Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 16.pdf/321

powers are entitled to a preference of 30 per is morally justifiable; and that the nation cent, of the custom duties at La G'uayra and which adopts such a policy is entitled to the Puerto Cabello, the litigants to pay the cost moral support of the world, and the nation of the Tribunal. which obstructs such a policy merits the The Tribunal states that it has been guid condemnation of mankind. ed by international law, the equity of the 5. That the exercise of force by the case, the protocols signed at Washington United States within the Isthmus of Pana since Feb. 13, 1903, and the protocol of May ma is legally justifiable to the extent that 7. The court further says that it is not com such force is necessary to protect rights and fulfill duties created by treaty stipulations. petent to question the character of the war like operations of the blockading powers, 6. That the legal right conferred upon the United States by the treaty of 1846 to a 1 nor to decide whether they had exhausted free and unobstructed transit across the i all pacific means to prevent the necessity isthmus of Panama justifies the use of force for employing force. sufficient to preserve the said line of transit The decision also states that the blockad ing powers could not have intended to re free from all obstruction. 7. That the legal duty imposed upon the nounce the acquired rights, that Venezuela throughout the diplomatic negotiations con United States by the same treaty, to main stantly distinguished between the allied pow tain the sovereignty of the territory, justifies and requires the exercise of force sufficient ers and the neutrals, and that the latter did to prevent the encroachment of any foreign not protest against the claims for preference power upon this territory. by the blockading powers, either at the time 8. That the right of way conditioned by the war stopped or immediately after the the correlative duty of protection constitutes signature in the protocol of Feb. 13. an easement attached to the territory and To the United States is assigned the duty unaffected by changes of proprietorship. of carrying out the decision of the Tribunal 9. That by the transference of the sovso far as it relates to the payment of costs. crignty of this territory to the new republic Having submitted the case to The Hague of Panama, the legal right of defending the Tribunal, its decision has become interna transit across the isthmus is still held by the tional law so far as the signatory powers are United States as against Panama; and the concerned and will, no doubt, be recognized legal duty of maintaining the sovereignty of as law by all the powers. The decision must the territory against foreign encroachments be disappointing to all the advocates of arbi is still imposed upon the United States in tration in settling international disputes. It offers a premium to the creditor nation favor of Panama. 10. That by the recognition of the inde which makes a show of force by giving it a pendence of the new republic, Columbia has preference to the nation which seeks the acquired the status of a country foreign to milder method of diplomacy or arbitration. Panama; and the United States is hence un H. CLEVELAND COXE. attaché of the Consul der the legal obligation to protect by all General of the United States at Paris, writ necessary force the territorial sovereignty of Panama against any encroachments on the ing in the March number of the Yale Law Journal, expresses the belief that the thing part of Columbia. which strikes most forcibly the legal minded The Legal Adviser gives the following American who comes to France to study her summary of the "Venezuela Case:" ! institutions ... is the condition of perThe Hague Tribunal has decided in favor! sonal liberty. . . . Strange as it may seem, of Germany, Great Britain and Italy, the ' it is, nevertheless, perfectly true, that the blockading powers in the Venezuela case. i personal liberty of the French citizen today is little better protected, in some respects, The Tribunal decided that the blockading