the signatories to the League. It contemplates the oppor-
tunity of any member of the League, having a cause of com-
plaint against any other member of the League, to sue such
member in this court and bring it into court by proper pro-
cess. The complainant's pleading will, of course, state its
cause of action. The defendant may wish to question the
jurisdiction of the court on the ground, for instance, that
the cause of action stated by the complainant does not involve
a justiciable issue; that it can not be decided on principles
of law or equity.

The court, upon this preliminary question, must decide
upon its jurisdiction. If it finds the question not to be
justiciable, it must dismiss the complaint; but it may properly
refer its investigation to the Commission of Conciliation.
If it finds that it is justiciable, it must require the defendant
nation to answer.

What I have to discuss is whether the President and the
Senate, constituting the treaty-making power for this
Government, may consent, for and on behalf of the United
States, to the settlement of any justiciable issue arising be-
tween the United States and any other member of the League
by this permanent court; and whether it may leave to that
court the power to decide whether the issue raised is a jus-
ticiable one. It was argued against a similar provision in
the general arbitration treaties with England and France that
such a stipulation constituted a delegation by the President
and Senate of the authority reposed in them over the foreign
relations of our Government and therefore that it was ultra-
vires. Both upon reason and authority this objection is
untenable. The United States is a nation, and, from a
foreign standpoint, a sovereign nation, without limitation
of its sovereignty It may, therefore, through its treaty-

-53-