e established a Permanent Court of
Arbitration and agreed on international rules of procedure for the
conduct of this court. And if, seeing that in every particular instance
the court is ultimately chosen by the parties, the expression 'Permanent
Court of Arbitration' is only a euphemism, nevertheless the permanent
list of persons from among whom the arbiters can be chosen, and, in
addition, the Permanent Bureau of the Court of Arbitration at The Hague,
and, lastly, the international rules of procedure, represent at least
the elements of a permanent court. Thereby an institution is obtained
which is always available if only parties will make use of it, whereas
such an institution was entirely lacking formerly, and if parties wanted
an arbitration they had to enter on lengthy arrangements about the
machinery of the process. And the short experience of twelve years has
already shown how valuable the institution is, and how well adapted to
induce disputant states to make use of it.

[Sidenote: The proposed International Prize Court and Court of Arbitral
Justice.]

52. The second Peace Conference took, however, another great step
forward in the resolution to establish an international court of appeal
in prize matters, and also in the proposal about a really permanent
international court to exist by the side of the Court of Arbitration.
And the United States of North America have recently entered on
negotiations with the object of utilizing the International Prize Court,
should it come into existence, as at the same time a permanent tribunal
for all legal issues. Here present and future touch hands, and these
proposed institutions must therefore be discussed. Attacks upon them
have been made from two sides, it being asserted that they infringe the
principles of the equality and sovereignty of states.

[Sidenote: Does the constitution of the International Prize Court
violate the principle of the equality of states?]

53. It is alleged that the principle of equality is violated in that the
Prize Court is contemplated as consisting of fifteen members, so that,
while the eight Great Powers are always represented by a member, the
thirty-seven smaller states are only represented by seven members who
take their seats in the court in rotation according to a definite plan.
Now it is not clear how the principle of equality can be deemed violated
thereby. This principle has really nothing to do with the constitution
of an inter