dden in all civilized states and threatened with
penalties, it--certain states excepted--continues to flourish.
Enactments being impotent where the public sentiment of the dominant
class refuses them any moral recognition, the duel will not disappear so
long as the moral attitude of the circles concerned demands it as a
protection for personal honour. And the _Sonderbund_ war of 1847 in
Switzerland, the American war of secession from 1861 to 1865, and the
Austro-Prussian war of 1866 within the German _Bund_, show that
organization into a confederation of states or into a federal state does
not necessarily banish war.
[Sidenote: War may gradually disappear without a world-state.]
20. On the other hand, the gradual disappearance of war, which certainly
is a correct ideal, is to be hoped for and expected quite apart from any
development of a world-state, even if neither to-day nor to-morrow can
be contemplated for the complete realization of this ideal. Many states
have already entered into numerous agreements with other individual
states to refer to arbitration disputed questions of law and questions
about the interpretation of treaties, so far as these disputed questions
do not touch the vital interests, independence, or honour of the
parties. It is here that further development must begin. The man who is
not a victim to prejudice asks the reasonable question, why should vital
interests and the independence and honour of states necessarily be
withdrawn from the domain of judicial decision? If individuals in a
state submit themselves to the judge's sentence, even when their vital
interests, their honour, their economic independence, aye, and their
physical existence are in issue, why should it be impossible for states
to do the same? If only we succeeded in the clear enunciation of legal
rules for all international relations; if only we could succeed in
finding independent and unbiased men to whose judgment a state could
confidently submit its cause; if only we could succeed in bringing such
men together in an independent international court--there would then be
no reason why the great majority of states should not follow the example
of the very small minority which has already agreed to settle all
possible disputes by means of arbitration. The objection that a state
could not submit its honour, for example, to the sentence of a judge is
as little entitled to recognition as is the claim, made by those
dominant classe
|