Paris Peace Conf. 180.0201/4

Preliminary Peace Conference, Protocol No. 4, Plenary Session of April 11, 1919

The Session is opened at 15 o’clock (3 p.m.) under the presidency of Mr. Clemenceau, President.

  • Present
    • For the United States of America:
      • The President of the United States.
      • Honorable Robert Lansing.
      • Honorable Henry White.
      • Honorable Edward M. House.
      • General Tasker H. Bliss.
    • For the British Empire:
    • great britain:
      • The Rt. Hon. David Lloyd George.
      • The Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour.
      • The Rt. Hon. A. Bonar Law.
      • The Rt. Hon. G. N. Barnes.
      • The Hon. C. J. Doherty.
    • Dominions and India:
    • canada:
      • The Rt. Hon. Sir Robert Borden.
      • The Hon. Arthur L. Sifton.
    • australia:
      • The Rt. Hon. W. M. Hughes.
      • The Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph Cook.
    • south africa:
      • General The Rt. Hon. Louis Botha.
    • new zealand:
      • The Rt. Hon. W. F. Massey.
    • india:
      • The Rt. Hon. The Lord Sinha.
      • Major-General His Highness The Maharaja of Bikaner.
    • For France:
      • Mr. Clemenceau.
      • Mr. Pichon.
      • Mr. L. L. Klotz.
      • Mr. Jules Cambon.
      • Marshal Foch.
    • For Italy:
      • Mr. V. E. Orlando.
      • The Baron S. Sonnino.
      • The Marquis Salvago Raggi.
      • Mr. Crespi (replacing Mr. Antonio Salandra).
      • Mr. S. Barzilai.
    • For Japan:
      • The Marquis Saionji, former President of the Council of Ministers.
      • The Baron Makino.
      • Mr. K. Matsui.
      • Mr. H. Ijuin.
    • For Belgium:
      • Mr. Hymans.
      • Mr. van den Heuvel.
      • Mr. Vandervelde.
    • For Bolivia:
      • Mr. Ismael Montes.
    • For China:
      • Mr. Lou Tseng-tsiang.
      • Mr. Cheng-ting Thomas Wang.
    • For Cuba:
      • Mr. Antonio Sanchez de Bustamante.
    • For Ecuador:
      • Mr. Dorn y de Alsua.
    • For Greece:
      • Mr. Nicolas Politis.
      • Mr. A. Romanos, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the King of the Hellenes at Paris.
    • For Guatemala:
      • Mr. Joaquín Mendéz, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of Guatemala at Washington, former Minister of State for Public Works and Public Instruction.
    • For Haiti:
      • Mr. Tertullien Guilbaud.
    • For the Hedjaz:
      • His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal.
      • Mr. Rustem Haidar.
    • For Honduras:
      • Dr. Policarpo Bonilla, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of Honduras at Paris.
    • For Liberia:
      • Hon. C. D. B. King.
    • For Nicaragua:
      • Mr. Salvador Chamorro, President of the Chamber of Deputies.
    • For Panama:
      • Mr. Antonio Burgos.
    • For Peru:
      • Mr. Francisco Garcia Calderon.
    • For Poland:
      • Mr. Roman Dmowski.
      • Mr. Ignace Paderewski, President of the Council of Ministers, Minister for Foreign Affairs.
    • For Portugal
      • Dr. Alfonso Costa, former President of the Council of Ministers.
      • Mr. Augusto Soares, former Minister for Foreign Affairs.
    • For Roumania:
      • Mr. Jean J. C. Bratiano.
      • Mr. Vaida-Voevod, Minister of State.
    • For Serbia:
      • Mr. N. P. Pachitch.
      • Mr. Trumbitch.
      • Mr. Ivan Zolger.
    • For Siam:
      • The Prince Charoon.
      • The Prince Traidos Prabandhu.
    • For the Czecho-Slovak Republic:
      • Mr. Charles Kramar.
      • Mr. Edouard Benes.
    • For Uruguay:
      • Mr. Jacobo Varela Acevedo, former Minister for Foreign Affairs, former Senator.

The Minutes of the Session of the 14th February, 1919 (Protocol No. 3), are passed.

The Agenda Paper provides for the submission to the Conference of the Report of the Commission on International Labor Legislation (Annex 1).

Mr. Barnes (British Empire) delivers the following speech:

“Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen.

“It falls to my lot to-day to present to you the Report and recommendations of the Commission on International Labor Legislation. We have issued with our Report two separate and distinct documents, one being the text of a scheme for an organization embracing States, employers, and workmen (Annex II); the other, nine resolutions which have been adopted by the Commission and are suggested for insertion in the Peace Treaty, or issue therewith (Annex III). Before, however, dealing with the documents which have been issued, I might be allowed to offer a few observations of a general character as to our conception of the duty which was entrusted to us. And, first of all, [Page 242] I want to say that we approached our work, as I am sure you would have had us do, in a sympathetic spirit, and from a humane point of view. Some of us knew our labor world at first hand, and we knew that there were many in it condemned to lives of penurious toil, relieved only by spells of compulsory idleness. In normal days, before the war, labor conditions were largely the result of blind chance. Age and want, that ill-matched pair, too often haunted the mind of the worker during his working life, and we must remember that the worker to-day still lives very largely in pre-war memories; he dreads return and is determined not to return to those pre-war conditions. Mr. Chairman, those pre-war experiences of labor have laid upon the world a heavy burden and a great danger. They have produced a workman who is class-centered, who regards work as a blessing, and has been deluded into the belief that the less work he does the more is left for his workmates. That feeling, and the practice based upon it, is demoralizing to the individual, and harmful to the community. But it can be eradicated only by security against unemployment and improved conditions of employment. In saying that, Mr. President, I am not casting stones at any class in regard to existing conditions. It has not been conscious cruelty, but rather the long arm of circumstances that has cast the devil’s chain around the workmen of some countries. Nor do I deny that there is room for some to rise and to share in the pleasure of life, but, nevertheless, it is true to say that the mass remain a misfit in their present conditions, a source of concern to all lovers of their kind and a menace to the peace of the world. It is that latter aspect of it that makes labor regulation, and I should say labor improvement, an integral and an urgent part in the work of a Peace Conference. And the question, therefore, which we had to consider, Mr. Chairman, was not only how to improve material conditions, but how to provide the means whereby to produce a better mental atmosphere.

“Hitherto it has sometimes happened that efforts at improvements in a country have been checked by the fear or the plea of competition with other lower-wage countries. I do not enter into the question of the validity of the plea, although it may here be said, in parenthesis, that the highest wage countries, such as America, are not the least successful in world competition. I merely mention it as a factor which has often prevented improvements taking place; and international co-operation has hitherto been but fitful and sectional, sometimes on the part of some States and some workmen and some employers, sometimes on the part of workmen alone, sometimes on the part of employers alone.

“We are seeking now, for the first time in history, so far as I know, to get the willing co-operation of all concerned—States, employers, [Page 243] and workmen—engaged in a common task and animated by a common desire to improve the workingman’s conditions in all countries.

“But, Sir, at the threshold of our proceedings we came across two very real obstacles. First of all there were the different degrees of industrial development in the different countries and, second, there were the limitations imposed on States against accepting the decrees of any super-authority. And therefore we had perforce to give up ideas of uniformity or coercion, and to rely mainly upon the goodwill of States to accept advice and guidance which might be given to them. I freely admit that at one time I had a good deal more faith in penalties; but, Sir, closer inspection led me to the conclusion that penalties must be kept well in the background and can be applied only through the League of Nations and under the authority of the League of Nations.

“That provision is now embodied in our draft.

“But, Sir, while our minds were driven from one channel, our minds were at the same time attracted to the possibilities of another one. Publicity and agreement presented themselves in stronger and clearer colors. After all, it is not coercion so much that is wanted in most things; it is more, I think, knowledge and goodwill. And we have therefore provided in our scheme for meetings of States, employers, and workmen to be held in the light of day, to be representative of all concerned, and to be armed with the fullest possible information. It will be the duty of the organization which we propose to collect and distribute information, to promote healthy public opinion and, generally speaking, to diffuse light in dark places, wherever such may be found.

“That, then, may be said to be the fundamental and, as we believe, the effective idea in our scheme—the creation and mobilization of healthy public opinion.

“Mr. Chairman, having, I hope, conveyed the right impression as to the character of our proposals, let me just say a few words, without, I hope, any unnecessary detail, about our scheme of organization.

“First, let me say that the scheme was drafted in Paris and was submitted first of all to the British Delegation and British employers and Labor representatives, then presented to the Commission which you set up, and, after it had emerged from the Commission, again submitted in an altered and expanded form to British representatives. I do not want to pose as the champion of Britain in this matter. I do not want to take undue credit for anything; we can only take credit for the initiation. I am speaking now for the British Delegation. This document as it now appears before you is the product of many minds; it is the unanimous finding of the Commission which you yourselves set up. It puts into concrete form [Page 244] what has been asked for and seen as a vision in France above all countries for many years.

“Now, let me say a few words about its main provisions. First of all, its boundaries are made to coincide with those of the League of Nations. We have two reasons for this: firstly, because in doing that the League of Nations is thereby invested with duties of a positive nature and associated with the everyday life of the community; and secondly, because all the nations in the League are brought into world cooperation for industrial improvement and thereby a favorable impression will be created on Labor in all countries because the impression will be created that the Peace Conference is seriously regarding this Labor problem.

“In the second place we provide for annual Conferences. These annual Conferences will consist of four members from each State; two members being directly representative of the State, and the others being representative of Labor and employers respectively. In so far as is possible and, in fact unless otherwise provided, the annual meetings will be held at the capital of the League of Nations, and we propose a new and novel form of voting at the Conferences. Each delegate will vote separately and independently, our object being to promote a spirit of internationality and moreover to enable Labor, as a whole, to take a due part in the deliberations. We propose that there should be a permanent office also constituted at the seat of the League of Nations, the duty of which would be to collect and distribute the information, as I have before mentioned; that that body should be under the control of what we call the Governing Body, and that the constitution of that Governing Body should be in the same proportion as the Conference itself, that is to say, one-half of States representatives and one-half of non-Government delegates.

