¹ “Proposals for the Avoidance of War with a Prefatory Note by Viscount Bryce (As revised up to 24th February, 1915)”, Lord Bryce Papers, New Bodleian Library, Oxford University. See appendix, pp. 306ff.

² Winkler, Henry R., The League of Nations Movement in Great Britain, 1954–1919 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1952), pp. 16–23Google Scholar, relies upon secondary sources and upon Viscount Bryce, , and others, Proposals jor the Prevention of Future Wars (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1917)Google Scholar. Winkler apparently did not see any of the 1915 editions of the “Proposals”. Zimmern, Alfred, in his classic The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 1918–1935 (London: Macmillan & Co., 1936), pp. 161ffGoogle Scholar, also depends upon die 1917 text, crediting die “Proposals” widi following die American League to Enforce Peace plan when, in fact, the “Proposals” preceded and influenced the drafting of die American scheme. Martin, Laurence W., Peace without Victory: Woodrow Wilson and the British Liberals (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1958), pp. 59 and 67Google Scholar; Bartlett, Ruhl H., The League to Enforce Peace (Chapel Hill, N. C: University of North Carolina Press, 1944), pp. 35 and 66Google Scholar; and Herman, Sondra R., Eleven against War: Studies in Internationalist Thought, 1898–1921 (Hoover Institution Publication 82) (Stanford, Calif: Hoover Institution Press, 1969), p. 57Google Scholar, contain only passing reference to the Bryce Group. Latané, While John H. (ed.), in Development of the League of Nations Idea: Documents and Correspondence of Theodore Marburg (2 vols; New York: Macmillan & Co., 1932)Google Scholar reproduces useful correspondence, the collection is designed to show Marburg's influence rather than to reconstruct the evolution of die ‘Proposals”. The “Proposals” is summarized at length in Hemleben, Sylvester John, Plans for World Peace through Six Centuries (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1943), pp. 138ffGoogle Scholar. However, the best treatment of the Bryce Group's work appears in Kuehl, Warren F., Seeking World Order, The United States and International Organization to 1920 (Nashville, Tenn: Vanderbilt University Press, 1969), pp. 186Google Scholarff.

³ Forster, E. M., Goldsworthy Lowes Dickinson (London: E. Arnold & Co., 1934), pp. 1632Google Scholar. Dickinson, G.Lowes, “The War and the Way Out, Preparing the Path to Peace”, The Labour Leader, September 17, 1914, and “The Way Out,” War and Peace, 09 1914 (Vol. 1, No. 12), pp. 345–346Google Scholar.

⁴ Swanwick, H. M., Builders of Peace Being Ten Years' History of the Union of Democratic Control (London: The Swarthmore Press, 1924)Google Scholar, and Hanak, H., “The Union of Democratic Control during die First World War”, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 11 1963 (Vol. 36, No. 94), pp. 168–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵ The Earl of Oxford and Asquith, Memories and Reflections,1852–1927 (2 vols; Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1928), Vol. 2, pp. 46–47Google Scholar.

⁶ GG. Lowes Dickinson to Bryce, October 20, 1914, Bryce Papers.

⁷ Ibid.

⁸ Copy in Bryce Papers. See appendix below, pp. 306ff. For Bryce's views during this period see Robbins, Keith G., “Lord Bryce and the First World War”, The Historical Journal, 1967 (Vol. 10, No. 2), pp. 255–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹ H., J. A. [John A. Hobson], The Memory of Richard Cross, The Nation (London), 08 19, 1916 (Vol. 19, No. 21), pp. 621–622, and 164Google Scholar. For Cross's early views see Cross's, letter to the editor, The Nation (London), 08 29, 1914 (Vol. 15, No. 22), p. 791Google Scholar.

¹⁰ “Mr. Graham Wallas's Notes”, Graham Wallas Papers, London School of Economics and Political Science.

¹¹ Hobson, John A., Towards International Government (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1915Google Scholar). G. Lowes Dickinson to Arthur Ponsonby, April 2, 1915, in Forster, p. 165. “Our worst enemies arc really men like Brailsford and Hobson, who go for a federation. They won't get that; but they may easily help to prevent our getting what we ask for”. For Ponsonby's views see “Mr. Ponsonby's Notes”, and “Mr. Ponsonby's Notes, 10 December 1914”, Lord Willoughby Dickinson Papers, New Bodleian Library, Oxford UniversityGoogle Scholar.

