(4) The Report of the Commission is to be signed by all its members; but if a member refuses to sign, the fact is to be mentioned, and the validity of the Report is not thereby affected (article 33). The Report of the Commission is read in open Court, the Agents and Counsel of the parties being present or duly summoned to attend; a copy of the Report is furnished to each party (article 34). This Report is absolutely limited to a statement of the facts, it has in no way the character of an Arbitral Award, and it leaves to the parties entire freedom as to the effect to be given to the statement of the facts (article 35). (5) Each party pays its own expenses and an equal share of the expenses of the Commission (article 36). [Footnote 7: See Herr, _Die Untersuchungskommissionen der Haager Friedenskonferenzen_ (1911); Meurer, I. pp. 129-165; Higgins, pp. 167-170; Lémonon, pp. 77-91: Wehberg, _Kommentar_, pp. 21-46; Nippold, I. pp. 23-35; Scott, _Conferences_, pp. 265-273; Politis in _R.G._ XIX. (1912), pp. 149-188.] [Footnote 8: On October 24, 1904, during the Russo-Japanese war, the Russian Baltic fleet, which was on its way to the Far East, fired into the Hull fishing fleet off the Dogger Bank, in the North Sea, whereby two fishermen were killed and considerable damage was done to several trawlers. Great Britain demanded from Russia not only an apology and ample damages, but also severe punishment of the officer responsible for the outrage. As Russia maintained that the firing was caused by the approach of some Japanese torpedo-boats, and that she could therefore not punish the officer in command, the parties agreed upon the establishment of an International Commission of Inquiry, which, however, was charged not only to ascertain the facts of the incident but also to pronounce an opinion concerning the responsibility for the incident and the degree of blame attaching to the responsible persons. The Commission consisted of five naval officers of high rank--namely, one British, one Russian, one American, one French, and one Austrian, who sat at Paris in February 1905. The report of the Commission states that no torpedo-boats had been present, that the opening of fire on the part of the Baltic fleet was not justifiable, that Admiral Rojdestvensky, the commander of the Baltic fleet, was responsible for the incident, but that these facts were "not of a nature to cast any discredit upon the military qualities or the humanity of Admiral Rojdestvensky or of the _personnel_ of his squadron." In consequence of the last part of this report Great Britain could not insist upon any punishment to be meted out to the responsible Russian Admiral, but Russia paid a sum of £65,000 to indemnify the victims of the incident and the families of the two dead fishermen. See Martens, _N.R.G._ 2nd Ser. XXXIII. (1906), pp. 641-716, And Mandelstam in _R.G._ XII. (1905), pp. 161 and 351.] [Sidenote: Effect of Negotiation.]