“Now, Mr. Chairman, I come to procedure, and the most important article in that part of the document is No. 19. That article cost us a great deal of trouble. It was the article upon which it was most difficult to agree, but I am glad to say that agreement was ultimately reached—agreement being reached upon it by compromise, as most agreements are. It now provides that if proposals are endorsed by an annual Conference, they are cast into the form of a Convention, or, alternatively, into the form of a Recommendation, and that if either one or the other gets two-thirds of the votes passed at a Conference, it then becomes the finding of the Conference, and is deposited with the Secretary-General of the League of Nations. Each High Contracting Party then comes under obligation to submit the Recommendation or Convention, as the case may be, to its appropriate competent authority; and, unless the Recommendation [Page 245] or Convention is accepted by such authority, that is the only obligation resting upon an affiliated State. But if the competent authority of this State accepts the Convention or the Recommendation, then, subject to a proviso in the next clause, about which I will say a word in a moment, subject to that proviso, then, it is under obligation to give it effect. But here we came upon the difficulty of the Federal State. There are some states which have no authority to make labor agreements in the form of Treaties. There are some States, such as the United States of America, that embrace many competent authorities in the sense in which the words are used in our document; and each of these competent authorities has a right, and must be left to decide for itself. It was because of this that we had to give the right to the Conference—to impose an obligation upon the Conference rather—to cast their finding in certain cases in the form of a Recommendation instead of a Convention, and we also had to provide, even if it were cast in the form of a Convention, that it would still be open for a Federal State to adopt it as a Recommendation to put before its own competent authorities and give effect to it, if at all, in its own time and in its own way. The net result of this—I want to be perfectly candid with the Conference—the net result of all this is, that a less degree of obligation falls upon a Federal State than upon other States signatory to our document. That is bad; it is regrettable, but, as we found, unavoidable. The difficulty was there. We did not make it, but we had to get over it in the best way open to us.

“I want to introduce two slight additions and, if you will allow me, Mr. Chairman, when the time comes for proposing the adoption of our scheme of organization, it will be understood that these have been made with the concurrence of all the countries with whom I have got into touch—France, United States of America, Italy (as far as she was able to say this morning), Japan, and India and the British Delegation. It will be remembered that I said a State was under obligation to put a Convention or Recommendation to its competent authorities within twelve months’ time from the end of the Conference. It has been pointed out to us that there might be unforeseen and exceptional circumstances and, in fact, a general election was mentioned as one which might occupy several months. It does in some countries, I believe; and we must provide against that particular contingency. It is therefore proposed that after the words ‘twelve months after the meeting of the Conference’ there should be inserted ‘or if it is impossible owing to exceptional circumstances to do so within a period of one year, then at the earliest possible moment and in no case later than eighteen months from the end of the Conference.’ This, as I have ascertained, is generally agreed to by the signatories. Then we propose [Page 246] to add a protocol to Article 19 to cover another point. You will remember that I said we ought to give up ideas of uniformity, at all events in some respects. There are some things in regard to which uniformity is impossible. That is implied by the document itself, because each nation has a right to accept or reject the findings of a Conference and therefore the Conference will always work under the knowledge that if they try the impossible—in the way of imposing upon an Eastern country for instance what was altogether out of the question for our day and generation—that country would simply reject the finding. However, in case there should be any misunderstanding, a form of words has been put forward as follows:—

“‘In framing any recommendation or draft Convention of general application the Conference shall have due regard to those countries in which climatic conditions, the imperfect development of industrial organization or other special circumstances make the industrial conditions substantially different, and shall suggest modifications, if any, which it considers may be required to meet the case of such countries.’

“Then the words in Clause 20 to which I have referred, if a State adopts a Convention it shall not be obliged to accept that Convention because there might be words in the Convention—what we have in mind is this: that the Convention might not be enforceable, to use a word which is in the document—it might not be applicable unless it was found that a certain number of States or a certain proportion of States had also adopted it. That is the proviso that I mentioned a while ago. Now only a word on the enforcement clauses from Number 23. It will be noted that although the machinery of organization is brought into play, reliance is placed on inquiry and publicity. The persons making the inquiry have to be selected from a panel by the Secretary-General of the League of Nations. It will also be noted that the Court of the League of Nations may reverse, vary or affirm any decision. Then I pass over a lot of comparatively unimportant articles and I want to say that we have decided—subject to approval and subject to the United States agreeing to convene the Conference and cooperate—we have decided on a Conference being held this year. And we are most anxious to get authority to go on with that Conference as soon as possible.

“I now come to the resolutions. It was felt by the Commission that it was not sufficient to deal only with machinery. Great hope has been expressed—has been raised in different countries. We were told that something of a direct nature would be done here in Paris by the Peace-makers to make industrial as well as military peace. Of course it was not within our competence to deal specifically or in detail with anything of that kind, nor should I say, Mr. Chairman, is [Page 247] it within the competence even of this Conference to lay down industrial changes for adoption by affiliated States. Still the Commissioners were so much impressed with the need for giving expression to some fundamental principles that they have adopted nine resolutions, each one of them having been adopted by a majority of two-thirds. Those are now before you for adoption or otherwise.

“That, Mr. Chairman, completed our work; the record is now before you in print and, providing you give us the necessary authority, we are quite ready to proceed forthwith to arrange for our first Conference. It is proposed that the first Conference should be held at Washington next October. That of course is subject to the co-operation of the Government of the United States and other arrangements being satisfactorily made by a Committee which we suggest should consist of seven, one of them being a representative of Switzerland, thereby bringing in the neutral countries.

“Well, Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen, I need scarcely remind you of the urgency of this work of labor amelioration because it is known to all of us that new thoughts are surging up all around and among us, and as a result the world is at present in a ferment. Nor need I remind you of its importance, an importance, I should venture to say, second only to the preservation of peace, to which we have already given our hand and seal in the Covenant of the League of Nations. We believe that our scheme will give life and strength and vitality to the League of Nations by bringing it in contact with the daily life of the people. We believe that our scheme gives hope and will bring help to those whose lives are seared and scarred by toil and sorrow.

“Therefore, on behalf of the Commission, and subject of course to the modifications which may have to be made under your rules by the Drafting Committee or Commission, I have much satisfaction in commending it to your favorable consideration.” (Applause.)

President Wilson expresses his opinion on the meeting of the first Conference in the following terms:—

“I rise not to add anything to what Mr. Barnes has said. I have admired what he has said altogether and concur in the conclusion with the greatest heartiness. I rise merely to say that no detail of the document is more welcome to my ears than the suggestion that the first Conference should be held in Washington in the United States, and I can assure the Conference that a most cordial invitation will be extended to the Conference to meet there.” (Applause.)

Mr. Colliard (France), speaking in French, expresses the views of the French Delegation on the Report of the Commission in the following speech:— [Page 248]

“Mr. Chairman, Gentlemen:

“As Mr. Barnes has just explained to us, the Commission on International Labor Legislation has used every endeavor to attain the objects for which it had been created.

“The Commission has paved the way for the establishment of a new and permanent organization which will render it possible to translate into deeds those feelings of humanity and justice which the democracies of the world regard as one of the necessary guarantees of peace.

“The results sought have been attained because a single principle has governed all our discussions, while the Delegates have always been in agreement with it.

“This principle is that, in the interests of the working men themselves, and in order that humane legislation may develop smoothly and without suffering by economic competition, it is necessary, at frequent intervals and by means of International Conventions, for the working men of all countries to be assured of certain minimum guarantees.

“These are the only conditions in which they will be able to see their lot improve day by day, and whereby they may find amid the riches and power of modern society the ease and leisure to which the development of civilization enables them legitimately to aspire.

“Thanks to the draft which is laid before you, the International Conventions will be drawn up with a facility which has not hitherto been attained. They will, moreover, acquire the breadth and importance which they ought to possess because adhesion to the permanent organization which will be charged with their preparation will be one of the necessary conditions of admission to the League of Nations.

“During the preparation of the draft, and while the details of the organization now adopted were being examined, divergent opinions were able to make themselves heard both in regard to determining the number of Delegates allotted to each constituent part of the Nations represented, and as regards reconciling the sovereignty of State rights in the matter of Labor legislation with the authority that the permanent organization ought to possess. In particular, certain Delegations wished to give more power to the decisions of that organization, and to invest it to some extent with a more direct legislative authority.

“No doubt these Delegations already foresaw the constitution of an International Parliament, which may be the solution of the future. Other Delegations were more careful of the sovereignty of the people which they represented, and were apprehensive lest, by the pursuit of premature settlements, they might hamper the initial steps of a [Page 249] work which must grow, strengthen itself and, by the fact of its own development, lead to lasting peace.

“However, all the Delegations were inspired by the same desire to achieve the task which had been entrusted to them, and they were able to make the necessary sacrifices in order to obtain the important result. So far as we are concerned we regret none of these sacrifices, certain as we are that the future will bring with it the settlement most favorable to a progressive and continuous improvement in Labor legislation.

“The British Delegation has submitted three draft amendments to the text which is laid before you. These amendments do not appear to us to touch fundamental principles, but the Commission was obliged to submit its Report before examining them, as a certain number of important Delegates had already left. The examination of these few amendments, therefore, now falls to the lot of the Plenipotentiary Delegates to the Conference.

“Whatever may happen, Gentlemen, I think we may congratulate ourselves on the results which the Commission on International Labor Legislation has attained, not only with respect to what it contributes to the present, but also to what it contains in embryo for the future; moreover, the solemn affirmation of its scope is recorded in the clauses which you are asked to introduce into the Treaty of Peace.”

