bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
Treatment of Enemy Aliens
Authors: Garner James W.
Published: April 2006

Writers on international law are now in substantial agreement that a belligerent ought not to detain enemy subjects, confiscate their property, or subject them to any disabilities, further than such as the protection of the national security and defense may require. Vattel, in 1758, appears to have been the first writer to adopt the view that had come to be generally held by publicists at the time the present war broke out. “The sovereign,” he said, “who declares war has not the right to detain the subjects of the enemy who are found within his state, nor their effects. They have come to his country in public faith; in permitting them to enter and live in the territory, he has tacitly promised them all liberty and surety for their return. A suitable time should be given them to withdraw with their goods; and if they stay beyond the time prescribed, it is lawful that they should be treated as enemies, though as disarmed enemies.” Alexander Hamilton, in defending the Jay Treaty of 1794, declared that the right of holding property in a country always implies a duty on the part of its government to protect that property and to secure to the owner full enjoyment of it. “Whenever, therefore,” he added, “a government grants permission to foreigners to acquire property within its territories, or to bring and deposit it there, it tacitly promises protection and security — the property of a foreigner placed in another country, by permission of its laws, may be justly regarded as a deposit of which the society is the trustee.” Westlake, in 1907, adverting to the numerous treaty stipulations on the subject, remarked that they might be deemed to amount to “a general agreement, on the part of governments, that modern international law forbids making prisoners the persons of enemy subjects in the territory at the outbreak of war, or, saving the right of expulsion in case of apprehended danger to the state, refusing them the right of continuous residence during good behavior.” Referring to the right of expulsion, Ullmann, a respectable German authority, remarks that expulsion can be resorted to against the subjects of the enemy state, but only after a suitable delay has been offered in order to enable those affected to wind up their affairs.
Enemy Goods and House of Trade
Authors: Baty Thomas
Published: April 2006

It is proposed to examine shortly, in the following pages, the precise extent to which a neutral’s commerce with a belligerent country is liable to interruption by the cruisers of the opposite belligerent, apart from the traditional doctrines of blockade and contraband, and from the practice of reprisals. We shall also eliminate the operation of the dogma of continuous voyage. Needless to say, that dogma is one which introduces utter uncertainty into the realm of prize law, and makes it easy for belligerents to behave towards neutral commerce in a quite arbitrary fashion. When combined with a swollen list of contraband, its application amounts to a complete control of commerce by belligerents; and might best be met by a friendly war being commenced between neutrals, who might thus, perhaps, regain the freedom of which they otherwise stand deprived.
The First Year of the Permanent Court of International Justice
Authors: Hudson Manley O.
Published: April 2006

The efforts made at the Hague Conference of 1907 to establish a Permanent Court of Arbitral Justice in addition to the panel which we call the Permanent Court of Arbitration, bore fruit at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 in Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The task of establishing a new court was too delicate for the Peace Conference to undertake. So the Covenant stopped short with directing the Council of the League of Nations to formulate plans for a Permanent Court of International Justice, and submit them to the members of the League “for adoption.” The Council lost no time after its organization in discharging this responsibility. At its second session, in February, 1920, which was really its first session for the transaction of business, it set up a Committee of Jurists to draft a scheme. This Committee deliberated through the summer of 1920, and its draft project was submitted to the Council at San Sebastian in August.
The United States and the Permanent Court of International Justice
Authors: Borel Eugène
Published: April 2006

From the day on which the United States of America declared that it would not become a party to the League of Nations, the thoughts of many people have naturally turned to the situation created by this abstention, the seriousness of which was necessarily clear to everyone.

Some think that the matter should be taken lightly. In their opinion the attitude of the United States can only be transitory and at some future time, which may, however, be still far distant, the country will modify its decision and make up its mind to occupy the place reserved for it in the League of Nations. Others allow themselves to be misguided by a different hope. According to them the League of Nations cannot live and will sooner or later disappear to make place for another grouping of nations which would win the approval and adhesion of the American Republic. Between these extreme views there lie the proposals of those who seek relief in the present situation, basing their expectations either upon such a revision of the Covenant as would satisfy the United States or upon the creation of a world association which would join the United States, the present League of Nations and other states not yet belonging thereto into one great group.
International Traffic Law: Its Forms and Requirements
Authors: Holländer Ernst
Published: April 2006

Traffic and trade among peoples are the prerequisites to any international law. Essentially distinct from them, however, are the right of peoples to traffic and trade with each other and the rules of law governing such international traffic. The aggregate of these rules constitutes the international traffic law.