¹² For Bryce's role in the 1911 arbitration treaty see Fisher, H. A. L., James Bryce (Viscount Bryce of Dechmont, O. M.) (2 vols; New York: Macmillan & Co., 1927), Vol. 2, p. 67ffGoogle Scholar. The text of die Anglo-American Treaty for the Advancement of General Peace appears in Scott, J. B. (ed.), Treaties for the Advancement of Peace (New York: Oxford University Press, 1920), pp. 41–43Google Scholar.

¹³ Cross, E. Richard, “Notes on Lord Bryce's Memorandum,” 11 27, 1914Google Scholar, Dickinson Papers.

¹⁴ “Proposals for the Better Prevention of Future Wars”, Wallas Papers.

¹⁵ “Proposals for the Prevention of Future Wars With a Prefatory Note By The Rt. Hon. Viscount Bryce, O. M. (As revised up to 15th February, 1915)”, Wallas Papers. The text of the 1907 Hague Convention on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes is presented in Scott, James Brown (ed.), The Hague Conventions and Declarations of i8gg and 1907 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1915), pp. 55–88Google Scholar. In 1908 Bryce negotiated a treaty which referred to arbitration “differences which may arise of a legal nature or relating to the interpretation of treaties” between the United States and the United Kingdom. A 1911 Anglo-American arbitration treaty, again negotiated by Bryce, defined as suitable for arbitration differences “justiciable in their nature by reason of being susceptible of decision by the application of the principles of law or equity. …” Text in Congress, U. S., Senate, Report of the Committee on Foreign Relations together with the Views of the Minority upon the General Arbitration Treaties with Great Britain and France signed on August 3, 1911, and the Proposed Committee Amendments, Document No. 98, 62nd Congress, 1st session, 1912, pp. 46ftGoogle Scholar.

¹⁷ Referring to his suggestion for a council of conciliation, Bryce claimed that it “is included because it has formed a part of most of the schemes put forward in the United States and in Europe, though the chance of its being adopted may be slender.” Lord Bryce, “When the War Comes to an End”, Bryce Papers.

¹⁷ “Mr. Lowes Dickinson's Notes”, Dickinson Papers.

¹⁸ Bryce, Lord, “Neutral Nations and the War” (New York: Macmillan Co., 1914)Google Scholar; and Bryce to Elihu Root, December 15, 1914, Elihu Root Papers, Library of Congress.

¹⁹ Cross, E. Richard, “Notes on Lord Bryce's Memorandum” 11 27, 1914, Bryce PapersGoogle Scholar.

²⁰ “Lord Bryce's Memorandum with E. R. Cross's Notes and the Revisions Made up to 15th December, 1914 by the Group in Conference”, Bryce Papers.

²¹ “Mr. Ponsonby's Notes, 10 December, 1914”, Dickinson Papers.

²² Lord Bryce, “Memorandum on Mr. J. A. Hobson's Notes”, January 9, 1915, Bryce Papers.

²³ “Lord Bryce's Memorandum with E. Richard Cross's Notes and the Revisions Made up to January 19th, 1915 by the Group in Conference”, Wallas Papers. See appendix, pp. 28ft.

²⁴ Ibid.

²⁵ Bryce, Lord, “Memorandum on Mr. J. A. Hobson's Notes,” 01 9, 1915Google Scholar, Bryce Papers.

²⁶ Lord Bryce, “When the War Comes to an End”, Bryce Papers.

²⁷ Cross, E. Richard, “Notes on Lord Bryce's Memorandum”, 11 27, 1914, Dickinson PapersGoogle Scholar.

²⁸ “Lord Bryce's Memorandum with E. R. Cross's Notes and the Revisions Made up to 22nd Dec.1914, by the Group in Conference”, Bryce Papers.

²⁹ “Lord Bryce's Memorandum with E. Richard Cross's Notes and Revisions Made up to January 19th, 1915 by the Group in Conference”, Wallas Papers.

³⁰ “Proposals for the Prevention of Future Wars with a Prefatory Note by the Rt. Hon. Viscount Bryce, O. M., (As revised up to 15th February, 1915)”, Wallas Papers.

