SINCE THE PACIFICATION OF 1815.

495

54. VICEROY OF EGYPT and the SUEZ CANAL COMPANY, in 1864.
Various disputes connected with the Suez Canal undertaking. Referred, at the re-
quest of the Viceroy, to the Emperor, Napoleon III., by whom it was decided against
the Viceroy. The award was given July 6th, 1864, and was followed by a Firman
of March 19th, 1868, determining afresh the concession to the Canal Company
on the newly prescribed bases.

55. The UNITED STATES and COLOMBIA, in 1864. Claims against the
latter, as representing the late Republic of New Granada, arising out of treaty
rights on the Isthmus of Panama. These were the claims not determined by the
former Commission (No. 37). Referred by a treaty concluded February 10th,
1864, and ratified 19th August, 1865, to a Mixed Commission consisting of two
members, appointed by each country, and an Umpire. Sir Frederick Bruce was
chosen umpire. "Questions that would have been causes of war were thus settled
quietly and equitably." The date of the last award was May 18th, 1866. The
Awards given in favour of the United States, including those of the former
Commission, under the Treaty of September 10th, 1857, amounted to $345,307.

56. The UNITED STATES and SALVADOR, in 1864. Claim of Mr.
Henry Savage, a citizen of the United States, for losses through sale of gunpowder.
An agreement was made with the Government of Salvador to submit the claim to
Arbitration in Guatemala, and signed in triplicate, May 4th, 1864. The referees,
Messrs. M. J. Dardon, A. Andreu, and Fermin Armas, on February 21st, 1865,
"finally adjudicated " the Claim "in favour of Mr. Savage."

57. FRANCE and VENEZUELA, in 1864. By a Convention between these
Powers in 1864, provision was made for the decision, by a Mixed Commission, of
the "claims of French subjects for expropriations, damages, and injuries of the
nature of those for which, according to the law of nations, the Government of
the Republic [of Venezuela] is responsible."

58. The UNITED STATES and VENEZUELA, in 1866. Claims by citizens
of the United States, against the Government of Venezuela. Many of these were
of long standing and large in amount, and some of them involved important
principles of International Law. Referred to a Mixed Commission, Messrs. David
M. Talmage and Gen. A. Guzman Blanco, after protracted and difficult negotia-
tions, by treaty, April 25th, 1866, ratified at Caracas April 17th, 1867, where the
Commission met August 30th, 1867. Its last session was held August 3rd, 1868,
all the claims submitted to it having been disposed of. Awards were given in
favour of the United States amounting to a total of $1,253,310. But the proceed-
ings were impeached for alleged fraud on the part of the Tribunal, and see
further, No. 119.

59. GREAT BRITAIN and MEXICO, in 1866. By a Convention signed
June 26th, 1866, and ratified November 19th of the same year, it was agreed to
refer to a Mixed Commission the claims of British Subjects against Mexico.
(British and Foreign State Papers, lvi. 7.)

60. FRANCE and PRUSSIA, in 1867. Question of surrender of LUXEM-
BURG to France, which was resisted by Germany. Submitted to a Conference of
the Great Powers, which met in London, May 7th-11th, 1867, under the presi-
dency of Lord Stanley. The Arbitrators agreed upon a treaty, guaranteeing the
neutrality of the province, the retirement of the Prussian garrison, and the dis-
mantling of the Fortress of Luxemburg.

61. GREAT BRITAIN and SPAIN, in 1868. The "Mermaid" difficulty.
Claim for compensation for the loss of the schooner" Mermaid," of Dartmouth,
loaded with coals for Ancona, which, in passing the forts of Ceuta on the 16th
October, 1864, was fired at and sunk. By an Agreement between Great Britain and
Spain, signed at Madrid March 4th, 1868, the claim was referred to a Mixed Com-
mission, consisting of four Commissioners, two to be named by each Government
from persons belonging to the Diplomatic and Naval Services, with an Umpire to be
named at their first meeting, and in case of disagreement as to the person to be
chosen by lot out of two named by them. The Decision was given within three

496

INSTANCES OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION

months from the first meeting of the Commissioners, but the result has not been announced. It was in connection with this difficulty that the late Earl Derby in Parliament said, "UNHAPPILY THERE IS NO INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL to which cases of this kind can be referred, and THERE IS NO INTERNATIONAL LAW by which parties can be required thus to refer cases of this kind. If such a tribunal existed, it would be a great benefit to the civilised world."

