Show THE CALVO O DOCTRINE Chicago Chronicle The Drago doc doe trino as it Is called bids fair Calr to bethe bethe be bo bothe the mo most t exciting subject of or discus discus- slon aslon In the congress of or American re republics republics re- re publics now In le session lon at nt the capital capita of oC Brazil That doctrine Is that no govern govern- meat should use uso force In collecting the tho claims of oC Its subjects or citizen citi- citi zen zens or even cven Its own claims agaInst ab another government Its Hs discussion is Included In th the program of or the Illo Ulo congress reM as ns article I 4 1 which reads rends A resolution recent recent- mending that the second peace ICaCO con con- forence at Th The Hague be bc requested t to consider whether and If IC at nt all the extent ex cx- tent to which the tho use of or force Coree for tor th the collection of ot public debts hi is Bible sible Tho The article originally offered In th the thc program committee did tIld not contain cental Ute lie words whether and anti If at nt all I It therefore assumed that the use of or fore force was admissible to some extent Cor- Cor taut tain representatives of br Latin Amen can republics republic on the lie committee objected oh ott- strenuously to this and to MUSe satisfy them liP words quoted were Inserted Even this Js is not satisfactory tl to all the republics of ot our hemisphere pher Such Is the tho feeling reeling on the subject that Dr Drago refused to go to Rio as a delegate dele delo- gate from Crom Argentina for Cor the reason that he objected to the consideration of ot the subject at nt all b by The Th Hague conference lIe He Insisted upon treating It as an American doctrine and md re refusing refusing re- re fusing to be bc bound lI by an any opinion of the world conference Th The Tho Drago doctrine Is 15 In fact not liot Dragos Drago's but Calvos Calvo's If It It It ItIs is not still sun older The Calvo Calve doctrine Is In substance substance substance sub sub- stance that a claim against a nation must be he adjudicated by Its own courts and Is not a proper subject ct of oC diplomacy ac acy under an any circumstances no matt matter mat mat- matI I t ter Cr r whether r the claim Is lJ by a foreign citizen n or by a foreign government Our own o go government nt has never ne assented as as- seated to this doctrine at all Obviously Obvious Obvious- I ly It can not be e acc accepted so far as ns asIt asit It relates to lo a claim b by one nation aln a-aln against t another A claim for Indemnity indent indent- nit b by one nation against another for Instance obviously should not be decided finally 1 by y the courts of oC the tho nation against t which the claim Is made mn for or they ar are the tribunals of an Interested part party The question must be he settled b by by y arbi- arbi or by lIy force Corce A claim lJ by a n. citizen of oC one nation against another nother nation It Is a different ent matter The rhe question whether cr It should be adjudicated by the tho courts orthe of or the he country countr against which the claim claims Is s made Is one of policy It may be deemed good policy for Cor fora Corn a n country to leave its It citizens who voluntarily trust a foreign countr country In Inan an any way to take their own chances On the other hand hantI It I may may be lie deemed deemed deemed deem deem- ed good policy for it to protect Its Is citizens against repudiation lI by other nations and In that case It ma may or ormay 0 may nay not accept tho ho decisions of oC the courts of oC those nations as final according according ac- ac cording to the tho character of oC the courts courts If f there is reason to believe that their I courts are me fair and Just their decisions decisions de tie- ala may be accepted otherwise not ot As to the use ule of oC force that necessarily ily y follows If a country chooses to pres ress claims of oC Its Is citizens ns and if Ie peaceable means of oC obtaining satisfaction gats- gats satis- satis faction action prove Ineffective The Thc extent to which force may bo lIo employed seems to be a proper subject subject sub- sub for Cor The Hague lague tribunal because the 10 claim o of a a citizen or subject ma may maybe maye he be e made a pretext for conquest to the 10 injury inJun of oC nations other than those directly involved In the thc controversy It I hardly becomes us to make our- our solves elves conspicuous in this controversy either ther at Rio or The Hague because as s a nation naton we deny redress against repudiating states of the union through diplomacy or In any other wa way ay We Wc set up for the thc benefit of of such states tates a doctrine which we would not tolerate If It It were up by byan any coun- coun c could u ili o much trouble |