The Lodge Court

President Harding advocated it, President Coolidge endorsed it, and Senator Lodge delayed it--that has been the approximate history of the proposal that the U. S. enter the Permanent Court of International Justice. Senator Lodge, as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was in a difficult position. He was expected to do something and yet he was opposed to the proposal made by the last two Presidents of his own party.

As a result he advanced last week a separate proposal for a World Court, which may properly be called the "Lodge Court" in contradistinction to the existing court, which he calls the League Court. His proposal was in the form of a Senate resolution authorizing the President to invite other nations to a third Hague Conference to consider the Lodge plan. There is surprisingly little difference between the Court which Mr. Lodge dislikes and his own proposal.

Comparison:

1) Name: World Court of International Justice (Lodge), or Permanent Court of International Justice (League).

2) Relation to the Hague Court of Arbitration: Both courts are inde pendent thereof.

3) Constitution of the Court: Twelve judges elected for nine-year terms (Lodge) or eleven judges elected for nine-year terms (League).

4) Selection of Judges: Each nation nominates four candidates, two not of its own nationality (both plans). From this list judges are elected by two Committees acting separately, a General Committee composed of one representative of each signatory power and a Special Committee composed of ten members, one each from the U. S., Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan and one each from five other nations to be selected from time to time (Lodge)--or from the list of nominees, judges are elected in separate meetings by the Assembly of the League of Nations (composed of one representative from each of the powers signatory to the League of Nations Covenant) and the Council of the League of Nations (composed of one representative each from Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan and six other nations selected from time to time).*

5) Expenses of the Court (including salaries of Judges) are borne by the signatory powers (Lodge) or by the League of Nations (League).

6) Jurisdiction of the Court shall be voluntarily assumed by two contending nations or they may, by ratifying an optional clause in taking membership, obligate themselves to the jurisdiction of the Court in matters relating to the interpretation of treaties, questions of international law, or the breach thereof and the nature and extent of any reparation for the breach of an international obligation (both plans).

In short, the two courts would be virtually identical, assuming that the same nations would join Mr. Lodge's Court which have joined the League of Nations. The only difference of any importance would be that the British Dominions could not take part individually in the election of judges, but could participate only through the one vote of the British Empire. Presumably their share of the cost of the Court would be correspondingly lessened.

However, Mr. Lodge appended to his covenant several articles pertaining only to the U. S., instead of taking the usual course, appending these as reservations to U. S. ratification. The articles in question follow: ARTICLE LXV

The Court shall not have jurisdiction to render advisory opinions on any question which affects the admission of aliens into the United States, or the admission of aliens to the educational institutions of the several States, or the territorial integrity of the several States of the United States, or concerning the question of the alleged indebtedness, or money obligations of any State in the United States, or any question which depends upon or involves the maintenance of the traditional attitude of the United States concerning American questions, commonly described as the Monroe Doctrine, or other purely Government policy or any question which is considered by the Government of the United States to be a domestic question.

ARTICLE LXVI

The Court shall be bound by the principle that international law recognizes the authority of the laws of the United States within its own jurisdiction as applied to foreigners or to foreign-owned property therein, whether in time of peace or war.

ARTICLE LXVII

Before a case in which the United States is concerned can be submitted to the Court a special agreement must be concluded between the United States and the other parties in interest, defining clearly the matter ia dispute, the scope of the powers of the Court, and the periods for the several stages of procedure, and such special agreements on the part of the United States can only be made by the President of the United States by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof.

This is a most unusual procedure. To ask other nations to sign the Lodge Treaty with these articles attached would be virtually equivalent to asking them to acknowledge that the United States is a specially privileged nation. It would require every country joining the Lodge Court to acknowledge formally the Monroe Doctrine. Most nations are content to accept the Monroe Doctrine in practice, but many would object violently to initial it as a sign of their formal approval. Other nations would object similarly to "O. K.'ing" our immigration policy, whatever it may finally turn out to be. And some would be almost certain to insist that if we could write our preferred policies into the Court Covenant they could do the same for their preferred policies--in which case, probably, clashing policies would prevent any agreement.

From the standpoint of practical politics within the U. S., the passage of the Lodge resolution would be decidedly doubtful, even if it should come to a vote in the Senate. Democrats would be sure to offer the World Court proposal of President Harding or another of their own as a substitute. Neither President Coolidge nor Secretary Hughes were said to have known the details of it before Mr. Lodge presented the plan to the Senate. They would probably act on it, however, if the resolution were approved by the Senate. But approval is decidedly dubious, and it is not impossible, as many people hare taken pains to point out, that the plan is purely a pre-election move by Mr. Lodge.

*This difference between the two plans for selecting judges may be stated in this manner: They are identical except; first, that in as much as the nations signatory to the Lodge pact were other than the nations belonging to the League of Nations, so much would the nations participating in the election be different; second, that under the Lodge plan the nations who voted for judges in the General Committee might not include the Dominions or colonies of Great Britain or any other nations, whereas in the corresponding body ( Assembly ) of the League of Nations the British Dominions are represented with separate votes; third, that in the Special Committee of the Lodge plan, corresponding to the Council of the League of Nations, the U. S. would have a permanent place. If the U. S. joined the League, this third difference would be eliminated for we should be entitled to a permanent place on the Council.