62. The UNITED STATES and MEXICO, in 1868. Various claims and counterclaims which had arisen since the Peace of Guadaloupe Hidalgo, in 1848. By a Convention, dated July 4th, 1868, these were referred to a Mixed Commission, consisting of two Commissioners, an American and a Mexican, W. H. Wadsworth, and F. G. Palacio, together with an Umpire, Mr. Francis Lieber, who died October 2nd, 1872, This Commission was appointed for a term of three and a-half years, but in 1871 by a new Convention, concluded April 19th, it was prolonged to January 31st, 1873. In the interval a new Convention, dated November 27th, 1872, prolonged for two years the action of the treaty of 1868; but inasmuch as this Convention was not ratified by the Mexican Congress before January 31st, 1873, it was mutually agreed to modify its terms, so as not merely to prolong but to renew the Convention of 1868. Accordingly the revised treaty of 27th November, 1872, was ratified by both Congresses-by the U.S. Congress on the 8th March, and the Mexican on the 29th April, 1873. This Treaty revived the old Commission, which had ceased to act, and new Commissioners were appointed, Sir Edward Thornton, the British Minister at Washington, being chosen Umpire, the Commissioners now being Mr. M. M. de Zamacona (Mexico), and Mr. W. H. Wadsworth, who served as Commissioner for the U.S.A from the first meeting to the last. On April 16th, 1874, the Umpire, Sir Edward Thornton, gave his award on the claims made by Mexico, in favour of the United States. Thereupon the United States' Commissioner abandoned all claims on the part of his countrymen against Mexico. After this award objection was raised, on the ground of false evidence and fraud, and the functions of the Commission were extended by a new Convention concluded November 20th, 1874, and those of the Umpire still farther until November 20th, 1876, by a Convention proclaimed June 29th, 1876. The Umpire gave his award that any attempt to re-open the subject was inadmissible-"That it was impossible to go back upon accomplished facts and an executed sentence." The Umpire closed his labours November 20th, 1876. Some doubt remained, however, in regard to two of the principal awards in favour of the United States, and says Prof. Moore in 1891, Pending efforts to secure a competent investigation of this charge, the United States has suspended the distribution of the money paid by Mexico upon them."

63. GREAT BRITAIN and VENEZUELA, in 1868. Claims of British subjects against Venezuelan Government, of which there were 79. By Convention signed at Caracas, 21st September, 1868, these were referred to two Commissioners, Dr. Juan de Dios Mendez and Geo. Fagan, British Chargé d'Affaires, who were to choose an Umpire by lot, if necessary. Their Report was given at Caracas, November 15th, 1869. Total amount awarded, 312,587 dols.

64. The UNITED STATES and PERU, in 1868. Mutual claims presented to either Government since the sittings of the Mixed Commission, which met in Lima in 1863 (see No. 50), and other claims specified. These were now by a new Convention, concluded at Lima, December 4th, 1868, ratified June 4th, 1869, and proclaimed July 6th, 1869, submitted to an Arbitral Commission of two members and an Umpire, the latter to be chosen by agreement or lot. This Commission sat in 1869 and made awards on a number of claims, The ComInissioners were Mr. Michel Vidal and L. B. Cisneros, and, later, Dr. Manuel Pino. By a singular coincidenee two Umpires were appointed, Mr. F. A. Elmore and Mr. T. Valenzuella. The Commission finally adjourned, and its Report of Awards was dated February 26th, 1870, all the business before it having been disposed of.

