side. It is also said that the members of the courts, as well as the advocates, will be persons trained in diplomacy, who will take narrow views of international law, and connive at trickery in the conduct of Htigation. This sort of argument proves too much. We all know how far " Neilson, Trial by Combat, 36, 328. Lea, Superstition and Force, 205-16. J2 Burnt Njal, pref., 158. Conybeare, The Place of Iceland in the History OP European Institutions, 61.