Geneva convention of 1864. Three declarations were adopted prohibiting the use of various projectiles and explosives that caused unnecessary suffering, and also a number of wishes (vaux) were drawn up that were to bear fruit, it was hoped, at some future day.

Soon after the conclusion of the conference a war broke out between the South African republics and Great Britain, and that was succeeded by the war between Russia and Japan. The improved code for land warfare was put in operation, and combatants were at last working upon a common basis.

Under the convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes, the Dogger Bank affair between Great Britain and Russia was settled, the machinery for the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War was put into operation, and a court of arbitration established which tried several important

cases.

34. The Second Hague Conference. This conference was proposed by President Roosevelt through the secretary of state, Mr. John Hay, in 1904, Russia being at that time at war with Japan. The Czar, however, made known his wish to call the second conference at The Hague, and President Roosevelt at once yielded the precedence to the Czar, who issued the first call in 1906, and this time included all other countries in South America that were ready to adhere to the conventions of the previous Hague conference. After unavoidable delay the second convention of The Hague met on the 15th of June, 1907, with representatives from forty-five states. As a result there were thirteen conventions and one declaration adopted, and three wishes (vaux), and a number of recommendations entered upon the records. The conventions

were:

1. A revised convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes.

2. A convention respecting the employment of force for the recovery of contract debts.

3. A convention relative to the opening of hostilities.

4. A revised convention regarding the laws and customs of land warfare.

5. A convention relating to the rights and duties of neutral powers and persons in case of war on land.

6. A convention regarding the status of enemy merchant ships at the outbreak of hostilities.

7. A convention in regard to the conversion of merchant ships into war-ships.

8. A convention as to the laying of submarine mines.

9. A convention regarding the bombardments by naval forces in time of war.

10. A convention for the adaptation to maritime war of the principles of the Geneva convention.

11. A convention relative to certain restrictions with regard to the exercise of the right of capture in naval war.

12. A convention relative to the creation of an international prize-court.

13. A convention concerning the rights and duties of neutral powers in naval war.

Besides these conventions there was a renewal of the declaration prohibiting the discharge of projectiles and explosives from balloons. In addition, the principle of compulsory arbitration was admitted, and the resolution of the first Hague conference in regard to the limitation of military expenditures was confirmed. The wishes adopted were in favor of the advisability of formulating a convention for a judicial arbitral court, and also one to safeguard the pacific relations, more especially those of a commercial and industrial nature between inhabitants of the belligerent states and neutral countries. The conference also expressed the wish that the powers should regulate by special treaties the position, as regards military charges, of foreigners within their territories, also that the preparation and codifications of regulations relative to the laws and customs of naval warfare, or in any case

applying as far as possible the principles of the laws and customs of war on land to such warfare, should be taken up by the next Hague conference, and also that the meeting of this conference should take place at a date fixed by common agree

ment.

So far as the revision of the convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes is concerned in the first eight articles, the only changes were to substitute the word "contracting" for "signatory" powers, and in Article 3 to add the words "and desirable" so that it now reads: "Independently of this recourse (to war) the contracting powers deem it expedient and desirable that one or more powers strangers to the dispute should on their own initiative, and as far as circumstances may allow, offer their good offices or mediation to the states at variance," etc.

The subject of international commissions of inquiry was dealt with in six articles in the convention of 1899, but that of 1907 contains twenty-eight articles upon the subject. This institution had proved its value in the North Sea commission of 1905. The only other important change was made in the addition to present Article 48-formerly Article 27—which provides that in case of dispute between two powers one of them may always address to the international bureau a note containing a declaration that it would be ready to submit the disputes to arbitration.

"The bureau must at once inform the other power of the declaration."

This convention was adopted by the United States and confirmed by the Senate on April 2, 1908, with the following declaration: "Nothing contained in this convention shall be so construed as to require the United States of America to depart from its traditional policy of not intruding upon, interfering with, or entangling itself in the political questions of policy or internal administration of any foreign state, nor shall anything contained in the said convention be construed to

imply a relinquishment by the United States of its traditional attitude toward purely American questions.

"Resolved, further, as a part of this act of ratification, that the United States approves this convention with the understanding that recourse to the permanent court for the settlement of differences can be had only by agreement thereto through general or special treaties of arbitration heretofore or hereafter concluded between the parties in dispute; and the United States now exercises the option contained in Article 53 of said convention to exclude the formulation of the 'compromis' by the permanent court and hereby excludes from the competence of the permanent court the power to frame the 'compromis' required by general or special treaties of arbitration concluded or hereafter to be concluded by the United States and further expressly declares that the 'compromis' required by any treaty of arbitration to which the United States may be a party shall be settled only by agreement between the contracting parties, unless such treaty shall expressly provide otherwise." 1

The second Hague conference adjourned on the 18th of October, 1907, after a session of some months. Its results, where not discussed under the present heading, will be discussed later, when the subjects treated by the conference come up for separate treatment.

Of the conference as a whole there must be expressed the general feeling of disappointment accompanying the close of all conferences assembled under the name of peace conferences. Higgins, in his comment on this conference, says:

"Some of these causes of want of greater success are capable of remedy by a future conference, but the more fundamental and permanent cause was political. Each delegation had the primary duty to discharge of defending its state's national interests; the conference was not composed merely of lawyers intent on framing a scientific code of international law; it

1 See Scott's "Hague," etc.

was a battle-field of diplomatists. In questions where political considerations were supreme compromise was often impossible.

"Notwithstanding all these circumstances, the conference was not a failure; it was disappointing, but it is not discouraging. War will not be banished from the world by peace conferences; nevertheless such gatherings, by removing doubts in international rules and bringing into greater prominence the solidarity of the interests of mankind, may do much to encourage arbitration and to remove the causes of war." 1

35. The Declaration of London. The international prizecourt formulated at the second Hague convention, and which has been duly ratified by the United States, contains in the second part of Article 7 the following words:

"In the absence of such (treaty) provisions, the court shall apply the rules of international law. If no generally recognized rule exists, the court shall give judgment in accordance with the general principles of justice and equity."

As a strong feeling existed on the part of Great Britain and other maritime powers as to what rules of maritime international law might be considered to exist at the present day, it was considered wise by Great Britain to call a conference to determine what laws should govern the international prizecourt in the cases to be brought before it for trial. Accordingly, on the invitation of the British Government, delegates from Germany, the United States, France, Great Britain, Italy, Austria, Russia, Japan, Holland, and Spain met in London from December, 1908, to February, 1909, and formulated a convention popularly known as the declaration of London, settling many important matters in the relations of belligerents and neutrals in matters connected with prize laws that were liable to be within the jurisdiction of an international prizecourt and about which there had existed great differences.

'Higgins, "Hague Conferences," pp. 525, 526.