A New International Court
173
diction to decide questions of law, but of international justice and the grow also gives it concurrent jurisdiction ing desire for the fair determination of with the Hague Permanent Court over every question which a nation has de questions other than those of a judicial cided to be suitable for arbitration. If nature. Mr. Tryon would evidently it is worth while to arbitrate at all, limit the jurisdiction of the former court we may as well have a fair arbitration to purely juridical questions. Dean while we are about it: this is likely Henry Wade Rogers would likewise to be the attitude to which the nations restrict the jurisdiction of the Arbitral will in the main try to conform. Real arbitration will come when the world Court.1 Mr. Tryon thinks that the proce really wants it, and not until then, and artificial restrictions on the per dure of the Permanent Court of Arbi tration could be improved by the sonnel of the tribunal cannot hasten adoption of a system of orderly plead the day of impartial decisions. The pro ing, and that the arbitrators should be vision that nationals may sit in the required by the terms of submission court need not delay the coming of this to know the languages that are to be ideal regime, in view of the abundant used in a trial. He also has something material which every nation may draw to say on the question whether nationals upon for unbiased arbitrators. It may should We have be allowed alreadyto expressed sit in the the tribunal. view have been, as Mr. Tryon says, that "with notable exceptions, such as the that the seating of nationals need not Fisheries and Grisbadarna cases, nationals embarrass a fair judgment.8 Everything when used on arbitral tribunals have of course depends upon the character shown a tendency to oppose decisions of the nationals. The ripe judicial tem injurious to their country's interest." perament and qualifications of Sir Charles Yet these two important exceptions Fitzpatrick and Judge George Gray make it impossible to generalize by no doubt had much to do with the atti laying down the rule that under no tude of careful impartiality which they circumstances should nationals act as maintained in the North Atlantic Fish arbitrators. As the Hague Permanent eries arbitration. Judicial experience Court grows older, it will evolve a cumu does not, of itself, insure detachment lative body of traditions of its own from national bias, of course, nor is which will exert no little influence upon there any guaranty that men of judi both its organization and its procedure. That nations as a rule have been un cial qualifications will be named as arbitrators. Yet, on the other hand, willing to submit their disputes entirely a provision that nationals shall not sit to the judgment of neutrals, and that in the court would be insufficient to nationals may be useful because of their guarantee its absolute impartiality, for knowledge of the systems of law pecu a nation not desiring a dispassionate liar to their respective states, Mr. Tryon decision is in a position to nominate recognizes, and his conclusion is: — If the Permanent Court of Arbitration were neutrals in sympathy with its cause. The only real guaranty of impartiality to be the only court of nations, it might be advisable to propose that nationals be finally is that offered by the growing sense excluded from its tribunal and used on outside • "The Essentials of a Law Establishing an Inter boards of arbitration; but, if there is to be a Court of Arbitral Justice also, there is still, in national • 25 Green Court." Bag 93.22 Yale Law Journal 277, 291. view of the Fisheries and the Casablanca cases,
