as it deems necessary for its defense is not denied, but it can never become, even temporarily, a naval base, whether of Belgian or foreign vessels, without a violation of the treaties of 1814 and 1839. For it is there expressly provided that Antwerp should be exclusively (uniquement) a commercial port. It is unfortunate that the value of the vast fortifications around Antwerp is thereby considerably lessened, but the Belgian Government should have taken that factor into consideration before undertaking the works. A neutralization of the Scheldt might, of course, solve the difficulty, and the author suggests, in concluding, that the advisability of completely neutralizing all rivers separating or traversing different states be recommended to the Third Hague Conference.

The two books, especially that of M. den Beer Portugael, will do much to clear up the situation, although they should be read in connection with the articles and speeches to which constant reference is made, and which are necessary for a proper appreciation of the arguments used. They will not, however, assist one in understanding M. Nys' frequent excursions into purely military history whose bearing on the issue seems often extremely doubtful.

A. VAN HEMERT ENGERT.

International Arbitration and Procedure. By Robert C. Morris, D. C. L. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1911. x, 178 pp.; appendix 48 pp.; and index.

This little volume, with its brief foreword by the President of the United States, presents compactly and in a pleasant style the history of arbitration in general, followed by a description of the more important arbitrations to which the United States has been a party; discusses the grounds of international controversies and procedure before special commissions; and finally takes up the work of the Hague Conferences and the questions arbitrated before the various tribunals organized in accordance with the conventions adopted at those conferences.

In dealing with particular arbitrations, the author devotes most space to arbitrations between the United States and Great Britain, stating that he selects these "because of their greater importance, both to history and to the general subject," referring especially to the "greater relative importance of the questions which the United States Government has submitted to arbitration" when compared with recent arbi

trations between other countries. He notices particularly the claims commissions under the Jay treaty; the various disputes over the Canadian boundary, including the Alaskan boundary difficulty; the joint claims commission of 1853; the recent treaty for the settlement of all pecuniary claims between Great Britain and the United States; the four arbitrations under the treaty of Washington; the fur seal arbitration; and the northeastern fishery dispute.

In regard to that class of international controversies involving "acute difficulties which deeply concern national interests, independence or honor" the author states, obviously referring to the recent treaties between the United States and Great Britain and France, probably signed but a short time before his book was published, "In defining the scope of arbitration, writers on international law have customarily excluded * ** the questions involving 'vital interests and national honor.' If I had been writing these lines a year or two ago, I should have said that those questions had no place in a historical review of the subject," adding what he might have erased had the book waited until 1912,"the events of the last few months, however, seem to indicate that this attitude may not entirely have been devoid of superstition," and, in a later passage, even foreboding the possibility of such erasure when he says, "There are indications that the Senate may repeat its performance of 1897, and again deprive the American people of a great opportunity. Calamitous as such action would be, it would only stay for a brief time the progress of this great idea.”

The words of the Right Honorable Robert L. Borden, Premier of Canada, at the last annual banquet of the American Society of International Law, when, referring to the boundary line stretching three or four thousand miles across this continent, the peaceful determination of which has been marked by arbitration after arbitration, he expressed the wish that its existence might be rendered doubly sure by formal agreement between the British Government and that of the United States, accord with the views of Mr. Morris, who, in asserting that "our whole national history furnishes abundant evidence that the disputes usually prohibited — independence, honor and vital interests — have repeatedly formed the subjects of arbitration," says of this boundary line, "Both nations have not had the slightest difficulty in showing clearly that their 'vital interests' were involved in every case," yet "nearly the whole of the line has been drawn by arbitral tribunals. It forms not only, as already said, an impressive monument to arbitration, but also disposes

of the superstition that questions involving 'vital interests' cannot be settled by peaceable means."

In his paragraphs on procedure Mr. Morris most particularly describes the procedure with which he is doubtless most familiar from personal experience, that of the claims commission, but in his appendix, in addition to the rules of the commission appointed under the convention of 1857 between the United States and New Granada, the circular order of the Department of State for the guidance of claimants, March 5, 1906, and rules of the commission appointed under the protocol of 1903 between the United States and Venezuela, he prints the rules of the Permanent Court of Arbitration as set forth in the Hague Convention of October 18, 1907. Although his discussion of procedure is so brief and restricted, he mentions one point which practice before other arbitral tribunals than special commissions has shown to be equally vital in the presentation of cases there, and that is the necessity of "care and exactness" in drawing up the compromis, or agreement for submission to arbitration. He might well have referred to the compromis in the late Northeastern Fisheries Arbitration as an example of a carefully drawn agreement.

In the discussion of the Hague Conferences, Mr. Morris' text is purely historical, covering facts generally well known to the readers of this JOURNAL. However, in referring to the new prize court and endeavoring to defend it against the charge that it is "a court without law," Mr. Morris unaccountably overlooks the work of the London Conference, 1908-1909 (which was ratified by the United States Senate on April 24, 1912), establishing by unanimous consent of the nations. represented a code for the express purpose of furnishing the international prize court with a law to guide it.

