Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 57.djvu/90

80 in the Peace of Westphalia, increasingly practiced since then, and at the instance of Lincoln embodied in a manual, has now led to the adoption of a common international code for the conduct of future armies in the field—a result which marks the triumph in our day of the conception of civilized warfare tempered with mercy over the old idea of indiscriminate and inhuman slaughter.

-—A matter that has given rise to much speculation is the jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals. It has come to be recognized that a distinction must be made between different classes of international disputes. What may be called "business disputes" between states, such, as boundary lines, tariffs, damages, fishery claims, questions of citizenhipcitizenship [sic], and various treaty arrangements—like the most-favored nation clause—are all fit subjects for arbitration. But the graver questions involving the consideration of national policy and aspirations, vital interests and honor, race and religious prejudices and passions, and last of all self-preservation, are, at least for the present, far beyond the competence of an arbitration tribunal.

If the list of arbitral decisions hitherto given be examined it will show that questions of the first sort above are those which have thus far been submitted to judicial settlement. It is therefore in harmony with past experience that the conference, in generally defining the scope of arbitration, declared it to be intended for the settlement of "questions of a juridical nature," especially the interpretation and application of international agreements upon the basis of respect for law. The frequency of these "business questions" is on the increase; they seriously embarrass diplomatic representatives, whose proper duty is the conduct of graver matters of policy, and there is a growing disposition to submit them to legal settlement. Under these circumstances, there is little doubt that