³¹ “Proposals for the Avoidance of War with a Prefatory Note by Viscount Bryce (As revised up to 24th February, 1915)”, Bryce Papers.

³² E. Richard Cross to Norman Angell, March 4, 1915, Norman Angcll Papers, Ball State University, Muncic, Indiana.

³³ Bryce to My Dear Sir, March 28, 1915, Confidential print of the Nederlansche Anti-Oorlog Raad in the Ford Archives, Dearborn, Michigan.

³⁴ Organisation centrale pour une paix durable, Compte rendu de la Reunion Internationale 7–10 avril 1915 la Haye et atttres documents relatifs mix travaux de Vorganisation (The Hague, 1916).

³⁵ Mrs. Walter Rea to Gilbert Murray, February 8, 1915, Sir Gilbert Murray Papers, New Bodleian Library, Oxford University.

³⁶ Winkler, pp. soff.

³⁷ Ibid., p. 51. Regarding the enforcement of arbitral awards, see Raymond Unwin to Marburg, November 14, 1915, Latané, Vol. I, pp. 83–85.

³⁸ “Suggestions for the Prevention of War”, The New Statesman, 07 10 and 17, 1915 (Vol. 5, Nos. 118 and 119) (Special Supplements)Google Scholar. A draft of the Fabian scheme was discussed in June 1915 with Dickinson, G. Lowes, Wallas, Graham, Cross, E. Richard, and Hobson, John A. of the Bryce Group. Fabian News, 06 1915 (Vol. 26, No. 7), p. 48Google Scholar.

³⁹ The Fabian scheme contained an elaborate and detailed definition of a justiciable dispute which lacked the elegance and simplicity of the definition in the “Proposals”. The Fabians defined as justiciable:

(a) Any question of fact which, if established, would be a cause of action within the competence of die Court; (b) Any question as to the interpretation or application of any international treaty or agreement …, or of International Law, or of any enactment of the International Council; together with any alleged breach or contravention thereof; (c) Any question as to the responsibility or blame attaching to any independent Sovereign State for any of the acts, negligences or defaults of its national or local Government officers, agents or representatives, occasioning loss or administrations of such State, or to its national Government; and as to the reparation to be made, and the compensation to be paid, for such loss or damage; (d) Any question as to the title, by agreement, prescription, or occupation, to the sovereignty of any place or district; (e) Any question as to the demarcation of any part of any national boundary; (f) Any question as to the reparation to be made, or the amount of compensation to be paid, in cases in which the principle of indemnity has been recognised or admitted by all the parties; (g) Any question as to the recoveryof contract debts claimed from the Government of an independent Sovereign State by theGovernment of another independent Sovereign State, as being due to any of its citizens, companies or subordinate administrations, or to itself; (h) Any question which may be submitted tothe Court by express agreement between all the parties to the case.

⁴⁰ A revised edition of the Fabian scheme appeared in 1916 with changes which followed those made in the August 1915 “Proposals” banning not only war but also “hostile preparations” during the moratorium. Woolf, L. S. and the Fabian Society, International Government: Two Reports (New York: Brentano's, 1916), pp. 376ffGoogle Scholar.

⁴¹ See, for example, Brailsfor, H. N., A League of Nations (London: Macmillan & Co., 1917)Google Scholar and Wells, H. G., In the Fourth Year: Anticipations of a World Peace (London: Chatto & Windus, 1918)Google Scholar. Brailsford's criticisms of the “Proposals” were that they provided too small a remedy for a great evil and that they gave no assurance of redress to a state with a reasonable ambition or real grievance. He conceived the problem as being not so much “How shall we prevent war?” as “How shall we secure that big organic changes may be brought about without war?” undated summary of H. N. Brailsford's views in the Dickinson Papers. See also the Union of Democratic Control platform of July 1917 in Swanwick, pp. 81ff, and the Labor Party “Memorandum on War Aims”, December 28, 1918, summarized in The Times (London), 12 18 and 29, 1918Google Scholar.

⁴² Kuehl, pp. 172ff.

⁴³ Latané, Vol. 2, pp. 713–717.

⁴⁴ Bartlett, pp. 40–41.

⁴⁵ The League to Enforce Peace's commentary on the “Proposals” is embodied in Marburg to G. Lowes Dickinson, August 12, 1915, and Marburg to Cross, September 28, 1915, in Latané Vol. 1, pp. 61–62 and 71–75.