65. TURKEY and GREECE, in 1869. Cretan insurrection. Conference of Great Powers, at the instance of Prussia, was called at Paris, January and February, 1869. Though not an Arbitration in the technical meaning of the word, yet, as involving the principle, it deserves to be reckoned among instances of successful Arbitration. The proposals of the Conference were accepted by Greece.

SINCE THE PACIFICATION OF 1815.

497

66. GREAT BRITAIN and PORTUGAL, in 1869. Rival claims to sovereignty over the island of Bulama, one of the Bisagos Islands at the mouth of the Rio Grande River, Senegambia, on the West Coast of Africa, and to a certain portion of territory opposite to that island on the mainland. Referred under protocol of January 13th, 1869, to General Ulysses S. Grant, the President of the United States, whose award, given April 21st, 1870, was in favour of Portugal.

67. The UNITED STATES and BRAZIL, in 1870. Claim against Brazil, for the loss of the whale-ship "Canada" and her cargo, by the illegal interference of the Brazilian officials. Submitted for Arbitration under a protocol of March 14th, 1870, to the British Minister at Washington, Sir Edward Thornton, whose award, July 11th, 1870, was favourable to the United States. Amount awarded $100,740.

68. UNITED STATES and SPAIN, in 1870. Seizure of the steamer "Colonel Lloyd Aspinwall," by the Spanish authorities, in 1870. Submitted for Arbitration to a Mixed Commission, consisting of Mr. Juan M. Caballos and Mr. John P. Williams, who selected Mr. Johannes Rösing as Umpire. His decision, which awarded $19,702 in gold, was made November 15th, of the same year.

69. The UNITED STATES and SPAIN, in 1871. Claims which had arisen out of the last insurrection in Cuba, in 1868, on account of the alleged wrongs and injuries committed by the Spanish authorities in that island. Submitted by diplomatic Agreement, concluded at the United States Legation, Madrid, February 12th, 1871, to a Mixed Commission composed of two Arbitrators, an American and a Spaniard, and an Umpire, a citizen of a third Power, which met at Washington, May 31st, 1871. This Commission adopted a special rule of procedure, and its labours were prolonged for several years. But it underwent a number of changes and viscissitudes owing to the death of its members, from which cause it had as many as four Umpires. By a Protocol signed at Washington, May 6th, 1882, its labours were extended to January 1st, 1883, but were actually concluded December 27th, 1882, the last decision of the Umpire bearing date February 22nd, 1883. By an Agreement of June 2nd, 1883, concluded between the Acting Secretary of State and the Spanish Minister, provision was made for the winding-up of the Commission and the disposition of its records.

70. The UNITED STATES and GREAT BRITAIN, in 1871, on the "Alabama" claims. By the Treaty of Washington, May 8th, 1871, the dispute was referred to a High Commission, consisting of five members, nominated by America, Great Britain, Italy, Switzerland, and Brazil, viz., Mr. Chas. Francis 7 Adams, Sir Alex. Cockburn, Count Ed. Sclopis, Mr. Jacob Staempfli and Viscount d'Itajuba. This Commission met December 5th, 1871, at Geneva, and on September 14th, 1872, gave its decision, which awarded 15,500,000 dollars (£3,100,000) to the United States. This is one of the most important instances of Arbitration, and forms a distinct historical landmark.

71. The UNITED STATES and GREAT BRITAIN, in 1871. Sundry claims by the subjects of both countries, arising out of the Civil War. Referred by the Treaty of Washington (Arts. 12-18), to a MIXED COMMISSION Of three members, respectively appointed by Great Britain, the United States, and Spain, which sat until September 25th, 1873, when it adjudged the United States to pay £386,000 to Great Britain.

72. The UNITED STATES and GREAT BRITAIN, in 1871. Revival of the SAN JUAN dispute. A question of boundary, which involved the exact interpretations of the 1st Article of the Treaty of Washington of June 15th, 1846. The Commission appointed by that Treaty were unable to agree, and the subject had involved long diplomatic correspondence, dating back prior to 1803. It was now referred by the same Treaty (i.e. of Washington, 1871, Arts. 34-42), to the Emperor of Germany, whose award, given at Berlin, October 21st, 1872, sustained the American claim. (See No. 28.)

