THE H.B. TRIBUNE SATURDAY, APRIL 10, 1926. THE WORLD COURT.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVI, Issue 96, 10 April 1926, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE SATURDAY, APRIL 10, 1926. THE WORLD COURT.

Even if the only motive may be, as President Coolidge himself puts it in one of to-day’s Washington cable messages, the rather narrow one that “it affects us”—advantageously, no doubt—it is matter of sincere congratulation for the rest of the civilised world that the Senate, as representing the people of the United States, has at length brought itself to a decision, subject to certain reservations, to link up with the World Court. The declared adherence of so influential a Great Power cannot but largely extend the scope and fortify the jurisdiction of this international tribunal devised and calculated to assist in the preservation of peace. Perhaps, too, we should remind ourselves at the time that it was. another American President who was in great measure responsible for the League of Nations’ Covenant in which the idea of this Court was originally embodied. Opportunely with the Washington.message there has come to hand the March issue of “The World To-day,” in which Mr. E. M. Maude gives a brief history of the development of, the principle of international arbitration and an outline of the constitution, functions, and authorities of the new tribunal. Coming down to recent days, he points out that The Hague Court of Arbitration, set up at the Peace Conference in 1899, was hardly a Court in any strict sense of the word. Tt had no fixed personnel and no continuity, but when a case was submitted to it five judges were chosen from a panel of about 120 eligible for such temporary appointment. This loose structure left no hope of the building up of a body of authoritative precedents such as is essential to the rational and consistent administration of justice. At the second Peace Conference in 1907 a plan for the institution of an international Court was drawn up, an American, Mr. Elihu Root, being one who took a proponent hand in its framing. This, however, was not adopted, owing mainly to the difli culties that arose with regard to tne selection of judges. It is not, Mr. Maude says, the least among the trimphs of the League of Nations that it has succeeded in solving the problem of creating an entirely' acceptable bench of judges. An advisory committee of jurists was set up in 1920, on which America was again represented by Mr. Elihu Root .and with some modifications their plan was accepted by the League. The difficulty of the election of judges, it is explained, was got over by an ingenious scheme under which the Council and the Assembly of the League each has rights ot voting for judges. Thus the Great Powers represented on the Council were assured of securing a judge, while the proper representation oi the smaller nations was also guaranteed. The Court is now composed of eleven judges, with four deputy judges who act as substitutes for absent judges. Up till now America has taken no part in the election of the Court, but the selection of a distinguished American jurist, whose name was submitted by the Court of Arbitration, has doubtless done,

much to pave the way towards American participation. The judges are elected > for a period of nine years, and they choose a president of the Court every third year.

The expenses pf the Court are met by the League of Nations, the judges being remunerated on the basis of an annual retaining fee and in addition an allowance for every. day during which,the Court sits. The maximum amount which a judge is likely to receive in any year docs not exceed one-half of the salary or a, British judge of the upper courts. The Court is open to all nations, whether menu bers of the League or not,, and its juriscjiction .“comprise all which the parties to a dispute care to submit to it; and all matters specially provided for in treaties and conventions.” Submission to its jurisdiction is purely voluntary, except in the case of powers which may have adopted as between themselves a clause giving the Court compulsory jurisdiction. As yet } we are told, none of the Great Powers have bound themselves by accepting this clause, but that may come ere very long. So far the Court has worked smoothly and satisfactorily since its inception in 1922, and has been instrumental in disposing of a good many international differences that might otherwise have .led to estrangements, if not to hostilities. “At last,’* as Mr. Maude quotes from the Secretary-General of the League, Sir Eric Drummond, “an international judicial Jjody.is established which is entirely free from an political control and entirely unfettered as to its decisions l}y , political bodies. Although it derives its authority from the League, its judgments are in no way subject to advice or revision by either .the Council or the Assembly of that association. The relation between the Court and the Leaguq is similar, to that whiph exists between the Court and the Government in England and elsewhere.”