this difficulty removed it would thus be possible for the King, on the advice of the Prime Minister, to summon such peers as he might select (in addition to the small number of statutory peers), which would result in a majority in sympathy with the Government of the day.

The present procedure of the Upper House would be left unaltered. There would, indeed, be no necessity for any alterations. In the ordinary course the Government of the day, of whichever party, would carry its measures through both Houses, but the old safeguard against hasty and illconsidered legislation would remain. A second Chamber, composed, it is true, of hereditary peers, would remain, but these might and would, in the ordinary course, consist of picked men. And, above all, it would be a Chamber possessing a majority in political sympathy with the majority in the people's House. Thus the struggle over, the veto of the Lords would vanish into thin air, and the danger and disadvantages of a written Constitution would be avoided.

By this ill-considered action in rejecting the Budget the Lords threw the Constitution into the melting pot. By their disregard of precedent and custom, they have undermined the very foundations upon which their own House rests. But, by consenting to the constitutional exercise of such a prerogative as indicated above, they may yet snatch security for their order from impending and irreparable disaster. The Crown and the people have, on several occasions in English History, found themselves allied against the baronage with results not always favourable to the latter. A similar alliance against the same foe, fighting for purely class interests, will meet with similar results. When once the people recognise that the peerage is endeavouring to limit the prerogatives of the Crown, not in the interests of the liberty of the subject and the like, but in order to protect their own order from sharing the

burdens of State and to retain their own peculiar privileges, then the old alliance between the Crown and the people will be renewed, and it will not be the peerage which will be able to congratulate itself upon the result.

An opportunity for a real compromise has unexpectedly, and since these words were written, been presented. The result of the Conference of the Eight is still on the knees of the gods. A compromise on the lines I have ventured to indicate would, I think, be acceptable to all parties. The House of Lords, no longer regarded as the complacent handmaid of one political party, would remain to fulfil its principal function as a drag to the coach of State.

HUGH H. L. BELLOT.

VIII. THE INTERNATIONAL LAW ASSOCIATION LONDON CONFERENCE.

[NDER the Presidency of Lord Justice Kennedy, and

UNDE

with the active assistance of the Lord Chief Justice (Honorary President), Mr. Justice Phillimore, Sir J. Gray Hill, and other members of its executive, the International Law Association held last August, in London, a Conference, which was remarkable for the high quality of the papers read, and for the gratifying numbers in which it was attended by members from abroad. Through the traditional generosity and hospitality of the City of London, and of the various legal and mercantile corporations connected with the metropolis, a reception was assured to the visitors of which it can only be said in criticism that it will be difficult to emulate its completeness on future occasions. The City Corporation granted the use of the Council Chamber at the Guildhall for the meetings, and the interest was so well sustained that the smaller apartment, which had been promised for use on occasions when subjects not

calculated to attract a large audience were to be discussed, was only called into requisition for sectional meetings and committees.

On the day fixed for the opening of the Conference, the Guildhall presented a brilliant appearance: the Lord Mayor (Sir Stuart Knill, Bart.)-to whom the Association owes a great debt of gratitude for his constant and tactful kindness-was present in State, attended by the civic authorities, and addressed the assembly in a speech of welcome, after which Lord Justice Kennedy read a suggestive and illuminating inaugural paper. The learned Lord Justice, going to the root of the matter, showed that the Association's labours were essentially directed to the preservation of peace, by placing the international relations of the world upon a stable and solid basis. Succinctly summarising its achievements in the past, his Lordship touched upon the unifying work of the Association in the sphere of commercial affairs, alluding to the York-Antwerp Rules on General Average, and the Budapest Rules on Bills of Exchange, but he impressed upon his hearers the fact that these were only aspects of its great aim—the maintenance of international harmony and respect for legal right. This was emphasised by the fact of the first papers read being specifically devoted to the subject of International Arbitration, in accordance with the practice of the Association ever since it began.

Dr. Evans Darby presented a paper which produced an immediate and marked impression. It has never been quite so clearly pointed out before-though Dr. Tryon, of the American Peace Society, has spoken out on the matterto what goal the indiscreet advocates of universal arbitration by force are hurrying. It is neither more nor less than World-Federation and the loss of national existence-which may be a desirable thing or not, but which certainly must not be accepted under any false impression. Unfortunately,

the Author of this remarkable paper was unable to be present in person, as the annual International Peace Congress was in progress during the same week at Stockholm-a coincidence which deprived the London meeting of not a few zealous members.

An interesting paper by Mr. F. Cunningham, Boston, on the Evolution of Law and Order of All Nations, was directed to be printed, though the writer was similarly prevented from attending. Dr. Bisschop then brought forward a motion for the approval of the establishment of a school of law in connection with the Hague Tribunal; it elicited a brisk discussion, Lord Alverstone delivering a weighty pronouncement in its favour, while Sir F. Pollock expressed himself as sceptical as to the value of such an academy. As proposed by Sir T. Barclay, a modified version of Dr. Bisschop's motion was ultimately adopted with unanimity, by which the Association expressed its willingness to examine any well-considered scheme on the lines indicated by him.

It was universally considered that great value attached to the papers read on the Declaration of London by Sir W. Phillimore for the Rt. Hon. A. Cohen and by Sir J. Macdonell. Mr. Cohen gave a careful summary of the provisions of the Declaration, according to them approval in the main, whilst criticising them in minor details. Sir J. Macdonell, subjecting them to an elaborate and searching analysis, arrived at a far less favourable conclusion. The present writer ventured to submit a short paper on the same subject, emphasising the view already expressed in this Magazine, that the instrument fails to take due account of the importance of evidence and costs, and is consequently unpractical and dangerous. There seemed to be a large body of opinion in the meeting in favour of withholding immediate British ratification from the Declaration, although Sir J. Gray Hill and Sir T. Barclay were prepared to regard the Convention

as a step in the right direction. Sir W. Phillimore was particularly emphatic in objection to the clauses by which a qualified right of destruction of neutral prizes is conceded to belligerents, which it seems could never be safely worked. On the special subject of Continuous Voyage, Professor C. Noble Gregory (Iowa) read a scholarly paper which closed the official programme of the first day's work.

Resuming on the second day, a series of four papers were read on Workmen's Compensation, by Sir J. Gray Hill (Liverpool), Mr. Ant. Franck (Antwerp), Mr. Mignault, K.C. (Montreal), and Professor Baumgarten (Pesth). The papers were very diverse in scope: the English one was in great part an able and lucid criticism of the economic effects of the English statute, with suggestions for its improvement: the Canadian one went deeply into the jural and ethical foundations of responsibility: the Belgian dwelt on the distinction between seamen and stevedores, recommending their assimilation; whilst the Hungarian pointed out the consequences of the refusal of the United States to grant compensation to foreigners. A general resolution was carried on the proposition of Professor Baumgarten (as amended on the lines of a subsequent speech by Professor Ferenczy (Pesth), expressing the opinion that the benefits of compensation should not be withheld on the ground of nationality. But the subject will doubtless present much complication in working out, as between countries where contributory and non-contributory systems are respectively in force. A wider aspect of the relations between industry and bureaucracy was dealt with in a series of papers by Mr. Justice Walton, Mr. J. E. R. Stephens, and Dr. A. C. Schröder (Cairo). Mr. Justice Walton-whose forcible and animated delivery conveyed no hint of his tragically sudden death within a few days interference -repeated the telling criticism on State

which was made by him at Berlin in 1906.

The modern