Mr. Vandervelde (Belgium), speaking in French, sets forth his reasons for concurring in this Report of the Commission in the following speech:—

“Gentlemen,

“I am present at this session in a dual capacity. I represent Belgium, and I belong to the Commission on Labor. There may, however, be yet another motive for my having been honored by a request to speak, namely, that for many years past I have been among those who have striven for the institution of International Labor legislation, and I am no doubt qualified on that score to welcome the results which are about to be achieved: in the first place, the creation of a permanent organization of international legislation; secondly, the fact that in the Conferences which are to be held from this year onwards, members of the working-classes will sit for the first time as Plenipotentiaries; and, lastly, that, as we have every reason to hope, there will be inserted this very day in the Treaty of Peace the reforms which are laid down in our draft Labor Charter, especially those which the working-classes hold so dear, namely, a minimum wage and an 8-hour day.

“Hardly 48 hours ago I was present at a meeting of the Belgian Labor party at the ‘Maison du Peuple’ in Brussels. We were awaiting [Page 250] on the following day the grant of the vote by universal suffrage for which we had been striving for more than a quarter of a century. We have won it. It was, moreover, known that this Assembly would have laid before it a proposal intended to proclaim the principle of an 8-hour day and, quite spontaneously, the working men present there said:—

“‘We only await a telegram from Paris in order to organize a double festival and a double manifestation in honor of the equality which we have acquired and of the 8-hour day.’

“This will show you, Gentlemen, the great importance which the Belgian working classes, like the British working classes, attach to the resolution which they await from you, and my reason for making this statement—I say so quite frankly—is that in other countries people are less optimistic in regard to the results which the Conference may be able to secure in this respect, and are less satisfied with the resolutions formulated by the Labor Commission.

“I should like to sum up briefly the objections which have been made to the proposals which my honorable friend Mr. Barnes, explained to us so fully just now.

“In the first place there is a complaint that Labor representation in the future Conference is inadequate.

“You are aware that, according to our draft resolution, the labor organizations are to have one representative, the employers’ organizations another one and States are each to be represented by two delegates. It is objected that this means giving Government Delegations an excessive preponderance and that it would be more rational for working men to be represented by one of their own number, the employers likewise, and the State by a single delegate who would act more or less in the capacity of an umpire.

“Personally, I was inclined at first sight to support this idea; however, after mature reflection, and after seeking the opinion of the Belgian technical delegates, both workmen and employers, I became firmly convinced that the proposal made by the British Delegation for one workman, one employer, and two Government Delegates, was more favorable than the other proposal to the interests of the working classes. You will at once grasp my reasons.

“By the terms of the draft a Convention, if it is to be submitted by the Governments to their Legislatures for ratification, must obtain a two-thirds majority of votes. Very well, in an assembly where employers, workmen and Governments each commanded one-third of the votes, it would suffice for one State representative to vote with the employers’ third in order to secure the rejection of a proposal; on the other hand, by the system which we propose, Governments and states have a preponderant influence and, in these circumstances, [Page 251] if they incline to the side of the working classes it is they who will form, with the Labor representatives, the indispensable two-thirds majority.

“It will be argued that the State, however, will not incline to the side of the working classes, that the State today is the Capitalist State and will be on the side of the employers.

“You will not expect me, Gentlemen, as a Socialist, to maintain that the Governments of today are not Capitalist Governments, and undoubtedly if an interest of a vital character for the propertied and ruling classes were involved, the State, in its present form, would undoubtedly range itself on the side of the capitalists. The experience of the last few years has, however, shown that in matters of labor legislation and when there is a question of protecting the weak against the strong, the weak have acquired through their organizations sufficient strength to induce the State to incline towards them rather than towards their masters, and I am convinced that Mr. Lloyd George at any rate, who has just solved so successfully one of the gravest conflicts between Capital and Labor that has ever arisen in the world, will not dream of contradicting me on this point.

“Wherever democracy has become powerful and the working classes, by their syndicalistic efforts, have already acquired sufficient influence to oblige the State to take their wishes into account, those classes need not fear to find the Government Delegates against them; that is the reason for which, without further hesitation, I have energetically defended and voted for the proposal of the British Delegation.

“Another objection has been made to the Draft Resolution of the Commission, for the Italian Delegates considered that the powers given to the future Labor Legislation Conferences were insufficient. In point of fact these Conferences will be, in spite of everything, Conferences of Plenipotentiaries; they will not be able to vote for anything except recommendations or Conventions which must necessarily be submitted for ratification to the different Legislatures. Many, indeed, would have wished the creation of a Super-Parliament, the decisions of which would have bound the Parliaments and Governments of the various States represented.

“I do not hesitate to say, Gentlemen, that I regard the creation of such an International Super-Parliament as an ideal towards which we should strive. I hope that one day the League of Nations may be sufficiently developed to be able to dictate laws to the world. Politics, however, are the science of what is possible, and it is precisely because I expect great things from the International Labor Conference that I have been among those who did not wish to demand from [Page 252] the Peace Conference the national abdications to which the nations themselves would not have consented. We must deal tenderly with the sovereignties which are beginning to draw closer to each other, and one day will federate, and it is in order to spare them that I have accepted the present text.

“Further objections have been made with regard to the Labor Charter which it is proposed to include in the Treaty of Peace. Some would have wished to make it more abundant in promises, and compared its text, which one must admit is somewhat meagre, to that of the resolutions recently adopted by the Labor Conference at Berne. But need I point out that ‘comparison is not reason’? The Berne Conference gave expression to the wishes of the working classes and defined their aspirations. What we require of the Conference is something more, and also something less; it is to translate into declarations of principle by Governments a portion of the aspirations of the working classes. It will, too, be a great step forward if the Governments of the whole world declare as a point of principle that they regard a minimum wage, equality of wages as between the sexes, the protection of night work, the protection of child labor, freedom of trades-unions, and, lastly, the 8-hour day, as essential conditions of a just peace.

“Lastly, Gentlemen, there is one final objection to which I beg leave to draw your attention: it is proposed that the International Labor Conference and the International Labor Bureau should be dependencies of the League of Nations. In my opinion that is not merely desirable, but actually necessary, and as advantageous to the League of Nations as it is to the International Labor Conference. It has this result, however, that when, a few months hence, the first Labor Conference is assembled at Washington, we risk seeing a certain number of empty seats and some nations absent; there will be representatives of the working classes or employers of the Entente and of neutrals, but there will probably not be by then any representatives of the Powers which are still enemy Powers.

“Now, if that is conceivable, if it can even be maintained that it is inevitable at the present stage when the League of Nations is involved, who does not see how difficult, if not impossible, it will be to legislate in matters of International Labor Legislation without the presence of all the great industrial nations and without the representation of all the proletariats? Moreover, if such a situation were to be other than a merely transitory one, two things would come about: firstly, we should run the risk of seeing our Conference confronted by another Conference at which the proletariats would perhaps be more powerful and more influential; and secondly, that if such a situation became protracted, our International Legislation would risk being partially [Page 253] inefficacious, because it would only be applied to a certain number of the great industrial countries. That was the reason for which the Commission was unanimous, not in demanding in the organic Statute of the Conference the immediate admission of all the industrial nations, but in voting the expression of a wish in favor of their incorporation as quickly as possible in the organization which we are about to establish.

“I must further express my conviction that the needs in regard to the protection of labor and to industrial legislation will be among the most powerful factors in the complete reconciliation of peoples to which I aspire with all the strength of my soul and my heart.

“That, Gentlemen, is what I wished to say to you. To sum up, I consider that the work of the Labor Commission has been one of fairness and moderation, one of ‘give and take,’ and, if I may say so, one of transition between the absolutism of the employers, which was the rule of yesterday, and the sovereignty of labor, which, I am ardently convinced will be the rule of tomorrow. For passing from the one to the other there are many roads: some are beset with violence and insurrection; others, on the contrary, give just as quick a journey, but without clashes and shocks. If I dared to express my thoughts in a tangible way, I should say that there are two methods of making the revolution which we feel is happening throughout the world, the Russian and the British method. It is the British method which has triumphed in the Labor Commission; it is the one which I greatly prefer, and it is for that reason that with all my heart I support the conclusions of my friend, Mr. Barnes, in expressing the hope that they may be accepted by the Conference, and that the events of today will show that the working classes, having been one of the decisive factors in winning the war, shall receive their due recompense at the moment in which we are about to make peace.”

Mr. Barzilai (Italy), speaking French, expresses the views of the Italian Delegation in the following speech:—

“Gentlemen,

“It will be the honor of the Peace Conference to have established as one of its principal aims the drawing up of a Charter for Labor, and it will be a source of great satisfaction for the Italian Delegation to have used all its endeavors in the direction of a wider and more liberal comprehension of the principles which should animate this Charter in accordance with the proposals of Mr. Barnes, which it accepts in their entirety.

“For we feel, and I am sure of here reflecting faithfully the thoughts of us all, that there is no question of concessions to be granted but rather of rules to be fixed in the interests of the workingmen [Page 254] who are, together with their fellow-citizens, those who have given us our mandate to attend this Peace Conference.

“It has for long been the rule in Italy to treat Labor questions in a spirit of courageous foresight; and even quite recently, it might almost be said by the anticipated influence of the collective organization which is about to be set up, a free agreement between workmen and employers accepting the eight-hours day, to which Mr. Vandervelde, with all the weight of his authority, has just directly alluded, has marked a solemn stage on the road towards a better welfare and peace between the classes.

“I, therefore, feel it to be a special subject of congratulation that all the questions put down on the Agenda for the forthcoming meeting of the International Labor Conference, which is to be held at Washington, correspond to those formulated in the proposal for a Labor Charter made by the Italian Delegation during the early sessions.

“It is also a matter of satisfaction that Italy, in agreement with the great American Republic, should have laid before the Commission a proposal recognizing the necessity of social legislation in regard to the workers on the soil. This proposal did not command the two-thirds majority of votes, and could not therefore be inserted in the Labor Charter. But it commanded unanimity among the voters as regards the recognition of its great importance, for those who voted against it explained that they had done so solely because they considered agricultural laborers to be sufficiently protected by the general measures relating to all working-men.

