WHEN COUNTRIES GO TO LAW.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7802, 5 September 1903, Page 1

WHEN COUNTRIES GO TO LAW.

Nations That Have Settled Disputes . Without Going To "War. (Pearson's TTeeJcly.) A man, named Davis, master of an American whaler, had- brought his vessel to anchor in the harbour of Papiete, in the Society Islands. He had a quarrel with one of his crew, and drew a pistol to terrorise the man. . The weapon went off accidentally and killed a saior aboard a neighbouring vessel belonging to an inhabitant of Papiete. The question, was whether the crime was committed under United States' or Society Islands' jurisdiction, and 1 which, should try the man. Eventually Davis was sent back to his own country, tried and acquitted. The Society Islanders complained. The question, was eventually referred to two arbitrators, one British and one French. Their decision was that the crime was not committed on the American) whaler but upon the Society Island ship, and, there- j fore, under the territorial Government of the king of the Society Islands, and not within the admiralty jurisdiction, of the American Courts. So Davis had to be sent'back to the scene of the shooting, and tried all over again ; he got off, however, wi;h a fine. This is an- example of the petty side of international law. Of recent years, however, there have been, many most important disputes between nations settled in a pacific manner by arbitration before judges and • JURIES .SELECTED FKOM OTHER COT7NTKIES, In all, thirty-eight such, questions, any of which would) have have caused war a century ago, have 'been, so decided since the year 1859. The constitution of these courts varies • very greatly. When, in 1888, Peru fell out with Ecuador on a question of frontier, one judge only was chosen to settle the dispute, namely, the Queen, of Spain. On the other hand, the question of sealfishing in the Bebring Sea was brought by Britain and the United States before a I Board of no fewer than seven arbitrators. One was named by France, one by Russia, one by Sweden, and two each by the coun.tries chiefly concerned. The latter case was a most peculiar one. In 1870, the United States gave a monopoly of tiia Pribylov seal rookeries to the Alaska Commercial Company, on condition that it paid a certain sum and killed only 100,000 seals annually, and none except on land. ; But Canadian schooners, bound by no : such restrictions, began killing the seals at | sea ail the year round. The United States complained in vain, ands at last, in 1886, i seized three Canadian schooners for killing fur seals in the limits of Alaskan waters, j The crews were imprisoned, and THEIR VESSELS WEKE CONFISCATED. Soon afterwords more vessels of other

were seized, and tbere >WB| V < B , general remonstrance on the part of taeif countries. It -was pointed ont 'by Great Britain that, according to international law, no country can claim rights over the sea at any greater distance than three miles beyond it» coasts. The United States refused to yield, and ■war seemed in sight, when, fortunately* both sides agreed to refer the matter to arbitration. The tribunal found that Great Britain "was perfectly right in her' contention tba-p no country could claim: more than a marina league of sea around her coasts, and decided that the United States had no property i 3 fur seals 'beyond these limits. ■ '" At the same time, recognising that it was necessary to restrict indiscriminate sealing in order to preserve the fur seals from utter destruction, the commission established a close time for seals, and forbade anyone to capture them within) sixty miles of the islands. It also decreed thai only sailing vessels should be -used in tb© fishing, and so settled the case to the satisfaction of all parties. Some , of these international law cases are very lengthy, for their -work is terribly 'arduous. - Besides some hundreds of witnesses, the Venezuela Arbitration Tribunal, which, settled the boundary between, British Guiana and Venezuela, has before it OVEXL TWO TONS OF DOCUMENTS! The arbitrators, among whom waa included ex-President Benjamin. Harrison, of the United States, took three and a half years to give a decision. Even then their award of Barima Point to Venezuela gave much dissatisfaction. ' Another award which gave even greater dissatisfaction was that which resulted froma quarrel over territory between \France and* Brazil. This began in 1895J and was only finally settled last year. Judges chosen . by the Swiss Government were selected to> try the matter. . . Brazil claimed no fewer than 150,000 square miles of territory, an area almost exactly three times as large as all England. The Brazilians were awarded 147,000 square miles of the contested country,,* decision which did not please France. The Berne tribunal ;'is also considered to have shown undue partiality to Portugal in the matter of the Delagoa Bay Bailway. About rfifteen years ago, the late Colonel M/Murdo obtained from Portugal a concession to build a railway up from Delagba. Bay. to the Transvaal border. , By 1888,' fifty-five miles of the line had been successfully constructed. Suddenly the Portuguese Govetnnient arbitrarily fixed a new terminus, and ordered that the line should be finished to this point within eight months, under pain of forfeiture. This proving impossible, Portugal took forcible possession of the whole Ene. Great Britain could, of course, have used, force where a subject had beeto so ill-used. She preferred, however, to go to law. The) matter was put in the issods pi tie Swiss arbitrators. \ ) The amount claimed* by v Mrs M'MnrA* and- uhe shareholders was £2,000,000 atefling. The arbitrators took eleven yeaw to give a verdict of any kind*, and then awaitted only £949,560. They decided 1 , also, tihat the claimants should pay too very (heavy costs of the arbitration- ■"•■>■ But uhe eleven years spent over Vbs Delagoa Railway case is ndfc-qufbe a recorJ for length, of time wasted over a claim of tbis description. It -was on' July 28, 1862, that the Alabama, .the famous Cttrfederaite privateer,, sailed from the Mersey,' one, day only be* fare Uhe British Government teHegrapfied to ide Sain hierV 1$ was 1876 before ' T^B AWJIRDS WEKE FINALLY MADE. The United States claimed fin 1865 S fort damage fione by this redoubtabie vessel* . and seven years were wasted!; in; fruitless correspondence and aimless quarreling ben fore the judges -were finally chosen. They, were five in number, one Swiss, on^j Italiaav one from Brazil, besides t!he .A merman and British representatives. . - T!be amount claimed Was neaxlj £9,500,000 ; . that eventually: awatrded was' £3,250,000. Evan this sum was ftdjj* £1,250,000 more than it should rifehtifullj! have beeoy for by 1885 the surplus witfij interest in the hands of the United States Government was £1,900,000. A curious sequel to the business was the presentation to Queen Victoria* by an American lady, Mrs W. Carson, in 1892, of a magnificent painting, of fcheJEnteirna-< tioaal Alabama, Commissioners. . It is rarely that a country refuses to g» to law peaceably over any dispute. Even) then war is not inevitable' In 1865, some Bolivians seized the British representative at the town of Sucre, and forced! hunt Fo ride through the' streets mounted onj tt donkey, with hi 3 face to the tail: Compensation was requested by tin* British- Government. Tbis Bolivia refused to grant, and would not even arbitrate* Britain considered ii not worth wMLe to) go to war. SHie withdrew her representative, anid officially blotted Bolivia from) the map. So it remained for thirty-five yeais, until Bolivia bad the gi&ce" to apologise. Recently, Six W. Beauczarmet was sent <x6 as our represeatativej and the boycott is •at an end.