Page images
PDF
EPUB

sustained through military power, or in Russia where a Communistic dictatorship is now forced upon the people, government could not withstand the strain of free expression of opinion or uncensored assemblies of the people. But by the recognition of these rights, Englishspeaking people are able to give free expression to their wishes and to control the action of their representatives whom they have placed in power, and as they generally desire to avoid war, the tendency is to preserve the peace of the world.

I may mention a few other things which are characteristic of Anglo-Saxon civil liberty and which are embodied in our Constitution and are based upon an effort to achieve abstract justice. The writ of habeas corpus gives to a person charged with a crime the right to demand in court the cause of his detention; unreasonable search and seizure of a man's person or property are prohibited; every individual is vouchsafed the exercise of full religious liberty; excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment are prohibited; life, liberty or property may not be destroyed or impaired without due process of law, and finally, an individual charged with a crime has the right to have twelve of his fellow citizens judge of his guilt. All these rights are secured by our Constitution. They embody the ideas of justice and fair play which have been derived from the experience of English-speaking nations for nearly a thousand years. Although we take them for granted, they are not axioms of government among all the nations of the world. Perhaps some of them have no very direct bearing on international negotiations. But if the spirit of liberty and justice on which they are founded is carried by the united action of English-speaking people into

negotiations between nations, it will go far to preserve the peace of the world.

England and her dominions and colonies have long been ready to coöperate with America in that much desired consummation. If concrete evidence of this were needed (and without entering upon the controversial question of our joining the League of Nations), it will be found in the powerful co-operation of the English representatives at the Washington Conference for the Reduction of Armaments, the greatest concrete contribution that has been made in the direction of the avoidance of rivalry in the production of war material, that the world has witnessed. Without the united action of England and America, the great results of that Conference could never have been accomplished. And if we should become one of the members of the League of Nations there is little doubt that by co-operation with England and her dominions and colonies, we could do much good in introducing among the nations of the world a spirit of good-will and of abstract justice to the the weak and powerful alike, which would do much to avoid the catastrophe of war.

XVII

THE WORLD COURT

SOMETHING THE UNITED STATES CAN CONTRIBUTE TO CREATE A FEELING OF

SECURITY IN EUROPE*

HE question as to whether the feeling of insecurity

from the United States, involves many considerations. The United States can contribute something towards this feeling of security, but not everything. I propose to address myself to a single matter in which we can be helpful. I refer to the World Court.

We are unofficially making a number of valuable contributions to the work of the League of Nations to secure world peace. I was in Geneva last September for fourteen days. One cannot spend so much time in the vicinity of the League of Nations without absorbing views and acquiring facts, and one conclusion that I' and many others arrived at, after hearing the debates, the speeches of Mr. Herriot and Mr. MacDonald, Mr. Salandra and others, and after witnessing the events of the week during which the Disarmament Protocol was agreed upon, was that the entry of this country into the League would be postponed for some time, probably until the European nations had advanced a little farther

Remarks at Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, held in Philadelphia on May 15 and 16, 1925. Reprinted from The Annals of the Academy for July 1925.

in the settlement of some of their problems, particularly that of disarmament. That does not mean that the hope of entry must be abandoned. I believe that today we could be a most useful member of the League. But the situation in Europe and the differences among the members of the League, afford to the opponents of the League in this country such arguments that they would be able to persuade the United States Senate that we ought not to join the League. But anybody visiting Geneva will see that the United States is doing coöperative work of great value and much that is effective in carrying to fruition the ideas on which the League is founded. Disarmament, reparations, settlement of Inter-Allied debts, remain unsolved; but we are doing much to aid in their solution. In matters of public health, traffic in opium, women and children, labor conditions and obscene publications, we have unofficially been able to do much good.

I speak today of our joining the World Court, because that is a concrete thing of the greatest value that we can contribute to the settlement of European affairs. The suggestion is in line with our public policy for a period of thirty years. I do not want to be understood as being of the opinion that the World Court will be a panacea for all the ills of the world. Arguments that the Court will contribute more to the preservation of peace than it ever can, tend to weaken our cause. But our joining the Court will certainly add much to the feeling of security in Europe. Indeed, at the present time, the most useful result of our entry into the World Court will be the moral effect upon the entire European situation.

The World Court does not mediate or arbitrate

disputes, through diplomatic and other means, but decides questions according to fixed principles of law. Some people say there is no such thing as international law. I disagree. Not alone is there a system of international law, but its principles come nearer to natural law based on moral concepts than municipal law. To be effective, however, it must be supported by the public opinion of the countries that profess it. Many people pretend to advocate the World Court, but not until a system of international law has been adopted. Such a condition precedent is impossible of accomplishment, and insistence upon it would defeat the entire project. Indeed, its suggestion has so little to support it, that it implies either that its advocates use it as an indirect means of keeping us out of the Court, or that it is the result of a superficial consideration of a profound subject. There are nearly 1,000 treaties now in effect and on file with the League of Nations. Questions are constantly arising under these treaties with reference to their true interpretation. That in itself is the administration of international law. Aside from that, international law has existed from the time of Grotius and long before him, and there are certain rules of international law that are now being applied by our own Supreme Court as well as by the World Court itself.

There are people who will say if we had international law, we would be governed by lawyers. But the polity, the political theory upon which this government is founded, is bound to throw into the hands of lawyers, or persons understanding the law, the control of important affairs in this country. It has always been so and it will always be so. The great statesmen of this

« PreviousContinue »