For a hundred years or longer there have been legal rules regulating international traffic, but in no case was any attempt made to cover more than specific questions as they presented themselves for solution, no need being felt as yet among the peoples for a systematic regulation of the law as a whole.
The Lack of Uniformity in the Law and Practice of States with Regard to Merchant Vessels
Authors: Nielsen Fred K.
Published: April 2006

There is at present considerable discussion regarding questions with respect to “the freedom of the seas.” These questions, so often vaguely referred to, should presumably be understood to relate to the exercise of belligerent rights on the sea and to embrace such matters as a possible codification of international law touching this subject, proper compliance with rules heretofore generally accepted if not always strictly observed, the desirability of amendments to such rules, and the formulation of principles to meet new problems that have grown out of the recent conflict. In the light of events in connection with the war the present situation with regard to the disposition of such questions through international agreement unhappily appears more difficult than that which confronted the delegates who assembled in conference at London in 1908 on the invitation of the British Government to reach an understanding among the nations represented relative to the rules of international law concerning the laws of naval warfare, and formulated the so-called London Declaration signed February 26, 1909.
The Dawes Report on German Reparation Payments
Authors: Finch George A.
Published: April 2006

The completion and transmission to the Reparation Commission on April 9th last of the report of the expert committees appointed by it to “consider the means of balancing the budget and the measures to be taken to stabilize the currency” of Germany and to “consider the means of estimating the amount of German exported capital and of bringing it back to Germany” mark a further step in the efforts of the Allied Governments to give practical effect to the reparation clauses imposed upon Germany by the Treaty of Peace signed at Versailles on June 28, 1919.
Soviet Treaties and International Law
Authors: Korovin Eugene A.
Published: April 2006

The treaties negotiated between the Soviet Republics and the Western and Oriental nations are numerous and varied. The official records of the Commissariat for Foreign Affairs make a distinction between political treaties, agreements on questions of law, conventions regarding disputed frontiers, economic agreements, liaison, transportation and public health agreements.
Neutrality and the World War
Authors: Graham Malbone W.
Published: April 2006

To understand aright the modern concept of neutrality as it existed on the eve of the World War, it is necessary to inquire into its relationship to the society and law of nations. Neutrality, as is well known, was a status almost unknown to the ancient world in the period previous to the establishment of the pax Romana. Once almost universal dominion had passed into the hands of Rome, the possibility of maintaining an impartial attitude as between the Roman Empire and its enemies virtually ceased to exist, and the tribes and peoples bordering the lands where Roman authority was exercised became either hostes or socii et amici. When the Roman imperator was succeeded as a temporal authority by the pontifex maximus of the Christian church, the Mediaeval Empire, embodying in theory the whole of Latin Christendom, went forth against Moor or Saracen alike, conquering and to conquer in the name of the church militant. The foes of the church were the foes of every Christian potentate, and there could be no lukewarmness, no neutrality, in the perennial conflict against the Infidel.
American and British Claims Arbitration Tribunal
Authors: Fromageot Henri
Published: April 2006

American traders acquired certain lands in the Fiji Islands by purchase from native chiefs years before the cession of the islands to Great Britain in 1874. After the cession, Great Britain established a board of land commissioners to pass upon the validity of titles to land in the islands, and by 1882 more than 1,300 claims were passed upon.
International Sanctions and American Law
Authors: Stinson J. Whitla
Published: April 2006

Mr. J. Holmes had told us that the object of the study of law is to make
the prophecies of precedent more precise, to generalize them into a
thoroughly connected system; that that object is “the prediction of the
incidence of the public force through the instrumentalities of courts.” The
framers of our constitutional jurisprudence were clearly concerned with the
incidence of just principles upon governmental powers. Kent declares that
when the United States ceased to be a part of the British Empire, and
assumed the character of an independent nation, they became subject to that
system of rules, which reason, morality and custom had established among the
civilized nations of Europe, as their public law. It was recognized that the
law of nations prescribed “what one nation may do without giving just cause
for war, and what of consequence, another may or ought to permit without
being considered as having sacrificed its honor, its dignity, or its
independence.” Story avers that the general law of nations is “equally
obligatory upon all sovereigns and all states." It is "the umpire and
security of their rights and peace,” declared Jefferson. It is a law which
“binds all nations,” declared the Supreme Court of the United States in
1794.
The Legal Status of the Pan American Union
Authors: Penfield Walter Scott
Published: April 2006