73. The UNITED STATES and GREAT BRITAIN, in 1871. About Nova Scotia Fishery Rights. By the Treaty of Washington, Arts. 18-25, May

K K

498

INSTANCES OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION

8th, 1871, referred to three Commissioners, Sir Alexander Galt, Mr. Ensign H. Kellogg, and Mr. Maurice Delfosse, who met at Halifax, June 15th, 1877, and on the 23rd of the following November, awarded 5,500,000 dollars (£1,100,000) to Great Britain, the American Commissioner dissenting and withdrawing from the Arbitration. The award, however, was accepted, the amount voted by Congress, and on the 21st November, 1878, Mr. Welsh, under instructions from the President of the United States, delivered to the British Government a draft for the amount of the Award.

74. The TRANSVAAL REPUBLIC and OTHERS, in 1871. Question as to the ownership of a small district between the Modder and Vaal rivers (where the town of Kimberley now stands) in which diamonds had been discovered. The Governor of Natal was recognised as Arbitrator by the Griquas, the Batlapin, and the President of the Transvaal Republic. The claims of the last-named State were disposed of by his decision. He awarded the tract in dispute to the Griqua Claimant, Waterboer, including in his award the part claimed by the Orange Free State, which had refused Arbitration. The Free State, whose case had not been stated, much less argued before the Arbitrator, protested, and was after a time able to appeal to a judgment delivered by a British Court, which found that Waterboer had never enjoyed any right to the territory. Meanwhile, before the Award, Waterboer had offered his territory to the British, and the country was forthwith erected into a Crown Colony. The British Government, therefore, without either admitting or denying the Free State title, declared that a district in which it was difficult to keep order amid a turbulent and shifting population ought to be under the control of a strong Power, and offered the Free State a sum of £90,000 in settlement of whatever claim it might possess. The acceptance by the Free State, in 1876, of this sum closed the controversy.

75. JAPAN and PERU, in 1872. Seizure of the Peruvian barque, "Maria Luz," engaged in the Coolie trade, in the Japanese port of Kanagawa, and the liberation as slaves of those on board. The dispute was getting embittered when it was referred, by a Protocol drawn up by common consent at Tokei, 15th and 25th June, 1873, to Alexander II., the Emperor of Russia, whose decision, given at Ems on May 17th, 1875, was in favour of Japan.

76. GREAT BRITAIN and the UNITED STATES, in 1872. Boundary from the N.W. angle of the Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains, on the 49th parallel of latitude. Referred, under the treaty of 1846, te a JointCommission, of which the American member, Mr. Archibald Campbell, was appointed under an Act of Congress, March 19th, 1872, the English Commissioner being Major D. R. Cameron; by which the delimitation was duly effected. The labours of the Commission were concluded in 1876.

77. GREAT BRITAIN and PORTUGAL, in 1872. A dispute, which had lasted since 1823, about various territories and islands situated on Delagoa Bay. Referred, by a Protocol signed at Lisbon, 25th September, 1872, to M. Thiers, the President of the French Republic. His successor, Marshal Mac Mahon, by his award, on July 24th, 1875, decided that the Portuguese title was established to all the territories in question. The decision was a serious blow to British hopes, and has become increasingly serious with the further development of the country. Yet it was mitigated by a provision, contained in the Agreement for Arbitration, that the Power against whom the decision might go, should have thereafter, from the successful Power, a right of pre-emption as against any other State desiring to purchase the territory.

78. GREAT BRITAIN and COLOMBIA, in 1872. Pecuniary claims of British Firm of Merchants (Cotesworth & Powell, of London), against Colombia. Referred to a Mixed Commission, Dr. Schumacher, German Resident, and Dr. Ancizar, on December 14th, 1872. A new Commission, owing to removal and death, was appointed, consisting of Mr. Scruggs, the Minister of the United States at Bogota, and Ex-President General Salgar. The case involved important principles. The Arbitrators agreed in an award of 50,000 dollars; the Commis

SINCE THE PACIFICATION OF 1815.