In summarizing the nine cases which have been heard before tribunals under the provisions of the Hague conventions of 1899 and 1907 Mr. Morris deals briefly with the procedure before each, the language or languages used, nomenclature of the pleadings, and constitution of the delegations representing litigant countries. The two most recent cases before the Hague Court, to which the United States was a party, are briefly but appreciatively discussed, the North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Arbitration being referred to as "perhaps the most important arbitration yet held at The Hague under the Hague conventions," the award in which is a "testimonial of incalculable value to the efficacy of arbitral settlements" because it "may be regarded as equally gratifying to both

parties to the ontroversy;" and the decision in the Orinoco Steamship Company's claim against Venezuela being considered "most important in that it recognizes that exceeding of powers and essential error may be grounds for holding void an international award. It is believed that this award will be regarded as a step of prime importance in making arbitration a judicial rather than a diplomatic or compromise proceeding."

To one interested in arbitration and little acquainted with its history, principal cases, or theories, but desirous of a brief, generally accurate and readable summary thereof, Mr. Morris's book will furnish a pleasant hour or two of profitable reading. The reviewer, however, will confess to a little disappointment at finding that an author of Mr. Morris' international experience and reputation has not seen fit to give a somewhat more scientific and suggestive discussion of arbitral procedure, a field scarcely entered by careful and competent authors. Possibly he considered it beyond the scope of this work, and if so, the reviewer feels that he expresses the desire of the readers of the JOURNAL in hoping that Mr. Morris will supplement his present work.

W. C. C.

War and the Private Citizen-Studies in International Law. By A. Pearce Higgins, M. A., LL. D., with Introductory Note by the Right Honorable Arthur Cohen, K. C. London: P. S. King & Son. 1912. xvi, pp. 200.

The introduction to these valuable and interesting studies by the learned author of an interesting and exceedingly valuable work on the Hague Peace Conferences, is furnished by the Right Honorable Arthur Cohen, K. C., a well-known and a distinguished practitioner, and is at once an analysis of the volume and a commendation of its views and method of execution. It may be said, however, without in any way questioning Mr. Cohen's authority, that Dr. Higgins needs no introduction to students of international law, that his works speak for themselves, and that, judged solely by their merits, he has a distinct and individual claim to a respectful hearing by all serious-minded students of international law.

In one sense of the word the present volume may be considered as a contribution to the peace movement, because the learned author endeavors and successfully "to show the great possibilities of harm which war may occasion to the civilian population." He says, and truly, that "the wider the diffusion of the knowledge of international law, and par

ticularly of that branch of it which relates to war, the greater is the hope for the maintenance of peace." In the next few sentences of the author's preface, his views on the subject are so clearly expressed as to justify quotation. "That this extended knowledge of the laws of war," he says, "or the propaganda of the formula that it is impossible for one civilized nation to gain economically by the conquest of another will put an end to war I do not think probable. They may, however, assist in moments of tension in steadying popular feeling, and aid in producing a calmer outlook; but, as I have pointed out, war remains possible so long as the motives for war remain, its causes are elemental and defencelessness and attack are in this connexion frequently correlative terms. 'So long as current political philosophy in Europe remains what it is,' says the author of The Great Illusion, 'I would not urge the reduction of our war budget by a single sovereign'" (pp. xiv-xv).

The author's viewpoint is further expressed in various passages in the first chapter, which was delivered as an inaugural lecture at the London School of Economics and Political Science for the session 19111912. "Certainly we should do," he says, "all that in us lies to seek peace and ensure it, to encourage all the factors that produce peace, especially the growth of international confidence and respect for the aspirations and motives of other nations. Ignorance and want of insight may produce catastrophes, the extent of which no one can foresee. War is a catastrophe, an evil of great magnitude, how great, perhaps we, who have so long enjoyed freedom from invasion, can hardly understand. Not all wars in the past have been wrong, and as long as violence, injustice, ambition, greed, bad faith and selfishness remain in human nature, so long is war unlikely to be removed permanently from the forces which make for the development of the world" (pp. 7-8). Dr. Higgins believes in "war in order to preserve * legitimate self-respect and dignity." It is, however, gratifying to note that he considers arbitration "extremely valuable as a method for solving the majority of international disputes" (p. 9). He evidently looks upon the preservation of the balance of power in Europe as essential and considers that "the maintenance of respect for international law can sometimes only be accomplished by more forcible means" (p. 9). These extracts furnish, it is believed, the point of view from which the present volume has been prepared.

* *

In the first chapter, entitled "The Laws of War," Dr. Higgins insists that, while war is a relation between state and state, its effects are not