“One question which is of especial interest to the Italian representatives is that of Labor emigration. The Italian Government during the last quarter of a century has paid the closest attention to this great social phenomenon which brings peoples closer together, which links up with each other the interests of different nations, and creates new affinities and fresh reasons for peace. I myself, as a member of the Italian Delegation to the Peace Conference, feel that I must state here that the sympathies by which my country is now surrounded are certainly due to a great extent to the spirit of work, sobriety, economy and enlightened patriotism which the Italian working-man has shewn abroad. It will therefore appear to you perfectly natural that questions concerned with emigration should be the subject of our especial attention; the Italian Delegation has only withdrawn certain proposals in regard to this argument in order not to retard the drawing up of the Labor Charter and because of the hope which it firmly entertained of being enabled to renew those proposals whenever circumstances might permit.

[Page 255]

“You will allow me, Gentlemen, in conclusion, to express two wishes:

“The first one is that in the Labor Charter room should soon be found for the application of constitutional forms in the relations between Capital and Labor in order to enable Labor to have a say, not only in the drafting of Labor regulations, but also in the control of the economic life of industrial or agricultural enterprise. Italy has, moreover, quite recently set her footsteps courageously in this path.

“My second wish is, I am sure, shared by you all: it is that employers and employees may feel, as we feel, that the peace which we are forging here will not be in vain if each citizen contributes to the maximum his own efforts for the preservation of social peace.”

Lord Sinha (India) expresses the views of British India in the following speech:—

“Mr. Chairman,

“I desire, with your permission, to offer a few observations on behalf of India which I and my friend, the Maharaja of Bikaner, have the privilege of representing. We have, in India, an industrial population fairly large in number, but relatively small as compared with our immense population. The reason is that, unfortunately for ourselves, our country is, from an industrial point of view, in an extremely backward condition, though it is our hope and our belief that, in the near future, a great impetus will be given to the development of indigenous industries. If, in bringing about that development, we are to build on safe and secure foundations, I, for one, feel convinced that the efficiency of our labor must be increased, and to that end we must devise measures to improve the conditions of labor and to provide facilities for the education and general well-being of our workers. Something has already been done in India in these directions. Eight years ago, after an elaborate investigation by an influential and representative Commission, the Indian Legislature passed a Factory Act, the result of which has been a considerable improvement already in the previous law and practice. But having regard to our climatic, social, and other conditions, so radically different from those existing in Western countries, that Factory Commission recommended, in the best interests of the country, that progress must necessarily be slow, and that, in the interests of the workmen, they must not lay down standards prevailing in Western countries. I admit that there is room for much improvement, but still, so far as India is concerned, I must confess that we who are here to watch over and to protect, so far as we can, the interests of India, watched the building up of this Convention with some misgiving. We feared [Page 256] that the special conditions of Eastern countries might not be sufficiently realized. We apprehended danger that the international regulation of labor might, under the pressure of public opinion, tend to make backward countries adopt, contrary to their best interests, and possibly against their will, measures which were not adapted to their conditions. Happily these differences of conditions have now been fully recognized by the slight addition which Mr. Barnes commended to your attention to-day—the addition in the form of a protocol to Article 19, which runs as follows:—

“‘In framing any recommendation or draft Convention of general application, the Conference shall have due regard to those countries in which climatic conditions, the imperfect development of industrial organizations, or other special circumstances make the industrial conditions substantially different, and shall suggest modifications, if any, which it considers may be required to meet the case of such countries.’

“With this safeguard, to which we in India attach the highest importance, we gladly and whole-heartedly accept this Convention, and I am sufficient of an optimist to believe that the International Labor Convention will prove, not an instrument to compel India and other countries in the same situation, against their will and contrary to their best interests, to accept impracticable standards, but a body on which India and other countries in the same situation will rely for advice and counsel for the steady and progressive amelioration of labor.”

The Maharaja of Bikaner (India) expresses the views of the States of India in the following speech:—

“Mr. President and Gentlemen,

“In endorsing generally the remarks made by my Right Honorable colleague, Lord Sinha, I should like also to give expression to my warm sympathy in regard to ameliorating the conditions of labor wherever the necessity is apparent. In view, however, of the conditions and circumstances—economic, industrial and otherwise which prevail in India, it would have been impossible for me, as one who has the honor of representing the ruling Princes of India, to bind the Indian States to proposals which, however suitable they may be for Western countries, would have proved prejudicial both to the interests of the people of India as well as to the labor and industries of the country. I am, therefore, very glad that due regard has been paid to the special conditions of India and that a provision has been inserted to which Lord Sinha has already referred. It therefore remains for me only to make one point quite clear.

“As the territories of the ruling Princes lie outside British India, and as legislation enacted for British India by the British Government cannot apply to the Indian States, and as furthermore the only [Page 257] competent authority to legislate for an Indian State is the Government of the State concerned, it should be clearly understood, with reference to Article 19 of the draft Convention, that ‘the authority or the authorities within whose competence the matter lies for the enactment of legislation or other action’ shall be the constituted authorities of the various Indian States concerned.”

Mr. Barnes (British Empire): I now beg to move, Mr. Chairman, the following resolution:—

“That the Conference approves the Draft Convention creating a permanent organization for the promotion of international regulation of labor conditions which has been submitted by the Labor Commission, with the amendments proposed by the British Delegation; instructs the Secretariat to request the Governments concerned to nominate forthwith their representatives on the organizing committee for the October Conference, and authorizes that committee to proceed at once with its work.”

You will remember I said our work was divided into two parts. A scheme for the organization of State employers, and workers, which is covered by this resolution. I move this resolution for the adoption of the scheme of organization. That still leaves the road open for the consideration of the second part, namely, the nine resolutions at the end, which are separate and distinct, and have still to be dealt with.

Mr. de Bustamante (Cuba), speaking in French, makes, in the name of the Cuban Delegation, the following reservations regarding the draft Convention:—

“The Delegation of the Cuban Republic will vote with pleasure for the draft Convention which has been submitted to us, and the clauses for the Treaty of Peace. However, I must make a reservation in regard to Article 37, respecting the amendments to the Convention, because it is incompatible with the constitutional law of the Republic. I request the insertion of this reservation in the Minutes of the proceedings.

“After making this clear, it only remains to me to express my concurrence in the words which have been spoken this afternoon and with the desires expressed for an improvement in the condition of labor throughout the whole world.”

Sir Robert Borden (Canada), moves in the following terms an addition to the motion proposed by Mr. Barnes:—

“Mr. Chairman: It would be both presumptuous and unnecessary for me to attempt to add anything to the very eloquent speeches which have been made this afternoon upon the all-important subject which has engaged the attention of the Labor Commission for several [Page 258] weeks past. It is possible that some of us would have framed the dispositions of the proposed Conventions somewhat differently, but the main purpose, and after all, the great purpose, in respect of this Convention, as in respect of the League of Nations, is to secure the adhesion of the different States to an arrangement which will tend to the welfare of humanity in the future. That purpose, I think, has been accomplished in the draft Convention which has been laid before us; and I desire to offer my congratulations to the Labor Commission on the good work which it has done in that regard.

“I have just one word to add. This Convention is linked in many ways by its terms to the Covenant of the League of Nations, and I think it desirable to make it perfectly plain that the character of its membership and the method of adherence should be the same in the one case as in the other. Probably, after all, in view of the dispositions of the Convention, that is only a matter of drafting; but in order to prevent any misapprehension and to make the matter perfectly clear, I move the following words be added to the motion which has been proposed by Mr. Barnes:—

“‘The Conference authorizes the Drafting Committee to make such amendments as may be necessary to have the Convention conform to the Covenant of the League of Nations in the character of its membership and in the method of adherence.’”

The Delegates of Bolivia, Ecuador and Panama make reservations in regard to Article 37 of the Draft Convention in view of the provisions of the Constitution of their Countries.

Mr. Montes (Bolivia): For reasons connected with the constitutional law of Bolivia, which is unable to accept emendations of the Acts passed by the legislative power, except such as may originate from that power, I am compelled to make, and do therefore make, the same reservations as the Cuban Delegation in regard to Article 37. If, indeed, as a result of ratification by the majority of States, the amendments became binding even on those which had not ratified them, the power to legislate would in point of fact have been thereby delegated, a thing which is forbidden by the Bolivian Constitution.

Having made these reservations, I hasten to add that I will cordially vote for the acceptance of the Draft which has been submitted at today’s session to the Conference.

Mr. Dorn y de Alsua (Ecuador).

“The Ecuadorean Delegation will have every pleasure in voting for the Draft which has been presented, but entirely associates itself with the reservations made by the Delegations of the Cuban and Bolivian Republics on the subject of Article 37.”

[Page 259]

Mr. Burgos (Panama).

“Gentlemen: If a society is to make progress, it is indispensable that its members should not be benumbed by indifference or inertia. Each one of them must use all his energy, must bring his contribution to the common task, and share according to his means in the complex organization of the social edifice.

“But if a definite result is to be obtained, communion with one’s own thoughts is not enough; we must live in the world and with the world; and by that I mean that each one must take up his share of the common burdens, must reach an understanding of the conditions of labor, and must follow the trend of prevailing ideas, for that is the only way of contributing to general progress by a more accurate knowledge of the worth of each social class. Thence arises the necessity of watching over the usefulness of our acts, of shunning all methods of constraint whether moral or physical, of respecting every category of workers, for each category contributes in its own way to social harmony. That is the way to apply the principle of relativity so as to ensure general cohesion.

“The time has passed when people could rest satisfied with the enunciation of a few utopian ideas from which the happiness of the world should spring. The hour has now struck for carrying into effect the changes recognized as indispensable in order to enable the working-classes to hold the place in modern society to which they are entitled, and to take their great share of the welfare of humanity. Without that, the inventions of the brain, progress in technical methods and economic laws, would be of no avail, for the working-classes make for all progress and their interests may not be hampered by anything which is old, or seems old.

“Such are the considerations which confer its importance on the scheme for International Labor Legislation which has been submitted for your deliberation. The Panama Delegation gives its enthusiastic adhesion and likewise reserves the right to point out to its Government the scope of Article 37.”