499

sion closed its labours on the 5th November, 1875, and its decision and Award was published in the Diario Oficial of Bogota, December 18th and 21st, 1875, and was signed by both Commissioners.

79. GREAT BRITAIN and BRAZIL, in 1873. Claim advanced by the Earl of Dundonald against the Brazilian Government, for services which his father, Admiral Lord Cochrane, had rendered to Brazil during her War of Independence. Referred to the United States and Italian Ministers at Rio de Janeiro, Mr. James R. Partridge and Baron Cavalchini. On October 6th, 1873, they awarded the Earl of Dundonald £38,675.

80. GREAT BRITAIN and FRANCE, in 1873. Questions concerning duties levied in France on British Mineral Oils. By a Convention signed July 23rd, 1873, it was referred to a Joint Commission (Messrs. C. M. Kennedy and J. Ozenne), with power to name an Umpire, whose award, without reference to the Umpire, was given in Paris, January 5th, 1874, and adjudged to British claimants 314,393 francs.

81. ITALY and SWITZERLAND, in 1873. A Disputed boundary between the Swiss Canton of Ticino and Italy, which involved the ownership of the Alp of Cravairola. Referred December 31st, 1873, to a Mixed Commission with the Hon. Geo. P. Marsh, the United States Minister at Rome, as Umpire, who, on September 23rd, 1874, decided in favour of Italy.

82. CHINA and JAPAN, in 1874. Murder of Japanese citizens by Chinese, in the Island of Formosa. The two Governments were on the point of appealing to arms, when the Cabinets of London and Washington induced them to have recourse to Arbitration, and the dispute was referred to Sir Thomas F. Wade, the British Minister at Pekin, who, in 1876, awarded an indemnity of 500,000 taels to be paid by China, as reparation for the outrage.

83. PERSIA and AFGHANISTAN (SEISTAN BOUNDARY), in 1874. This was a dispute respecting the boundaries of the Persian and Afghan territories, on the N.W. frontier of India, which had for years been the source of constant bickerings between the Shah and the Amir. The treaty of March 4th, 1857, between Great Britain and Persia, provided that: "In case of differences arising between the Government of Persia and the countries of Herat and Afghanistan, the Persian Government engages to refer them for adjustment to the friendly offices of the British Government, and not to take up arms unless these friendly offices fail of effect." This question was so referred, and two British officers were appointed Arbitrators on behalf of the British Government, viz., General Goldsmid and General Pollock, by whom, at the beginning of the year 1870, was brought to a successful conclusion," one of the most important boundary questions which our Government has had to decide."

84. UNITED STATES and COLOMBIA, in 1874. Claims for damages against Colombia for the capture of the American steamer "Montijo," in April, 1871, in Colombian waters, by insurgents in the State of Panama. Referred to a Mixed Commission, consisting of Mr. Bendix Koppel and Mr. Mariano Tanco, appointed under a Diplomatic Agreement of August 17th, 1874. Mr. Robert Bunch, the English Minister at Bogota, was chosen Umpire, by whom, July 25th, 1875, the sum of 33,401 dollars was awarded to the United States, and paid, Mr. Scruggs, the Minister Resident of the United States at Bogota, being "congratulated by his Government on the results of the Arbitration.”

85. PERU and CHILI, in 1874. Disputed accounts in connection with the fleets of both Powers, which were in alliance during the war with with Spain of 1855. By a Protocol, signed at Lima, March 2nd, 1874, the controversy was referred to Mr. C. A. Logan, U.S. Minister at Valparaiso, whose award, given April 7th, 1875, adjudged to Chili a sum of 1,130,000 dollars, less 654,000 paid by Peru.

86. ARGENTINE REPUBLIC and PARAGUAY, in 1876. The El Chaco Boundary dispute. Referred, by treaty of February 3rd, 1876, to the President of the United States. The decision of President Hayes was given November 12th, 1878, in favour of Paraguay. KK 2