In the English section of the Peace Conference the most prominent
members of which were Dr. Clarke, Mr. Moscheles and Mr. Alexander, the
following resolutions had been unanimously adopted to be proposed at the
Peace Conference:

"That according to the report sent by the Berne International
Bureau it has come to the knowledge of the International Peace
Congress, that:

(_a_) "The British Government steadily opposed various attempts
made with the object to submit the South African difficulties to
arbitration.

(_b_) "Arbitration was eagerly accepted by the South African
Republics, who had repeatedly asked for it, therefore, the
International Peace Congress feels compelled to arrive at the
following conclusions:

1st. "Of the two opponents the one who declined arbitration,
_i.e._, the British Government is responsible for the war in South
Africa.

2nd. "As long as arbitration can possibly be resorted to the appeal
to arms is tantamount to being guilty of a crime against
civilisation and humanity; therefore,

3rd. "The application of brutal force by Great Britain so as to end
their quarrel with the South African Republics deserves an
everlasting blame for what must be considered as an outrage
against human conscience, and a betrayal of the cause of progress
and humanity."

Then a lengthy discussion arose, in the course of which M. Yves Guyot
quoted facts in contradiction to the assertions which the proposed
resolution contained.

That resolution was passed in principle by the Congress Commission of
Actuality, with the proviso that some words should be left out as being
too offensive.

For instance the words: _an outrage_ or a _reprehensible attempt_
against the right of nations should be substituted for _a crime_ against
civilisation. The former version was adopted and submitted to the
Congress by the Commission, whilst soliciting its opinion on the text of
the proposition and of its bearings. After the English delegates had
exposed their views, M. Yves Guyot rose and said that he considered it
his duty, as a member of the Congress Committee of Patronage, not only
to find fault with the proposals of the Commission in their details,
_but to object also to the spirit as well as to the letter of the
resolution_.

"Looking at actual facts", said Mr. Yves Guyot, "it was not true
that arbitration had