Mr. Varela Acevedo (Uruguay), speaking in French, declares in the following terms that he unreservedly concurs in the draft Convention.

“The Uruguayan Delegation accepts forthwith and unrestrictedly not only the Convention which has been laid before you for examination, but also the social principles which are to be embodied in the Treaty of Peace. The most important of these principles, viz., the 8-hour day, the weekly rest, the protection of children, stand already on our Statute Book. They have contributed to the economic development of our country, and to social pacification.

[Page 260]

“We wish that the success of our experience, however modest, may encourage other countries to enter on this path, which is the one of justice, and even a safeguard for democratic institutions.

“We should therefore be proud to see our policy shared by the great men present here.”

President Wilson expresses in the following terms his deep regret at the absence of Mr. Gompers:—

“Mr. Chairman: No one could have desired a more adequate exposition of this report than that which Mr. Barnes has given. But I cannot let this occasion pass without expressing my personal regret that my fellow countryman, Mr. Samuel Gompers, is not here. Mr. Gompers, as you know, was the Chairman of this Commission. He went home only under the compulsion of imperative duties there. I know how thoroughly and truly he represents the sentiment of the working-men of America. I wish very heartily that he were here to do what I am not qualified to do—express their sentiments and their entire concurrence in what I regard as this admirable document.”

The President calls upon Sir Robert Borden to read his amendment.

Sir Robert Borden reads his amendment, which runs as follows:—

“The Conference authorizes the Drafting Committee to make such amendments as may be necessary to have the Convention conform to the Covenant of the League of Nations in the character of its membership and in the method of adherence.”

This amendment is added, with the assent of the Conference, to Mr. Barnes’ resolution.

Mr. Barnes’ resolution, thus completed, is put to the vote and unanimously adopted.

The session is adjourned at 17.30 o’clock (5.30 P.M.).

The President,
G. Clemenceau

The Secretary-General,
P. Dutasta.

The Secretaries,
J. C. Grew
M. P. A. Hankey
Paul Gauthier
Aldrovandi
Sadao Saburi

[Page 261]

Annex I

Report Presented to the Preliminary Peace Conference by the Commission on International Labor Legislation

The Commission has held thirty-five meetings, and has drawn up its conclusions in two parts. The first is a draft convention containing provisions for the establishment of a permanent organization for international labor legislation. (See Annex II.) This convention, which was based on a draft presented by the British Delegation, has been the subject of the most careful examination and discussion. The first part of this report may conveniently take the form of a commentary thereon. The second part of the Commission’s conclusions is in the form of clauses (see Annex III) containing declarations of principle in regard to a number of matters which are of vital importance to the labor world. At the opening sittings, the various Delegations agreed on the need for such declarations, which the Commission suggests should be included in the Treaty of Peace, in order that it may mark not only the close of the period which culminated in the world-war, but also the beginning of a better social order and the birth of a new civilization.

Part I.—Permanent Organization

Preamble

The main idea underlying the scheme embodied in the Convention is that the constitution of the League of Nations will not provide a real solution of the troubles which have beset the world in the past, and will not even be able to eliminate the seeds of international strife, unless it provides a remedy for the industrial evils and injustices which mar the present state of society. In proposing, therefore, to establish a permanent organization in order to adjust labor conditions by international action, the Commission felt that it was taking an indispensable step towards the achievement of the objects of the League of Nations and has given expression to this idea in the Preamble, which defines the objects and scope of the proposed organization.

Chapter I

Chapter I provides the machinery of the permanent organization proposed. In the first place, it is stipulated (Article I) that participation in this organization shall be a condition of membership of the League of Nations, since every State Member of the League is morally bound to accept the principles set forth in the Preamble, [Page 262] if it has really at heart the promotion of the cause of justice and humanity.

The organization itself is divided into two parts: (1) The International Labor Conference; (2) The International Labor Office controlled by a Governing Body. (Article 2.)

1. International Labor Conference.

This Conference will meet at least annually and will consist of delegates nominated by each of the High Contracting Parties, two of whom will be directly appointed by the Governments, and the other two will be chosen in agreement with the industrial organizations representative of their employers and workpeople respectively. (Article 3.)

Each delegate will vote individually (Article 4.) It was strongly felt by the Commission that if the Conference was really to be representative of all those concerned with industry and to command their confidence, the employers and workpeople must be allowed to express their views with complete frankness and freedom, and that a departure from the traditional procedure of voting by national units was therefore necessary. It was accordingly thought that the employers’ and workpeople’s delegates should be entitled to speak and vote independently of their Governments.

Some difference of opinion made itself felt on the Commission as to the relative numbers of the delegates representing the Governments, the employers and the workpeople respectively. The French, American, Italian and Cuban Delegations contended that each of these three parties should have equal voting power. They maintained that the working classes would never be satisfied with a representation which left the Government and the employers combined in a majority of three to their one. In other words, the proposal amounted to giving the States a veto on the proceedings of the Conference which would create so much distrust of it among the workers that its influence would be seriously prejudiced from the start. This view was contested by the British, Belgian and other Delegations, who pointed out that as the Conference was not simply an assembly for the purpose of passing resolutions, but would draw up draft conventions which the States would have to present to their legislative authorities, it was essential that the Governments should have at least an equal voice. Otherwise, it might often happen that conventions adopted by a two-thirds majority of the Conference would be rejected by the legislatures of the various States, which would have the effect of rendering the proceedings of the Conference nugatory and would quickly destroy its influence and prestige. The adoption of a proposal to which the majority of the Governments were opposed would not lead to any practical result, [Page 263] as the legislative authorities of the Governments whose delegates were in the minority would in all probability refuse to accept it. Moreover, it was likely, especially in the future, that the Government delegates would vote more often with the workers than against them. If this were so, it was obviously to the advantage of the latter that the Governments should have two votes instead of one, as it would render it easier for them to obtain a two-thirds majority, which under the Franco-American proposal would be practically impossible, if the employers voted in a body against them.

The Commission finally decided by a narrow majority to maintain the proposal that each Government should have two delegates.

The Italian Delegation, which united with the French Delegation in urging the importance of securing representation for agricultural interests, were to some extent reconciled to the above decision by the consideration that, as the Governments would have two delegates, it would be easier to secure such representation. It should also be observed that, as different technical advisers may be appointed for each subject of discussion, agricultural advisers may be selected, when necessary.

2. International Labor Office (Articles 6 to 13).

This Office will be established at the seat of the League of Nations, as part of its administrative organization. It will be controlled by a Governing Body of 24 members, the composition of which is provided for in the Protocol to Article 7. Like the Conference, the Governing Body will consist of representatives of the Governments, employers and workpeople. It will include 12 representatives of the Governments, 8 of whom will be nominated by the States of chief industrial importance, and the remaining 12 will consist of six members nominated by the employers’ delegates to the Conference, and six nominated by the workers’ delegates. The objects and functions of the Office are sufficiently explained in the articles referred to.

Chapter II

1. Procedure (Articles 14 to 21).

This portion of the Convention contains one article of vital importance, namely, Article 19, which treats of the obligations of the States concerned in regard to the adoption and ratification of draft conventions agreed upon by the International Conference.

The original draft proposed that any draft convention adopted by the Conference by a two-thirds majority must be ratified by every State participating, unless within one year the national legislature should have expressed its disapproval of the draft convention. This implied an obligation on every State to submit any draft convention [Page 264] approved by the Conference to its national legislature within one year, whether its own Government representatives had voted in favor of its adoption or not. This provision was inspired by the belief that, although the time had not yet come when anything in the nature of an international legislature, whose decisions should be binding on the different States was possible, yet it was essential for the progress of international labor legislation to require the Governments to give their national legislatures the opportunity of expressing their opinion on the measures favored by a two-thirds majority of the Labor Conference.

The French and Italian Delegations, on the other hand, desired that States should be under an obligation to ratify conventions so adopted, whether their legislative authorities approved them or not, subject to a right of appeal to the Executive Council of the League of Nations. The Council might invite the Conference to reconsider its decision, and in the event of its being reaffirmed there would be no further right of appeal.

Other Delegations, though not unsympathetic to the hope expressed in the first resolution printed at the end of the draft convention, that in course of time the Labor Conference might, through the growth of the spirit of internationality, acquire the powers of a truly legislative international assembly, felt that the time for such a development was not yet ripe. If an attempt were made at this stage to deprive States of a large measure of their sovereignty in regard to labor legislation, the result would be that a considerable number of States would either refuse to accept the present convention altogether, or, if they accepted it, would subsequently denounce it, and might even prefer to resign their membership of the League of Nations rather than jeopardise their national economic position by being obliged to carry out the decisions of the International Labor Conference. The majority of the Commission therefore decided in favor of making ratification of a convention subject to the approval of the national legislatures or other competent authorities.

The American Delegation, however, found themselves unable to accept the obligations implied in the British draft on account of the limitations imposed on the central executive and legislative powers by the constitution of certain federal States, and notably of the United States themselves. They pointed out that the Federal Government could not accept the obligation to ratify conventions dealing with matters within the competence of the forty-eight States of the Union, with which the power of Labor legislation for the most part rested. Further, the federal Government could not guarantee that the constituent States, even if they passed the necessary legislation to give effect to the convention, would put it into effective operation, nor could [Page 265] it provide against the possibility of such legislation being declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Judicial Authorities. The Government could not therefore engage to do something which was not within their power to perform, and the non-performance of which would render them liable to complaint.

The Commission felt that they were here faced by a serious dilemma, which threatened to make the establishment of any real system of international labor legislation impossible. On the one hand, its range and effectiveness would be almost fatally limited if a country of such industrial importance as the United States did not participate. On the other hand, if the scheme were so weakened as to impose no obligation on States to give effect to, or even to bring before their legislative authorities, the decisions of the Labor Conference, it was clear that its work would tend to be confined to the mere passage of resolutions instead of resulting in the promotion of social reforms with the sanction of law behind them.