⁴⁶ Lowell, A. Lawrence, “A League to Enforce Peace”, Atlantic Monthly, September 1915 (Vol. 116), pp. 392–400Google Scholar, and Lowell to G. Lowes Dickinson, August 17, 1915, A. Lawrence Lowell Papers, Harvard University. Also see Lowell's remarks to Charles Robert Ashbee in Ashbee's diary, October 12, 1915, copy in London Library, London. “There must be a binding and determining league, said Lowell, (sic) the proposal of the ”Bryce Group' makes but for a rope of sand”.

⁴⁷ See the account of the “Conference of Peace Workers”, in The Advocate of Peace, 12 1916 (Vol. 78, No. 11), pp. 320–321Google Scholar. The views of the American Peace Society and the World's Court League are presented by Scott, James Brown in “The Movement for International Justice and Judicial Settlement”, The World Court, 12 1916 (Vol. 2, No. 5), pp. 267–273Google Scholar. Evidence of the Carnegie Endowment subsidy appears in the Year Book, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 1916 (Washington, n. d.), p. 43, and Year Book, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 1917 (Washington, n. d.), pp. 142–143. For the position of the Endowment's president, former Secretary of State Elihu Root, see Dubin, Martin David, “Elihu Root and the Advocacy of a League of Nations, 1914–1917”, The Western Political Quarterly, 09 1966 (Vol. 19, No. 3), pp. 439–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁸ G. Lowes Dickinson to Marburg, July 5, 1915, Latané, Vol. 1, p.

⁴⁹ These demands are contained in a packet of criticisms of the “Proposals” contained in the Dickinson Papers. Among Americans other than those associated with the League to Enforce Peace commenting on the “Proposals” were Charles W. Eliot; Professor William I. Hull of Swarthmore College; President H. E. Jordan of the University of Virginia; and Ellery Sedgwick, editor of the Atlantic Monthly. Early British critics included Sir George Paish, the economist; Sir Frederick Pollock, the jurist; Sir Edward Fry, head of the British delegation to the 1907 Hague peace conference; Lord Farrer, a Liberal peer; Theodore Baty, a pacifist; Richard D. Denman, a Liberal member of parliament; George Bernard Shaw of the Fabian Society; and John Galsworthy, the writer.

⁵⁰ “Proposals for the Avoidance of War with a Prefatory Note by Viscount Bryce”.

⁵¹ E. Richard Cross to Graham Wallas, August 27, 1915, Wallas Papers.

⁵² G. Lowes Dickinson to Bryce, October, 1915, Bryce Papers.

⁵³ “Proposals for the Avoidance of War with a Prefatory Note by Viscount Bryce Amended after Receipt of Criticisms, November, 1915.”

⁵⁴ G. Lowes Dickinson was the most prolific writer of the group. See Forster, pp. 254ff. Hobson's, views appear in Towards International Government and in “A League of Nations” (The Union of Democratic Control, Pamphlet 15A) (London, 10 1915)Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ Grey's, remarks appear in the Chicago Daily News, 05 13, 1916Google Scholar; Balfour's, are in The Times (London), 05 18, 1916Google Scholar; and Wilson's, address is in Baker, Ray Stannard and Dodd, William E. (ed.), The Public Papers of Woodrow Wilson, The New Democracy (2 vols; New York: Harper & Brothers, 1926), Vol. 2, pp. 184–188Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ For Hughes's statements see Hughes, Charles Evans, Addresses of Charles Evans Hughes 1906–1916 (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1916), pp. 33–35Google Scholar, and the New York Times, August 16, 1916.

⁵⁷ Grey's, remarks appear in The Times (London), 10 24, 1916Google Scholar. For Bryce, see The Manchester Guardian, 10 4, 1916Google Scholar, and The Times (London), 10 27, 1916Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Although Bryce acquired a subsidy from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, he was reluctant to publish the “Proposals”. Bryce to James Brown Scott, June 30, 1916, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Papers, Columbia University. G. Lowes Dickinson to Norman Angell, July 23, 1916, Angell Papers. “Bryce is very dilatory over the Proposals. … I have an idea he really funkspublication”.

⁵⁹ War and Peace, 05 1917 (Vol. 4, No. 42), pp. 88f.Google Scholar T. G. Lowes Dickinson to Harold Wright, December 7, 1916, Angell Papers.

