The lines of distinction drawn by the decisions are not very-clear and turn often upon matters of form rather than of substance, which is objectionable where the question is one of policy. In New York it is said that a distinction is to be made "between the provisions of a contract providing that before a right of action shall accrue certain facts shall be determined, or amounts or values ascertained, and an independent covenant or agreement to provide for the adjustment and settlement of all disputes and differences by arbitration to the exclusion of the courts;" 65 and in a concurring opinion in the same case from which this quotation is taken it is said of an attempt to bestow exclusive jurisdiction on private arbitrators that whether it "takes the form of a condition precedent or a covenant, it is equally ineffective." Probably these expressions as nearly represent the prevailing American judicial opinion, as any that could be selected.