Nappanee High School - Napanet Yearbook (Nappanee, IN)

Page 27 text:

Class of 1920 Wilma Best, Edna Cole. Charley Defrees, Warren Miller. Thelma Metzler. Blanche Xeher, Grace Smeltzer, Daisy Shively, Arthur Truex, Florence Walters, Hilda Walters

Page 26 text:

Freshman ( lass President........................French Wldmover Vice-President...................Wade Ringenberg Secretary and Treasurer..............Lola Rosbrugh Ralph Arnott Theodore Etymons Glen Geyer Earl Geyer Ralph Holm Minnie Ingle Wilma James Elmer Keck Glen wood Kronk Albert Knoble Howard Miller Olive Musser La Fern Miller Loneta Mishler Charlotte Nold Marjorie Naylor Harry Neher Oilier Overholser Ward Prickett Harvey Postma Wade Ringenberg Lola Rosbrugh Dale Rouch Loyal Stuckman Guy Terwilliger Kathren Wagner Paul Cline Levi Mishler Blanch Musser Versie Sheets Bertha Sheets Esther Truex Aaron Moore CLASS COLOns PCRPLE AND WHITE CLASS FLOWER WHITE ROSE CLASS YELL Rah, Re, Rip, Zip! Rah, Re, Rene! Bomerah! Bomerah! Nineteen! Nineteen!

Page 28 text:

International Arbitration is often consid- ered as suggestive of the time when nations will cease war with one another and when peace will reign supreme; or as the means of bringing a state of world peace into ex- istence. Arbitration may he a way of secur- ing peace, judicial settlement may be a bet- ter means of abolishing war, hut probably the use of both would be the most effective. If we consider the International Court, created by The Hague Conference as a court of arbitration and if we suppose that it thor- oughly meets the needs of arbitration, the question comes up whether or not arbitra- tion as understood and practiced, is the ul- timate goal for which we should work, or whether it is but a step to judicial settle- ment. •lames B. Scott of the John Hopkins ITiiversity and a I’nited States delegate to the second Hague Conference says that in fact, if not in theory, these two systems dif- fer, not merely in form but in substance; that certain classes of disputes should lie and can only be decided by judicial process and that certain questions can be better settled by arbitration than by courts of justice. He defines International Arbitration as the settlement of differences between states by judges of their choice and on the basis of respect for law. Judicial decision, on the contrary, is the decision of differences by judges, not necessarily chosen by the parties in controversy, and by application of prin- ciples of law. and not on the basis of respect for law. According to Act XX, of tin Hague Con- ference, the object of arbitration “Is the settlement of differences which it has not been possible to settle by diplomacy.” That is to say. arbitration springs out of diplo- macy, or takes up the settlement of a dis- pute, after diplomacy has failed. It, there- fore. as a rule, has the spirit of a compromise, which plays so leading a part in diplomacy, in it: and may not in the end give either na- tion concerned satisfaction, or may even be partial to one nation. Because of this fact, the establishment of an international court. composed of judges and lawyers from the d 'rren' countries whose opinions would not be biassed, and whose decisions would bo final, has often been suggested as a means for increasing the effectiveness of Interna- tional Arbitration, and the bringing about of a lasting peace to the world. .Mr. Elihu Root, who as Secretary of State, instructed the American delegates to the Second Hague Conference to propose such a court, did so in the following short speech : “The method in which arbitration can be made more effective, so that nations may be more ready to have recourse to it voluntar- ily, and to enter into treaties by which they bind themselves to submit to it, is indicated by observation of the weakness of the sys- tem now apparent. There can be no doubt that the principle objection to arbitration rests not upon the unwillingness of nations to submit their controversies to impartial arbitration, but upon the apprehension that the arbitration to which they submit may not lie impartial. It has been a very general practice for arbitrators to act, not as judges deciding questions of fact and law upon the record before them, under a sense of judicial re- sponsibility; but as negotiators effecting set- tlements of questions brought before them in accordance with the traditions and usages and subject to all the consideration and in- fluences which affect diplomatic agents. The two methods are radically different, proceed upon different standards of honorable obli- gation and frequently lead to widely differ- ing results. It very frequently happens that a nation which would be very willing to submit its differences to an impartial judicial determination is unwilling to subject them to this kind of diplomatic process.” From Mr. Root’s message, then, it is plain to he seen that one of the essential require- ments necessary in order that International Arbitration may reach its greatest point of effectiveness and accomplish the greatest good, is the organization of. or rather the creation of, an International Court; which