Many times inquiry has been made as to the legal status of the Pan American Union. Its friends have often wished that an opportunity might be afforded a court to determine that question. For the first time in its history, a court of the United States recently had occasion to pass on the matter.
The Passing of Extraterritoriality in Siam
Authors: Sayre Francis Bowes
Published: April 2006

As a result of the expansion of Western trade during the nineteenth century following the industrial revolution, Western nations, ever eager for the coveted trade of the Orient, and stimulated by the need of finding new markets for their accumulating exports, pushed their insistent way into the Far East with new determination. There followed a series of treaties with Eastern potentates opening up new trading areas and clothing Western merchants with extraterritorial rights roughly similar to those enjoyed by foreigners under the Turkish Capitulations. Thus was born in the Orient the régime of extraterritoriality which in three quarters of a century was destined to become the focus of increasing disturbance and unrest in the Far Eastern world.
The Permanence of Treaties
Authors: Williams John Fischer
Published: April 2006

Starting, as we must start, from the proposition, that in the international sphere, treaties are at any rate no less binding than are contracts in the municipal sphere, may we nevertheless agree that treaties become obsolete, and, if yes, when and in what conditions? Has Article 19 of the Covenant of the League in any way diminished the respect due to treaty obligations? These are questions, which have a special importance at a time when the world has recently been resettled by treaty, and it is worth while to give a little time to their examination. Such an examination may at least serve to clear our ideas, to suggest what are the limits of the doctrine, and to emphasize the necessity, if those limits are to be defined, of a resort to an international court of justice.
What Parts of International Law May be Codified?
Authors: Rodgers William Ledyard
Published: April 2006

The discussions on the subject of the codification of international law at the 1926 annual meeting of the American Society of International Law made clear once more that matters as to which codification was conceivable fell into two broad classes, namely:Those affecting the international relations of states in their sovereign capacity and those affecting individuals in their international relations. It will be difficult to make law control in the first class of relations; it will be less difficult to do so in the second class.
The Second Year of the Permanent Court of International Justice
Authors: Hudson Manley O.
Published: April 2006

A year ago, when an attempt was made in this Joubnal to describe the inauguration of the Permanent Court of International Justice and the beginning of its work,1 it seemed that a new experiment in international relations was on trial. But such has been its progress in two years that the court now appears to be one of the established institutions in our international life. The Foreign Offices have begun to regard it as a sort of international fixture. It is fast accumulating a record of achievement indispensable to the international law of the future, and the court now bids fair to be permanent in influence as in name.
Recent Recognition Cases
Authors: Dickinson Edwin D.
Published: April 2006

The prolonged interval during which the United States declined to recognize the government functioning in Mexico, and the still more protracted period during which recognition has been withheld from the de facto government in Russia, have produced some unusually interesting problems with respect to the appropriate judicial attitude toward an unrecognized de facto foreign government. In Mexico the recognized Carranza regime was overthrown by revolution in the spring of 1920, and General Obregon was inaugurated president on the first of December in the same year, yet it was not until August 31, 1923, that the Obregon Government received recognition from the United States. In Russia the recognized Provisional Government of Kerensky fell before the onslaughts of the Bolsheviki in December, 1917, and the Soviet Government established by the Bolsheviki soon acquired virtually undisputed control of most of the old empire, yet the Soviet règime remains unrecognized by the United States even at the present day. During intervals thus abnormally prolonged it has become increasingly difficult for the courts to resolve the cases which arise by applying the simple arbitrary formula that all matters of recognition are for the political departments to decide. More and more it has become evident that cases may arise in which the courts, without deprecating in any way the general principle which the formula is conceived to express, may be justified in taking account in some degree of de facto foreign governments from which recognition has been withheld. It is proposed to consider here only the more recent English and American cases. The cases considered may be grouped under three heads.
Enemy Patents in the United States
Authors: Holtzoff Alexander
Published: April 2006

