Galerie

between Poland and the Free City of Danzig in regard to this
Treaty or any arrangements or agreements made thereunder.\"
This provision was evidently intended to lay down a general
principle to be developed and completed by subsequent rules.
These rules are to be found in Article 39 of the Paris Convention
of November gth, 1920, which runs as follows :
~(Any differences arising between Poland and the Free City
of Danzig in regard to the present Treaty or to any other subsequent agreements, arrangements or conventions, or to any
matter affecting the relations between Poland and the Free
City, shall be submitted by one or the other Party to the decision of the High Commissioner, who shall, if he deem it neces- 1\'
sary, refer the matter to the Council of the League of Nations.
\"The two Parties retain the right of appeal to the Council of
the League of Nations. \"
The Court has no doubt that the principles laid down in its
Opinions Nos. 8 and g as to the final character of decisions under J
international law, apply to any final decision under the aforesaid
provisions.
This point is not contested by the Parties, although Poland
maintains that there may be exceptional cases in whicli even a final
decision can be reconsidered by the High Commissioner or the 1
Council of the League of Nations.
The point now at issue is only whether there is in force a decision
to the effect that the Polish postal service at the port of Danzig is
restricted to operations within its premises at Heveliusplatz
and that the use of such service is confined to Polish authorities
and offices.
It appears from the documents submitted to the Court that both
Parties mainly rely in their arguments upon three documents,
viz., the decision of May zsth, 1922, the decision of December qrd,
1922, and the High Commissioner\'s letter of January 6th, 1923.

***

An appeal was brought by Poland before the Council of the League
of Nations against the decision of General Haking of May 25th,
1922. On August 30th of the same year, in consequence of3he interpretation given by the High Commissioner of certain points of
his decision, the appeal was withdrawn. The decision so inter- \'