APROPOS of an article in these columns some weeks ago on “The Pope as International Arbitrator,” is the following from the European edition of the New York Herald:—
ROME. May 19, 1894.—A copy of the World’s Columbian Exposition Memorial for International Arbitration has been sent by Mr. W. E. Blackstone to the holy father, who is very much pleased with it, and has expressed his satisfaction at this new effort to maintain and consolidate peace among nations. The Civilt? Cattolica to be published to-day contains on this subject an important article by Father Brandl, one of the most talented and best known ecclesiastical writers. The article is supposed to give the Vatican ideas about arbitration. It begins by showing the exceptional inportance [sic.] of the memorial, which was not presented to a peace Congress or to a special Parliament, but to all the governments of the world, and was sent by the United States through their diplomatic representatives.
RIGHT vs MIGHT
Then on to discuss on what basis international arbitration might be conducted, it proposes that this basis should be not merely one of utility, which is movable and variable, but of law, the moral strength of which is invariable and universal. But the law of right must replace the anarchy of principles now reigning among many people, which anarchy has to be corrected by the schools and the press. Without this there would be no unity of view and consequently no unity of will, so that any effort to bring about international arbitration would resolve itself into the simple expression of a wish.
HOW TO FORM THE TRIBUNAL
One of the greatest difficulties of the whole question is to be decide in what way the supreme tribunal of arbitration should be formed. After showing that instead of nominating this tribunal on every occasion it would be better to have it sit in permanence and in a neutral land, the Civilt? Cattolica asks:—“But who enjoys such universal confidence as to be chosen arbitrator? Is there a man whose qualities may inspire such a confidence?”
“Yes, there is,” is the answer, “he is the pope.
The Civilt? Cattolica then tries to prove this assertion by historical examples and by the unique position of the pontiff.
The persistency with which this idea is being kept before the world is highly significant. Indeed the whole present policy of the papacy is in line with the suggestion, and shows as clearly as possible that to attain this position of influence and power is the settle purpose of the pope, and that in this the whole hierarchy is one with him.