LAW-ABIDING NATIONS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19139, 7 October 1936, Page 12

LAW-ABIDING NATIONS

HOLLAND AND EELGIUM DISPUTE OVER CANAL Those who believe in the ultimate triumph of the League of Nations ideal, although that ideal is to-day challenged and throat enod by dictatorships, will take heart from abundant evidence that tli(' majority of nations are still peaceloving and law-abiding, writes Leslie A. Aldous in a bulletin issued by the League of Nations Union. Thus a steady stream of eases flows to the Permanent Uourt of Internationa! Justice at The Hague lor settlement'. It is not generally realised that 60 eases have come before the court since it was set up by tile League of Nations in 1936. The latest concerns a quarrel between Holland and Belgium with regard to the Albert Canal, an important Belgian waterway which curves near the Dutch frontier.

Every boy and girl at school realises the importance ot the canals of the Netherlands. Any factor which governs the economic life of nations is potentially a serious source of friction. It will not do for us to dismiss a canal in Belgium as a trivial cause of disturbance. Wo can conceive of a war being fought about the Suez Canal or the Panama Canal. The case of the Albert Canal is not strictly parallel, but there can be no doubt that it is arousing anxious feelings between Holland and Belgium. The present situation is that the Belgians have been undertaking certain works on the Albert canal. The Dutch leel that their interests are being adversely affected and that, moreover, the Belgian attitude n contrary to the terms of a 73-year-old treaty between the two countries. It is obvious that, in some parts of Europe, such a clash of opinion would be fraught with grave danger to international peace, Fortunately both Holland and Belgium have signed' the “optional clause,” by which they and 40 other nations have mutually agreed in advance to submit all suitable- cases to the World Court |or settlement. During the first week *of August, Holland opened proceedings at The Hague. There seems no reason to doubt that, after tie evidence on both sides lias been lieaid 'by the judges on the bench in the Place Palace, the verdict of the court wll he freely accepted by the two parties.