cannot fail to elicit feelings of kindness and admiration on the part of the government of China." A number of other cases of fraudulent award might be cited but the most notable were those which occurred under the claims treaty with Mexico of 1868. Decisions were rendered by the arbitration commission in favor of American citizens in the sum oí over $4,000,000. Immediately after the ad journment of the commission newly discov ered evidence came into the possession of Mexico which, if not successfully rebutted, would establish the fact that two of the claims to the amount of $1,170,000 were without merit and absolutely fraudulent. This evidence was submitted to the Secretary of the State and by him laid before Congress, with a view to legislation providing for a judicial examination of the charges of fraud. All efforts to that end were strongly re sisted in Congress by the claimants on the following grounds—(i) that the question was res jndicata; (2) that the parties to the award had acquired vested rights of which they could not be deprived: (3) that the award of an international tribunal could not be re opened; and (4) that Congress was without power to provide for a rehearing of the case. Under the provisions of the treaty Mexico was paying to the United States the amount due on the awards in instalments. Five of these instalments had been distributed to the claimants, but finally further distribution in the two cases in question was suspended and $750.000 paid in by Mexico was withheld to await action by Congress. Two attempts were made by the claimants to obtain pos session of this money by writ of mandamus upon die Secretary of State, but in both instances on appeal to the United States Su preme Court the writ was refused. In its decision the Court said: "As between the United States and the claimants, the honesty of the claim is always open to inquiry for the purpose of fair dealing with the government
against which, through the United States, a claim has been made." After fourteen years of delay, occasioned by the obstructive tactics of the claimants, in 1892 Congress passed an act referring the two cases to the Court of Claims for investi gation to determine whether the awards had been obtained by fraud and perjury, and if so found the money remaining in the Treas"ury was to be returned to Mexico. Upon a full hearing this court decided that the two awards had been obtained by fraud and per jury, and upon appeal by the claimants to the Supreme Court the decision was affirmed. Not only was the money in the Treasury returned to Mexico, but Congress made an appropriation for the amount which had been distributed to the dishonest claimants, and that was also repaid to Mexico. It has thus been determined that inter national arbitration cannot be used by claim ants to perpetrate fraud, and that, in the language of the Supreme Court, "no tech nical rules of pleading, as applied to munici pal courts, ought ever to be allowed to stand in the way of the national power to do what is right under all the circumstances." The foregoing cases show that, though the government of the United States is not infre quently misled by designing claimants or by the unwise action of its diplomatic agents, it has not hesitated when fully possessed of the facts to undo any injuries inflicted upon friendly powers by means of international commissions; and that fraud, once exposed, cannot reap the benefit of its iniquity under the cover of the finality of an award. A study of the various cases of arbitration in which the United States has been a party vill develop a great variety of questions of law and practice, which it will not be possible for me to take up in detail. They relate, in part, to the constitution or personnel of the tribunal, to its procedure, and to the power of the arbitrators to determine their own jurisdiction. In the arbitration of claims
