but I have never known of a case in which such unfortunates have been subjected to such a protracted series of persecutions, in which each and every point of contact with the officials of a government have been so uniformly characterized by unjust treatment and oppression, and in which such officials, unsatisfied with the material impoverishment of a formerly wealthy individual, have left no stone unturned to make his moral impoverishment equally complete.

This arbitration is probably unprecedented, not in that it involves a denial of justice by the judicial tribunals of the Respondent Government, because such cases are not infrequent, but it is probably unprecedented in that it involves, in the view of the United States, two clear and unquestionable denials of justice by the courts of the respondent Government.

It is to me, on the one hand, a privilege to have the opportunity of presenting this case to a Tribunal in which I have such implicit confidence that its award, when rendered, will represent the crystallization of justice from the dross of the confusing and complicated elements of fact and law which are involved in this case.

It is at the same time a very unpleasant task which I have undertaken, not only because of my feeling of incapacity to do justice to the Tribunal, to my Government, and to the grievously injured American citizen whose rights are involved, but because I shall be called upon to say some very unkind things concerning Egyptian officials. I am sure the officials of the Egyptian Government who will hear me speak thus unkindly of their fellow subjects will realize that my words do not spring from an unkind heart.

It has been my privilege to spend several days in sunny Egypt en route to Vienna, and to be impressed with the usual great kindness of the Egyptian people. But Egypt, like the United States and every other country of the world, is composed of individuals who, despite the great age of that country, have not laid aside human passions,

prejudices, dislikes, or even hatreds. And it is such human passions, unleashed at times, under unusual circumstances, which usually are at the foundation of such claims as this.

I must, to the best of my ability, present to this Honorable Tribunal the facts of this case as known and understood by the Government of the United States. If, therefore, I speak unkindly of Egyptian officials, it will be because the facts are in themselves unkind. I believe in moderation in all things, and wherever I feel I can, without injustice to the Tribunal and to the Government of the United States, omit reference to ugly facts, I shall do so.

Mr. President, the Government of the United States, in the century and a half of its history, has engaged in very few such individual arbitrations.

I may, speaking from personal knowledge and belief, say to this Tribunal that literally hundreds of potential international claims have been compromised or waived by the Government of the United States, which this Tribunal would, I feel sure, adjudge to be valid claims in international law. The United States is always most reluctant to champion the cause of any American citizen against any foreign government, and always prefers compromise to the arbitral process when that is practicable.

The Department of State did everything reasonably possible to avoid this arbitration. But, Mr. President, there are times when governments cannot properly sacrifice principles and the interests of their citizens.

The Government of the United States is absolutely convinced of the full justice of the claim which it brings before this Tribunal for adjudication.

It is my duty to present the case to the Tribunal in the light of the proven facts and the applicable law, in such a manner that the Tribunal may see clearly the justice of the claim, as that justice is perceived by the Government of the United States. In performing that duty, I shall probably ask the assistance of Mr. Anderson or Mr. Da

vies, the latter of whom has been requested by my Government to participate in this case because of his familiarity with its circumstances, since he has been attorney for Mr. Salem over a period of nearly 10 years.

Every case of this kind is composed of a factual foundation and a legal superstructure. It is impossible properly to apply the law to the case if the facts are not fully known and understood.

In presenting the case of the United States, it will be my first task to present to the Tribunal in a simple, chronological manner the facts as they have developed.

As the pleadings stand in this case, it is an impossibility, without the greatest effort, for one properly to so reconstruct the facts of the case from those pleadings, since evidence bearing upon any one particular point may be found in not two, but many different places.

The United States has been deflected from its original purpose of reconstructing the whole case in a systematic factual manner in the pleadings, preparatory to the application of the law in the Brief and the oral presentations, by a different system adopted by the Egyptian Government, of combining the law and the facts in a partial manner in each of its pleadings.

I shall now, therefore, undertake anew the development for the Tribunal of the facts in the unfortunate chain of circumstances of which George J. Salem has been the victim, in a chronological manner, citing the necessary proofs as I proceed. An effort will then be made to apply the law to the facts as developed.

The story of this case, aside from its pathetic and exasperating circumstances, constitutes an interesting study in human psychology. It will be my aim to reconstruct the circumstances in such a manner as to merit the continued interest of the Tribunal and to minimize the discomfort necessarily attending the patient hearing of what the Tribunal may consider overlong arguments.

I shall make my presentation as brief as possible, consistent with the development of the facts. And Mr. Pres

ident, just as an opening caution to myself, may I mention to the Tribunal that I have the shortcoming, after I have become interested in the case, of speaking very rapidly. I shall undertake to overcome that as much as possible, and if at any time I do speak too rapidly for the Tribunal to understand clearly, I would appreciate it if you would make that fact known to me.

Mr. President, the roots of this case go back to Damascus more than 75 years ago. In Damascus was born the Salem family, consisting of four persons: Joseph Salem, father of George Salem; Goubran Salem, his brother; and two sisters, Selma Salem and Fadwa Salem.

According to the record in the case, the husband of Selma Salem-the record does not disclose his namefirst left Damascus and went to Mehalla, Egypt. After arriving in Mehalla, he sent back for Joseph Salem, who joined him; and the two young men they were very young at that time-engaged in business together.

Shortly thereafter, Joseph Salem sent for his sister Selma, and she came; and thereafter the sister of Joseph Salem, Selma Salem, became married to the gentleman who first was responsible for Joseph Salem's going to Mehalla.

The story of this is told by Selma Salem at page 574 of the Counter Case of the United States.

May I suggest to the Tribunal this: In going through the record of this case, as we study the various characters, it is interesting to notice the psychology of the various personalities, especially members of the Salem family. Selma Salem was the oldest daughter, the oldest sister of the family, and you will find as you study the testimony of Selma Salem that she was an outstanding sterling Christian character. You find her at one time fighting George Salem because he was anxious to bring the Archimandrite to "intervene" the dying Goubran. You find her at another time contending with Fadwa, her other sister,

177406-35- -2

and Doctor Gahel, the arch manipulator of them all, who was conspiring to produce the proof of October 27, 1917. But always you find Selma Salem fighting for the right.

On page 574 begins the testimony of Selma Salem before the official who investigated the alleged offense of George Salem. With the permission of the Tribunal I shall read this, because it is very enlightening at this point:

My name is Selma George Salem and my age is 60; born at Damascus, Syria; land owner and residing after the death of my brother with my nephew, George, and before that I was living at Ramleh, Alexandria, in a rented house. (She was sworn in.)

Q. How long since you came to Egypt?

A. About forty years ago.

Q. What time did your brothers Goubran and Joseph come and how did they make their fortunes?

A. My brother Joseph [the father of George Joseph Salem] came first, who is older than I am and older than Goubran, my brother. The one who brought my brother Joseph was my husband because he was a business man at Mehalla and he brought him to teach him commerce and he was then an employee of the Government. When my brother [Joseph] came with my husband they went into the business of cotton together and in the business of loaning money to peasants and in the silk business and grains, etc., and later my brother, Joseph, brought his younger brother, Goubran

May I ask the Tribunal especially to note that point, that Joseph Salem, father of the present man involved in this claim, had been in Mehalla quite some time and in business before he brought his younger brother, Goubran. (Continues reading:)

and employed him at his office as a clerk, and at that time my husband and my brother were partners and my brother, Joseph, worked and later worked independently and so did my younger brother and he was successful and went into business by himself. Later Joseph left an estate, which

This is an important point, because the Egyptian Government has undertaken to establish before this Tribunal that there was no reason for the deed of January 26, 1917,