ARBITRATIONS BETWEEN OTHER NATIONS
178. General considerations. -- We will now take up the subject of arbitrations with which nations foreign to the United States have been concerned. In so doing, it will be our purpose to touch upon only the more important disputes, reserving for separate chapters cases which have been referred to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague or the Hague Permanent Court of International Justice, and also to the various mixed tribunals between European countries formed consequent upon the conclusion of the World War or to the Central- American Court of Justice.
179. Allied Powers and the Netherlands. -- A dispute of historical interest arose respecting the inheritance of the Duchy of Bouillon. By Article 4 of the Treaty between Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, Russia, and the Netherlands, signed May 31, 1815, it was referred to an arbitral tribunal1 of five members, one chosen by each of the claimants and one each by Austria, Prussia, and Sardinia. The award was in favor of the Prince de Rohan. Much of the interest in this tribunal is because of the fact that it was the second instance of arbitration with regard to the inheritance, the first occurring in the seventeenth century.
180. France and Mexico. -- A dispute arising between these countries because of personal injuries and capture of ships during a recent war, all questions were referred to the arbitration2 of Queen Victoria under a convention of March 9, 1839, who held that claims of both sides were invalid because of the state of hostilities between them.
181. Great Britain and the Two Sicilies. -- It was claimed3 in 1840 that certain English houses suffered considerable loss through the establishment of a monopoly for the extraction and sale of sulphur by a decree of the King of Naples, dated July 9, 1838. A joint commission was appointed consisting of two selected by each government and one by France, which gave an award for about one-third of the amount claimed.
182. France and Great Britain. -- An arbitration frequently referred to is that involving the Portendick claims, so-called, for injuries sustained by British merchants in consequence of the absence of notification of the blockade of the Portendick coast of Morocco by France in____________________