328 A Positive Century (1815–1914)against the capture of private property at sea, as the majority of states
wished. Th e opposition of the major maritime powers kept it from being
adopted. Other conventions dealt with the status of enemy merchant ships
at the outbreak of war, the conversion of merchant ships into warships, and
the placing of mines at sea.
Progress was made on some of the unfi nished business shortly aft erward,
although only by abandoning the Hague Conference’s all- inclusive ap-
proach, in favor of a reversion to treaty making by major powers. Th is took
the form of the London Naval Conference of 1908– 9, to which only the ten
leading maritime states were invited. As fully intended, the atmosphere was
very diff erent from that of the much larger gathering at Th e Hague. Th e del-
egations made a n impressive eff ort to resolve their many diff erences through
a series of compromises. It helped that the conference was under the able
chairmanship of Renault. Th e result was the Declaration of London, which
set out rules on contraband, blockades, captures of neutral ships, and a host
of other issues that had defeated the delegates at the Second Hague Confer-
ence. In the event, however, the declaration never entered into force be-
cause domestic po liti cal pressure led the British government (the foremost
naval power) to decline to ratify it.
Adjudication
Lawmaking was not the only business of international lawyers. Adjudica-
tion was another important task. Th e greatest advances in this area were in
the realm of arbitration. Th is phenomenon was hardly new on the world
scene, since it had been a feature of both ancient Chinese and Greek state
practice, as well as of the Eu ro pe an Middle Ages. But it had largely fallen
out of fashion in recent centuries. A major landmark in its revival was the
work of the mixed- claims commissions established by the Jay Treaty of
1794. In the course of the fi rst two- thirds or so of the nineteenth century,
a number of arbitrations took place, dealing with an array of specifi c issues.
Th e connection between arbitration and international law is not so close
as might be initially supposed. Th e reason is that arbitral decisions are not
necessarily made on the basis of law, as is the case (by defi nition) in true ju-
dicial resolution. Instead, the parties to the dispute determine the basis on