They may quote but not print in full or mention any names in connection with it, saying only a scheme of an English group. This is absurd but [it is] my arrangement with Bryce.

⁶⁰ The Manchester Guardian, April 12, 1917.

⁶¹ The Nation (London), 04 14, 1917 (Vol. 21, No. 2), p. 27Google Scholar. Two weeks later in the same journal a writer labeled the “Proposals” as “by far the most practicable and the most influential” of the published league schemes. Its outlines “have become the accepted basis for discussion throughout the English-speaking world.” “On the Agenda of Humanity”, The Nation (London), 04 28, 1917 (Vol. 21, No. 4), p. 90Google Scholar.

⁶² See Bryce, Viscount, and others, Proposals for the Prevention of Future Wars (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1917Google Scholar) and also the appendix below, pp. 306ff. Martinus Nijhoff in the Hague also published an English language edition of the “Proposals” sponsored by the International Congress for the Study of the Principles of a Durable Peace, Bern, 1916, a subsidiary of the Central Organization for a Durable Peace.

⁶³ Haldane's memorandum is in Cabinet Papers CAB 37/127 in the Public Record Office, London. It is partially reproduced in Sommer, Dudley, Haldane of Cloan, His Life and Time, 1856–1928 (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1960), pp. 332–333Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Diary of Charles Robert Ashbee, July 16, 1915, copy in London Library, London.

⁶⁵ A. J. Balfour, “Irresponsible Reflections on the Part Which the Pacific Nations Might Play in Discouraging Future Wars”, January 19, 1916, in file FO 899/3/454, and Bryce to Sir Eric Drummond, January 17, 1916, and Drummond to Bryce, January 18, 1916, in file FO 800/105, Foreign Office Records, Public Record Office, London.

⁶⁶ Smuts on April 20, 1917, proposed that the Imperial War Cabinet

affirm in principle that some form of conference or conciliation among the powers should be established to deal with international disputes not susceptible to arbitration or judicial procedure, and that the details of the scheme should be discussed with our allies and especially the U. S. A. before the conclusion of the war.

Imperial War Cabinet, “Draft Minutes of a Committee to Consider the Economic and Non-Territorial Desiderata in the Terms of Peace… April 20, 1917”, CAB 21/71. The Imperial War Cabinet adopted resolution which endorsed the principle of a league. Imperial War Cabinet, Minutes of Meetings 12 and 13, April 26 and May 1, 1917, CAB 21/78. See George, Lloyd, War Memoirs of David Lloyd George 2 vols; London: Oldhams Press, 1938), Vol. 1, p. 10365, and pp. 1066–1067Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ Lord Robert Cecil to Bryce, December 3, 1917, and Bryce to Cecil, December 4, 1917, FO 371/3439.

⁶⁸ The Phillimore committee professed to have “carefully considered” the various private schemes for league. It claimed to embody in its recommendations “their leading ideas” while avoiding “their more obvious stumbling blocks”. Phillimore, both in an historical essay attached to his committee's report and in a handbook prepared for use by the British delegation to the Paris peace conference, specifically reproduced the Bryce Group's definition of a justiciable dispute and identified its source. The full report of Phillimore's committee is presented in Wilson, Florence, The Origins of the League Covenant: Documentary History of its Drafting (London: Hogarth Press [for the Association of International Understanding], 1928), pp. 114–172Google Scholar. Phillimore's league scheme also is reproduced in Miller, David Hunter, The Drafting of the Covenant (2 vols; New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1928), Vol. 2, pp. 3–6Google Scholar. See also Phillimore, Walter George Frank, Schemes for Maintaining General Peace by The Right Hon. Lord Phillimore (London: H. M. Stationery, 1920), pp. 28–29Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Cecil's and Smuts's schemes appear in both Wilson, pp. 181–188, and Miller, pp. 23–64. Cecil on March 24, 1919, asked the League of Nations commission to adopt the Bryce Group's definition of a justiciable dispute. Miller, pp. 348 and 352. This definition also was favored by Elihu Root who advised President Wilson to provide for its inclusion in the League of Nations Covenant. American Society of International Law, , Proceedings at the Meetings 0f its Executive Council Held at Washington, D.C., April 27, 1918 and April 17, 1919, pp. 50ffGoogle Scholar.