The Commission spent a considerable amount of time in attempting to devise a way out of this dilemma, and is glad to be able to record that it ultimately succeeded in doing so. Article 19 as now drafted represents a solution found by a Sub-Commission consisting of representatives of the American, British and Belgian Delegations specially appointed to consider the question. It provides that the decisions of the Labor Conference may take the form either of recommendations or of draft conventions. Either must be deposited with the Secretary-General of the League of Nations and each State undertakes to bring it within one year before its competent authorities for the enactment of legislation or other action. If no legislation or other action to make a recommendation effective follows, or if a draft convention fails to obtain the consent of the competent authorities concerned, no further obligation will rest on the State in question. In the case of a Federal State, however, whose power to enter into conventions on labor matters is subject to limitations, its Government may treat a draft convention to which such limitations apply as a recommendation only.

The Commission felt that there might in any event be instances in which the form of a recommendation affirming a principle would be more suitable than that of a draft convention, which must necessarily provide for the detailed application of principles in a form which would be generally applicable by every State concerned. Subjects will probably come before the Conference which, owing to their complexity and the wide differences in the circumstances of different countries, will be incapable of being reduced to any universal and uniform mode of application. In such cases a convention might prove impossible, but a recommendation of principles in more or less [Page 266] detail which left the individual States freedom to apply them in the manner best suited to their conditions would undoubtedly have considerable value.

The exception in the case of Federal States is of greater importance. It places the United States and States which are in a similar position under a less degree of obligation than other States in regard to draft conventions. But it will be observed that the exception extends only to those Federal States which are subject to limitations in respect to their treaty-making powers on labor matters, and further that it only extends in so far as those limitations apply in any particular case. It will not apply in the case of a convention to which the limitations do not apply, or after any such limitations as may at present exist have been removed. Though reluctant to contemplate an arrangement under which all States would not be under identical obligations, the Commission felt that it was impossible not to recognize the constitutional difficulties which undoubtedly existed in the case of certain Federal States, and therefore proposed the above solution as the best possible in the circumstances.

Attention should be drawn to the protocol to Article 19. The fear was expressed that the article might be interpreted as implying that a State would be required to diminish the protection already afforded to the workers by its legislation as a result of the adoption of a recommendation or draft convention by the Conference; and in consequence, the protocol was added in order to make it quite clear that such an interpretation was inadmissible.

It should be added that the Japanese Delegation abstained from voting on Article 19, as they had not yet received instructions from their Government in the matter. The Italian Delegation also abstained on the ground of the inadequacy of the powers given to the Conference.

2. Enforcement (Articles 22 to 34).

These articles provide machinery whereby a State which fails to carry out its obligations arising under Article 19, or which fails to enforce a convention which it has ratified, may be made subject to economic measures. This machinery is briefly as follows:—

An industrial association of employers and workpeople may make representations to the International Labor Office which the Governing Body may at its discretion communicate to the State complained of for its observations. (Article 23.) If no satisfactory reply is received, the Governing Body may publish the correspondence (Article 24), which in most cases will probably create sufficient pressure by public opinion to cause the complaint to be remedied.

The Governing Body also has the power, either on its own motion or on receipt of a complaint from a Government or from a Delegate [Page 267] to the Conference, to apply to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations to nominate a commission of enquiry. For the purpose of such enquiries, each High Contracting Party undertakes to nominate one employer, one workman and one person of independent standing, and each commission shall consist of one person drawn from each of these three categories. (Articles 25 and 26.) The Commission will report on the facts, recommend the steps which should be taken to meet the complaint, and indicate the economic measures, if any, which it considers would be appropriate in the event of the condition complained of not being remedied. (Article 28.)

Appeal may be made to the Permanent Court of International Justice of the League of Nations, which shall have power to review the findings of the Commission. (Articles 29 to 32.) If the defaulting State fails to carry out the recommendations of the Commission or the Permanent Court, as the case may be, within the specified time, it will then be open to the other States to take the economic measures indicated against it. (Article 33.)

It will be seen that the above procedure has been carefully devised in order to avoid the imposition of penalties, except in the last resort, when a State has flagrantly and persistently refused to carry out its obligations under a convention. It can hardly be doubted that it will seldom, if ever, be necessary to bring these powers into operation, but the Commission consider that the fact of their existence is nevertheless a matter of almost vital importance to the success of the scheme.

The representatives of the working classes in some countries have pressed their delegates to urge more drastic provisions in regard to penalties. The Commission, while taking the view that it will in the long run be preferable as well as more effective to rely on the pressure of international public opinion rather than on economic measures, nevertheless considers it necessary to retain the possibility of the latter in the background. If all forms of sanction were removed, the effectiveness of the scheme, and, what is almost equally important, the belief in its effectiveness, would be in a great measure destroyed.

Chapter III

General.

This chapter does not call for much comment, but attention should perhaps be drawn to the provisions of Article 35, which provide that the British Dominions and India and any colonies or possessions of any State which may hereafter be recognized as fully self-governing by the Executive Council of the League of Nations, shall have the same rights and obligations under the convention as if they were separate High Contracting Parties. It seemed evident to the Commission that colonies which were fully self-governing, [Page 268] not only as regards labor legislation but generally, must be regarded as separate entities for the purposes of the Labor Conference, but it was decided that a State and its self-governing colonies should not have more than one seat in the Governing Body. In the case of colonies which are not fully self-governing, the mother country undertakes the obligation to apply labor conventions to them, unless local conditions render it impossible to apply them either wholly or in part.

Chapter IV

Transitory Provisions.

This chapter provides, inter alia, for the holding of the first Conference in October 1919.

The Commission felt it was essential that the Conference should meet at the earliest possible moment, but that, if it was to do its work effectively, some time must be allowed for the collection of information and for the different countries to prepare their views on the various subjects for discussion. The Conference could, therefore, hardly meet earlier than October. In the schedule to Article 39, it is proposed that the arrangements for this Conference should be made by an international committee consisting of representatives of the States named, with power to invite other States to send representatives, if necessary. It is suggested that the United States Government might be willing to convene the Conference at Washington, and the Commission much hopes that they will be willing to undertake this task. It is also suggested that the Peace Conference should approve the agenda set out in the same schedule.

The Italian Delegation proposed that all Nations should be admitted to the Conference immediately after the signature of the Peace Treaty, but the Commission confined itself to passing the second resolution attached to the draft convention.

In conclusion, it should be remarked that after a long discussion on the question of adopting certain measures in the interest of seamen, the Commission thought that “the very special questions concerning the minimum conditions to be accorded to seamen might be dealt with at a special meeting of the International Labor Conference devoted exclusively to the affairs of seamen,” at which the Delegates and technical advisers could accordingly be chosen from the shipping community. (See resolution attached to the Convention.)

Part II.—Labor Clauses

The Commission were unanimous in thinking that their work would not be complete if it were simply confined to setting up a permanent machinery for International Labor Legislation. It was not within [Page 269] their competence or within their terms of reference to deal with specific questions relating to industrial conditions and to work them out with the detail necessary for the framing of proposals which could be accepted in a binding form. So impressed were they, however, with the urgent need for recognizing explicitly certain fundamental principles as necessary to social progress, that they decided to submit a series of declarations for insertion in the Peace Treaty. They did not feel called upon, however, to draw up a Charter containing all the reforms which may be hoped for in a more or less distant future, but confined themselves to principles the realization of which may be contemplated in the near future.

It will be seen that the High Contracting Parties are not asked to give immediate effect to them, but only to endorse them generally. It will be the duty of the International Labor Conference to examine them thoroughly and to put them in the form of recommendations or draft conventions elaborated with the detail necessary for their practical application.

Proposals were placed before the Commission by the Italian, French, American, Belgian and British Delegations as to the declarations which should be made. The Commission decided that no declaration should be submitted to the Peace Conference, unless it were adopted by a two-thirds majority, and it now has the honor of submitting nine declarations, all of which obtained such a majority and some of which were adopted unanimously.

It should be added, in conclusion, that a majority, but not a two-thirds majority, was obtained for a proposal couched in very general terms which suggested the application to agriculture of the general principles of labor legislation, and which arose out of an Italian proposal in regard to the limitation of the hours of work in agriculture. The delegates who voted against this proposal were, as they explained, by no means hostile to its general idea, but they thought that a proposal in such wide terms was not suitable for inclusion among the declarations to be put forward.

Samuel Gompers
,
President.
Arthur Fontaine,
General Secretary.

Harold Butler,
Assistant General Secretary.

[Page 270]

Annex II

commission on international labor legislation

draft convention

A Draft Convention Creating a Permement Organization for the Promotion of the International Regulation of Labor Conditions

Preamble

Whereas the League of Nations has for its object the establishment of universal peace, and such a peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice;

And whereas conditions of labor exist involving such injustice, hardship and privation to large numbers of people as to produce unrest so great that the peace and harmony of the world are imperilled; and an improvement of those conditions is urgently required: as, for example, by the regulation of the hours of work, including the establishment of a maximum working day and week, the regulation of the labor supply, the prevention of unemployment, the provision of an adequate living wage, the protection of the worker against sickness, disease and injury arising out of his employment, the protection of children, young persons and women, provision for old age and injury, protection of the interests of workers when employed in countries other than their own, recognition of the principle of freedom of association, the organization of technical and vocational education and other measures;

Whereas also the failure of any nation to adopt humane conditions of labor is an obstacle in the way of other nations which desire to improve the conditions in their own countries;

The High Contracting Parties, moved by sentiments of justice and humanity, as well as by the desire to secure the permanent peace of the world, agree to the following convention:—

Chapter I.—Organization

Article 1

The High Contracting Parties, being the States members of the League of Nations, hereby decide to establish a permanent organization for the promotion of the objects set forth in the Preamble, and for this purpose hereby accept the provisions contained in the following Articles.

Article 2

The permanent organization shall consist of (i) a General Conference of Representatives of the High Contracting Parties and (ii) an [Page 271] International Labor Office controlled by the Governing Body described in Article 7.

