No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
American Members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration during Forty Years
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2017
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
- Type
- Editorial Comment
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 1941
References
1 The convention contained no provision concerning the date of its entry into force; one of the signatories, Turkey, did not deposit its ratification until June 12, 1907. The convention was ratified by the President of the United States on April 7,1900, and the ratification was deposited at The Hague on Sept. 4, 1900; but the convention was not proclaimed by the President of the United States until Nov. 1, 1901. 32 U. S. Stat., p. 1779.
2 Holls, The Peace Conference at The Hague (1900), p. 305.
3 Judge Cardozo, then Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, wrote to Charles Evans Hughes on Sept. 8, 1927, as follows:
“After many inward struggles I have come to the conclusion that a Judge of the Court of Appeals best serves the people of the State by refusing to assume an obligation that in indeterminate, if improbable, contingencies might take precedence of the obligations attached to his judicial office.
“The Constitution of the State excludes a Judge of the Court of Appeals or a Justice of the Supreme Court from holding any other office or public trust. In my opinion, membership in the Court of Arbitration is not an office or a public trust within that prohibition. Analysis of the Hague Tribunal is necessary, however, before this conclusion becomes obvious. To the minds of many, I might seem, in accepting membership, to be violating the command of the Constitution, or to be making nice distinctions to win an honor for myself. Even if I were to make it clear that membership does not violate the letter of the mandate there might be many who would feel that there had been an offense against the spirit. I think I shall best maintain the dignity and fair fame of the great office that I hold if I avoid the occasion and the possibility of debate or misconstruction. None more fully than you will feel an understanding sympathy for this attitude of mind.
“ I am grateful to the President for his generous confidence. Though I put the honor aside, it is with many a pang of regret and in obedience to a sense of duty. Every impulse of personal desire would move me to another choice.” New York Times, Sept. 13, 1927, p. 16. See also, Hellman, Benjamin N. Cardozo, American Judge (1940), pp. 155–157, in which some inaccurate statements are attributed to Cardozo. Fortunately, his over-meticulous attitude was not taken by Chief Justice Fuller and Judge Gray in 1900.
4 Most of the dates of appointments are taken from the published reports of the Administrative Council of the Court. Some confusion seems to prevail as to the dates when the six-year terms begin to run.
5 The appointments made in 1900 seem to have been notified to the International Bureau on or soon after November 24, 1900. U. S. Foreign Relations, 1900, p. 792.
5 See footnote 5 on preceding page.
6 In the Venezuelan Claims Arbitration in 1904, a strong objection was made to the appearance by a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration as counsel before a tribunal of the Court; the Convention of 1907 provides (Art. 62) that a member of the Court may not act as counsel before an arbitral tribunal created within the framework of the Court, except on behalf of the state which appointed him.
7 League of Nations Doc, A.92.1921.V.
8 This was not strictly accurate. Both the 1899 and the 1907 Conventions are in force for the United States vis-à-vis different groups of other states; the appointments by the President are made under both conventions, therefore.
9 The 1939 election was postponed and has not yet been held.
You have
Access