The Stratford Evening Post. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1913. AMERICA AND ARBITRATION.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXV, Issue 96, 30 April 1913, Page 4

The Stratford Evening Post. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1913. AMERICA AND ARBITRATION.

Mr W. J. Byran’s announcement that tlio American Government intends making a fresh essay towards international arbitration will be received among English-speaking people with widespread interest. The fundamental idea is the establishment of a Court “to take into account all questions including those of national honour, to discover the facts and to place them before the world.’ The disputant nations are to be pledged not to alter their military status, or prepare for war during the hearing of the case, although afterwards they may light it out or arbitrate just as they choose. A scheme of this kind had been mooted before in 1911, the first hint of it being received when Sir Edward Grey, in a. now famous speech in the House of Commons, quoted President Taft as saying that “matters of national honour were proper subjects of arbitration,” and also that “If we can negotiate and put through agreements with some other nations to abide by the adjudication of International Arbitration Courts in every issue which cannot be settled by negotiation.” Sir Edward Grey considered this attitude one calling for hearty reciprocation on the part of England, and in this opinion he was backed up by a great portion of the people. In America, however, the proposal, although widely supported, received great opposition. Mr Roosevelt was most violent in attacking it. He argued that America should not single out Britain for so conspicuous a friendship, if she could not arrange a treaty on the same terms and in the same spirit with any other nation. In the second place, he argued that matters involving national honour could not be subjected to national arbitration for, if a nation’s honour were wounded, no treaty could endure in the flame of national passion. It were better, he urged, to make no treaty at all than one which would not bind. The new American Administration, however, evidently does not share Mi' Roosevelt’s views, probably basing its belief on the supposition that if an Arbitration Treaty cannot avert war when tho dispute touches national honour it may, at any rate, avert some wars, nr dangerous tensions. But, in any case, it is a thing of the future, and as such its r 'suits remain to bo seen.