Article 3

The meetings of the General Conference of Representatives of the High Contracting Parties shall be held from time to time as occasion may require, and at least once in every year. It shall be composed of four Representatives of each of the High Contracting Parties, of whom two shall be Government Delegates and the two others shall be Delegates representing respectively the employers and the workpeople of each of the High Contracting Parties.

Each Delegate may be accompanied by advisers, who shall not exceed two in number for each item on the agenda of the meeting. When questions specially affecting women are to be considered by the Conference, one at least of the advisers should be a woman.

The High Contracting Parties undertake to nominate non-Government Delegates and advisers chosen in agreement with the industrial organizations, if such organizations exist, which are most representative of employers or workpeople, as the case may be, in their respective countries.

Each Delegate may be accompanied at each sitting of the Conference by not more than two advisers. The advisers shall not speak except on a request made by the Delegate whom they accompany and by the special authorization of the President of the Conference, and may not vote.

A Delegate may in writing addressed to the President appoint one of his advisers to act as his deputy, and the adviser, while so acting, shall be allowed to speak and vote.

The names of the Delegates and their advisers will be communicated to the International Labor Office by the Government of each of the High Contracting Parties.

The credentials of Delegates and their advisers shall be subject to scrutiny by the Conference, which may, by two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present, refuse to admit any Delegate or adviser whom it deems not to have been nominated in accordance with the undertaking contained in this Article.

Article 4

Every Delegate shall be entitled to vote individually on all matters which are taken into consideration by the Conference.

If one of the High Contracting Parties fails to nominate one of the non-Government Delegates whom it is entitled to nominate, the other non-Government Delegate shall be allowed to sit and speak at the Conference, but not to vote.

[Page 272]

If in accordance with Article 3 the Conference refuses admission to a Delegate of one of the High Contracting Parties, the provisions of the present Article shall apply as if that Delegate had not been nominated.

Article 5

The meetings of the Conference shall be held at the seat of the League of Nations, or at such other place as may be decided by the Conference at a previous meeting by two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present.

Article 6

The International Labor Office shall be established at the seat of the League of Nations as part of the organization of the League.

Article 7

The International Labor Office shall be under the control of a Governing Body consisting of 24 members, appointed in accordance with the provisions of the Protocol hereto.

The Governing Body shall, from time to time, elect one of its members to act as its Chairman, shall regulate its own procedure and shall fix its own times of meeting. A special meeting shall be held if a written request to that effect is made by at least 10 members.

Article 8

There shall be a Director of the International Labor Office, appointed by the Governing Body, who shall, subject to the instructions of the Governing Body, be responsible for the efficient conduct of the International Labor Office and for such other duties as may be assigned to him.

The Director or his deputy shall attend all meetings of the Governing Body.

Article 9

The staff of the International Labor Office shall be appointed by the Director, who shall, so far as is possible with due regard to the efficiency of the work of the Office, select persons of different nationalities. A certain number of these persons shall be women.

Article 10

The functions of the International Labor Office shall include the collection and distribution of information on all subjects relating to [Page 273] the international adjustment of conditions of industrial life and labor and particularly the examination of subjects which it is proposed to bring before the Conference with a view to the conclusion of international conventions, and the conduct of such special investigations as may be ordered by the Conference.

It will prepare the agenda for the meetings of the Conference.

It will carry out the duties required of it by the provisions of this Convention in connection with international disputes.

It will edit and publish a periodical paper in the French and English languages, and in such other languages as the Governing Body may think desirable, dealing with problems of industry and employment of international interest.

Generally, in addition to the functions set out in this article it shall have such other functions, powers and duties as may be assigned to it by the Conference.

Article 11

The Government Departments of any of the High Contracting Parties which deal with questions of industry and employment may communicate directly with the Director through the Representative of their State on the Governing Body of the International Labor Office, or failing any such Representative, through such other qualified official as the Government may nominate for the purpose.

Article 12

The International Labor Office shall be entitled to the assistance of the Secretary-General of the League of Nations in any matter in which it can be given.

Article 13

Each of the High Contracting Parties will pay the travelling and subsistence expenses of its Delegates and their advisers and of its Representatives attending the meetings of the Conference or Governing Body, as the case may be.

All the other expenses of the International Labor Office and of the meetings of the Conference or Governing Body shall be paid to the Director by the Secretary-General of the League of Nations out of the general funds of the League.

The Director shall be responsible to the Secretary-General of the League for the proper expenditure of all moneys paid to him in pursuance of this Article.

[Page 274]

Chapter II.—Procedure

Article 14

The agenda for all meetings of the Conference will be settled by the Governing Body, who shall consider any suggestion as to the agenda that may be made by the Government of any of the High Contracting Parties or by any representative organization recognized for the purpose of Article 3.

Article 15

The Director shall act as the Secretary of the Conference, and shall circulate the agenda to reach the High Contracting Parties, and through them the non-Government Delegates when appointed, four months before the meeting of the Conference.

Article 16

Any of the Governments of the High Contracting Parties may formally object to the inclusion of any item or items in the agenda. The grounds for such objection shall be set forth in a reasoned statement addressed to the Director, who shall circulate it to all the High Contracting Parties. Items to which such objection has been made shall not, however, be excluded from the agenda, if at the Conference a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present is in favor of considering them.

If the Conference decides (otherwise than under the preceding paragraph) by two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present that any subject shall be considered by the Conference, that subject shall be included in the agenda for the following meeting.

Article 17

The Conference shall regulate its own procedure, shall elect its own President, and may appoint committees to consider and report on any matter.

Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Convention, all matters shall be decided by a simple majority of the votes cast by the Delegates present.

A vote shall be void unless’ the total number of votes cast is equal to half the number of the Delegates attending the Conference.

Article 18

The Conference may add to any committees which it appoints technical experts, who shall be assessors without power to vote.

[Page 275]

Article 19

When the Conference has decided on the adoption of proposals with regard to an item in the agenda, it will rest with the Conference to determine whether these proposals should take the form: (a) of a recommendation to be submitted to the High Contracting Parties for consideration with a view to its being given effect by national legislation or otherwise, or (b) of a draft international convention for ratification by the High Contracting Parties.

In either case a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present shall be necessary on the final vote for the adoption of the recommendation or draft convention, as the case may be, by the Conference.

A copy of the recommendation or draft convention shall be authenticated by the signature of the President of the Conference and of the Director and shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the League of Nations. The Secretary-General will communicate a certified copy of the recommendation or draft convention to each of the High Contracting Parties.

Each of the High Contracting Parties undertakes that it will, within the period of one year at most from the end of the meeting of the Conference, bring the recommendation or draft convention before the authority or authorities within whose competence the matter lies for the enactment of legislation or other action.

In the case of a recommendation, the High Contracting Parties will inform the Secretary General of the action taken.

In the case of a draft convention, the High Contracting Party will, if it obtains the consent of the authority or authorities within whose competence the matter lies, communicate the formal ratification of the convention to the Secretary-General and will take such action as may be necessary to make effective the provisions of such convention.

If on a recommendation no legislative or other action to make such recommendation effective is taken, or if the draft convention fails to obtain the consent of the authority or authorities within whose competence the matter lies, no further obligation shall rest upon the High Contracting Party.

In the case of a federal State, the power of which to enter into conventions on labor matters is subject to limitations, it shall be in the discretion of the Government of such State to treat a draft convention to which such limitations apply as a recommendation only, and the provisions of this article with respect to recommendations shall apply in such case.

(In regard to the interpretation of this Article, reference should be made to the Protocol.)

[Page 276]

Article 20

Any convention so ratified shall be registered by the Secretary General of the League of Nations, but shall only be binding upon the States which ratify it, subject to any conditions which may be contained in the convention itself.

Article 21

If any convention laid before the Conference for final consideration fails to secure the support of two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present, it shall nevertheless be within the right of any of the High Contracting Parties to agree to such convention among themselves.

Any convention so agreed to shall be communicated by the Governments of the States concerned to the Secretary General of the League of Nations, who shall register it.

Article 22

Each of the High Contracting Parties agrees to make an annual report to the International Labor Office on the measures which it has taken to give effect to the provisions of conventions to which it is a party. These reports shall be made in such form and shall contain such particulars as the Governing Body may request. The Director shall lay a summary of these reports before the next meeting of the Conference.

Article 23

In the event of any representation being made to the International Labor Office by an industrial association of employers or of workpeople that any of the High Contracting Parties has failed to secure in any respect the effective observance within its jurisdiction of any convention to which it is a party, the Governing Body may communicate this representation to the State against which it is made and may invite that State to make such statement on the subject as it may think fit.

Article 24

If no statement is received within a reasonable time from the State against which the representation is made, or if the statement when received is not deemed to be satisfactory by the Governing Body, the latter shall have the right to publish the representation and the statement, if any, made in reply to it.

[Page 277]

Article 25

Any of the High Contracting Parties shall have the right to file a complaint with the International Labor Office if it is not satisfied that any other of the High Contracting Parties is securing the effective observance of any convention which both have ratified in accordance with the foregoing articles.

The Governing Body may, if it thinks fit, before referring such a complaint to a Commission of Enquiry, as hereinafter provided for, communicate with the State against which the complaint is made in the manner described in Article 23.

If the Governing Body do not think it necessary to communicate the complaint to the State against which it is made, or if, when they have made such communication, no statement in reply has been received within a reasonable time which the Governing Body considers to be satisfactory, the Governing Body may apply for the appointment of a Commission of Enquiry to consider the complaint and to report thereon.

The Governing Body may adopt the same procedure either of its own motion or on receipt of a complaint from a Delegate to the Conference.

When any matter arising out of Article 24 and 25 is being considered by the Governing Body, the State against which the representation or complaint is made shall, if not already represented thereon, be entitled to send a representative to take part in the proceedings of the Governing Body while the matter is under consideration. Adequate notice of the date on which the matter will be considered shall be given to the State against which the representation or complaint is made.

Article 26

The Commission of Enquiry shall be constituted in accordance with the following provisions:—

Each of the High Contracting Parties agrees to nominate within six months of the date on which this Convention comes into force three persons of industrial experience, of whom one shall be a representative of employers, one a representative of workpeople, and one a person of independent standing, who shall together form a panel from which the members of the Commission of Enquiry shall be drawn.

The qualifications of the persons so nominated shall be subject to scrutiny by the Governing Body, which may by two-thirds of the votes cast by the Members present refuse to accept the nomination of any person whose qualifications do not in its opinion comply with the requirements of the present article.

[Page 278]

Upon the application of the Governing Body, the Secretary General of the League of Nations shall nominate three persons, one from each section of this panel, to constitute the Commission of Enquiry, and shall designate one of them as the President of the Commission. None of these three persons shall be a person nominated to the panel by any State directly concerned in the complaint.

Article 27

The High Contracting Parties agree that, in the event of the reference of a complaint to a Commission of Enquiry under Article 25, they will each, whether directly concerned in the complaint or not, place at the disposal of the Commission all the information in their possession which bears upon the subject-matter of the complaint.

Article 28

When the Commission of Enquiry has fully considered the complaint, it shall prepare a report embodying its findings on all questions of fact relevant to determining the issue between the parties and containing such recommendations as it may think proper as to the steps which should be taken to meet the complaint and the time within which they should be taken.

It shall also indicate in this report the measures, if any, of an economic character against a defaulting State which it considers to be appropriate, and which it considers other States would be justified in adopting.

Article 29

The Secretary-General of the League of Nations shall communicate the report of the Commission of Enquiry to each of the States concerned in the complaint, and shall cause it to be published.

Each of these States shall within one month inform the Secretary General of the League of Nations whether or not it accepts the recommendations contained in the report of the Commission; and if not, whether it proposes to refer the complaint to the Permanent Court of International Justice of the League of Nations.

Article 30

In the event of any of the High Contracting Parties failing to take within the specified period the action required by Article 19, any other of the High Contracting Parties shall be entitled to refer the matter to the Permanent Court of International Justice.

[Page 279]

Article 31

The decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice to which a complaint has been referred shall be final.

Article 32

The Permanent Court of International Justice may affirm, vary or reverse any of the findings or recommendations of the Commission of Enquiry, if any, and shall in its decision indicate the measures, if any, of an economic character against a defaulting State which it considers to be appropriate, and which other States would be justified in adopting.

Article 33

In the event of any State failing to carry out within the time specified the recommendations, if any, contained in the report of the Commission of Enquiry, or in the decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice, as the case may be, any other State may take against that State the measures of an economic character indicated in the report of the Commission or in the decision of the Court as appropriate to the case.

Article 34

The defaulting State may at any time inform the Governing Body that it has taken the steps necessary to comply with the recommendations of the Commission of Enquiry or in the decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice, as the case may be, and may request it to apply to the Secretary-General of the League to constitute a Commission of Enquiry to verify its contention. In this case the provisions of Articles 26, 27, 28, 29, 31 and 32 shall apply, and if the report of the Commission of Enquiry or decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice is in favor of the defaulting State, the other States shall forthwith discontinue the measures of an economic character that they have taken against the defaulting State.

Chapter III.—General

Article 35

The British Dominions and India shall have the same rights and obligations under this Convention as if they were separate High Contracting Parties.

[Page 280]

The same shall apply to any colony or possession of any of the High Contracting Parties which on the application of such High Contracting Party is recognized as fully self-governing by the Executive Council of the League of Nations.

The High Contracting Parties engage to apply conventions which they have ratified in accordance with the provisions of the present Convention to their colonies, protectorates and possessions, which are not fully self-governing:

1.
Except where owing to the local conditions the convention is inapplicable, or
2.
Subject to such modifications as may be necessary to adapt the convention to local conditions.

And each of the High Contracting Parties shall notify to the International Labor Office the action taken in respect to each of its colonies, protectorates and possessions which are not fully self-governing.

Article 36

Any State, not a party to this Convention, which may hereafter become a member of the League of Nations, shall be deemed ipso facto to have adhered to this Convention.

Article 37

Amendments to this Convention which are adopted by the Conference by a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present shall take effect when ratified by the States whose representatives compose the Executive Council of the League of Nations and by three-fourths of the States whose representatives compose the body of Delegates of the League.

Article 38

Any question or dispute relating to the interpretation of this Convention or of any subsequent Convention concluded by the High Contracting Parties in pursuance of the provisions of this Convention shall be referred for decision to the Permanent Court of International Justice.

Chapter IV.—Transitory Provisions

Article 39

The first meeting of the Conference shall take place in October, 1919. The place and agenda for this meeting shall be as specified in the Schedule annexed hereto.

[Page 281]

Arrangements for the convening and the organization of the first meeting of the Conference will be made by the Government designated for the purpose in the said Schedule. That Government shall be assisted in the preparation of the documents for submission to the Conference by an International Committee constituted as provided in the said Schedule.

The expenses of the first meeting and of all subsequent meetings held before the League of Nations has been able to establish a general fund, other than the expenses of Delegates and their advisers, will be borne by the High Contracting Parties in accordance with the apportionment of the expenses of the International Bureau of the Universal Postal Union.

Article 40

Until the League of Nations has been constituted all communications which under the provisions of the foregoing articles should be addressed to the Secretary-General of the League will be preserved by the Director of the International Labor Office, who will transmit them to the Secretary-General of the League when appointed.

Article 41

Pending the creation of a Permanent Court of International Justice, disputes which in accordance with this Convention would be submitted to it for decision will be referred to a tribunal of three persons appointed by the Executive Council of the League of Nations.

Protocol to Article 7

The Governing Body of the International Labor Office shall be constituted as follows:—

Twelve representatives of the Government.

Six members elected by the Delegates to the Conference representing the employers.

Six members elected by the Delegates to the Conference representing the workpeople.

Of the twelve members representing the Governments eight shall be nominated by the High Contracting Parties which are of the chief industrial importance, and four shall be nominated by the High Contracting Parties selected for the purpose by the Government Delegates to the Conference, excluding the Delegates of the eight States mentioned above. No High Contracting Party, together with its Dominions and Colonies, whether self-governing or not, shall be entitled to nominate more than one member.

[Page 282]

Any question as to which are the High Contracting Parties of the chief industrial importance shall be decided by the Executive Council of the League of Nations.

The period of office of members of the Governing Body will be three years. The method of filling vacancies and other similar questions may be determined by the Governing Body subject to the approval of the Conference.

Protocol to Article 19

In no case shall any of the High Contracting Parties be asked or required, as a result of the adoption of any recommendation or draft convention by the Conference, to diminish the protection afforded by its existing legislation to the workers concerned.

Schedule Referred To in Article 39

First Meeting of Annual Labor Conference 1919.

The place of meeting will be Washington.

The Government of the United States of America is requested to convene the Conference.

The International Organizing Committee will consist of seven members, appointed by the United States of America, Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, Belgium and Switzerland. The Committee may, if it thinks necessary, invite other States to appoint representatives.

Agenda

1.
Application of principle of the 8–hours day or of the 48 hours week.
2.
Question of preventing or providing against unemployment.
3.
Women’s employment—
(a)
Before and after child-birth, including the question of maternity benefit.
(b)
During the night.
(c)
In unhealthy processes.
4.
Employment of children—
(a)
Minimum age of employment.
(b)
During the night.
(c)
In unhealthy processes.
5.
Extension and application of the International Conventions adopted at Berne in 1906 on the prohibition of night work for women employed in industry and the prohibition of the use of white phosphorus in the manufacture of matches.
[Page 283]

Resolutions Adopted by the Commission

I.—Resolution proposed by the Belgian, French and Italian Delegations.

The Commission expresses the hope that as soon as it may be possible an agreement will be arrived at between the High Contracting Parties with a view to endowing the International Labor Conference under the auspices of the League of Nations with power to take, under conditions to be determined, resolutions possessing the force of international law.

II.—Resolution proposed by the Belgian, French and Italian Delegations.

The Commission, being of opinion that an international code of Labor legislation which will be really effective cannot be secured without the co-operation of all industrial countries, expresses the wish that pending the signature of the Treaty of Peace, which will permit all such countries to be approached, the Peace Conference will communicate the present draft Convention to the neutral Powers for their information before finally adopting it.

III.—Resolution proposed by the French Delegation.

The Commission considers that the very special questions concerning the minimum conditions to be accorded to seamen might be dealt with at a special meeting of the International Labor Conference devoted exclusively to the affairs of seamen.

Annex III

COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL LABOR LEGISLATION

Clauses Proposed for Insertion in the Treaty of Peace

The High Contracting Parties declare their acceptance of the following principles and engage to take all necessary steps to secure their realization in accordance with the recommendation to be made by the International Labor Conference as to their practical application:—

1.
In right and in fact the labor of a human being should not be treated as merchandise or an article of commerce.
2.
Employers and workers should be allowed the right of association for all lawful purposes.
3.

No child should be permitted to be employed in industry or commerce before the age of fourteen years, in order that every child may be ensured reasonable opportunities for mental and physical education.

[Page 284]

Between the years of fourteen and eighteen, young persons of either sex may only be employed on work which is not harmful to their physical development and on condition that the continuation of their technical or general education is ensured.

4.
Every worker has a right to a wage adequate to maintain a reasonable standard of life having regard to the civilization of his time and country.
5.
Equal pay should be given to women and to men for work of equal value in quantity and quality.
6.
A weekly rest, including Sunday, or its equivalent for all workers.
7.

Limitation of the hours of work in industry on the basis of eight hours a day or forty-eight hours a week, subject to an exception for countries in which climatic conditions, the imperfect development of industrial organization or other special circumstances render the industrial efficiency of the workers substantially different.

The International Labor Conference will recommend a basis approximately equivalent to the above for adoption in such countries.

8.
In all matters concerning their status as workers and social insurance foreign workmen lawfully admitted to any country and their families should be ensured the same treatment as the nationals of that country.
9.
All States should institute a system of inspection in which women should take part, in order to ensure the enforcement of the laws and regulations for the protection of the workers.