There was concluded in Washington on December 15,1931, an arbitration between the Central Powers and the United States of claims arising out of the seizure by the United States of enemy-owned ships, patents and radio stations during the World War. The arbitration was unique in that, instead of being brought about as the result of a treaty or a convention between the Powers in question, it was instituted as the result of an Act of Congress by which a special tribunal was established for the hearing of such claims against the United States. Thus we are confronted with the unusual spectacle of a Power against whom the claims were asserted, recognizing such claims by a legislative act on its own part, without any bilateral agreement, and establishing of its own accord a special tribunal for the determination of the claims. It was consequently an arbitration international in its scope, but conducted before a domestic tribunal.
The Meaning of the Pact of Paris
Authors: Wright Quincy
Published: April 2006

The Pact of Paris is a short document but it has invoked a wealth of commentary. It was hoped that the Pact would be an effective preventive of violence, that governments would therefore not often be called upon to interpretit, and that consequently exposition of its meaning would be largely the task of jurists and publicists. This hope has not been entirely realized, to the misfortune of the world, but at least the international jurists have a more positive grist to grind in their elucidations.
In the Matter of the Claim of Madame Chevreau Against the United Kingdom
Authors: Beichmann
Published: April 2006

Great Britain and her Allies were at war with Germany and Turkey, but not with Russia orPersia, and martial law had not been proclaimed in Persian territory occupied with permission of the government by the British troops. The latter, however, met with armed resistance from certain local inhabitants and hostile bands of brigands under Russian Bolshevist leadership. Under these circumstances the British forces in Persia had the right totake the necessary measures to protect themselves against acts harmful to their operations or favorable to the enemy, a right which in general, according to international law,belongs to belligerent forces occupying enemy territory.
The International Technical Consulting Committee on Radio Communication
Authors: Stewart Irvin
Published: April 2006

The International Technical Consulting Committee on Radio Communication, commonly known as the C.C.I.R. from the initial letters of the French title, had its origin in the International Radio Convention signed at Washington in 1927. The conference which drafted that convention was closely divided upon the question of setting up the new committee. Those delegations which opposed the idea of creating any committee to meet between conferences succeeded in having the text of the article providing for the committee drafted so as to limit the powers of the committee far more than the proponents of the new body desired.
Some British Opinions as to Neutral Rights,1861 to 1865
Authors: Baxter James P.
Published: April 2006

In the controversy between Great Britain and the United States as to neutral rights from 1914 to 1917, both governments appealed again and again to precedents of the American Civil War. British prize courts as well as British diplomats made effective use of the Civil War decisions. Indeed, Professor A. Pearce Higgins has recently gone so far as to assert that, if one views the decisions as a whole, there was no greater extension of the principles of international law by the decisions of British prize courts during the World War than in the American cases.
Taking Over and Return of Dutch Vessels, 1918-1919
Authors: Wilson George Grafton
Published: April 2006

In modern times of war belligerents usually have need of exceptional facilities for transportation. The taking over of private means of transportation belonging to the citizens of the belligerents has been common. The seizure of means of land transportation, whoever may be the owner, has long been common and was often called the exercise of the right of angary. With the development of maritime transportation, vessels were appropriated for war use. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries there was little question as to the right of angary. With the opening of the nineteenth century the right was questioned, as treaties had begun to prescribe that the right would not be exercised. Some treaties made specific mention of the use of vessels, etc., for military purposes, as the treaty between Prussia and Salvador, 1870, Article VI:

The citizens or subjects of each country cannot respectively be subjected to any embargo, nor can they be detained with their vessels, cargoes, merchandise, and effects for any military expedition, nor for any public use, unless there has been previously fixed by the interested parties themselves or by experts on their behalf, a sufficient indemnification in all cases, according to usage, both for the service imposed upon them, and for the damages, losses, and delays occasioned thereby or resulting therefrom.
The Doctrine of Res Judicata in Naturalization Cases in the United States
Authors: Hazard Henry B.
Published: April 2006

With nationality problems continuing to occupy a prominent place in both international and municipal practice, expressions of opinion of our highest tribunal upon the subject are received with peculiar interest. This is particularly true where the rule announced is one which governs the validity of naturalization judgments. In a recent sweeping naturalization decision which upholds the government’s views at every point, the United States Supreme Court has again stressed the rule that when doubt exists concerning a grant of citizenship, the statutes must be strictly construed in favor of the United States and against the alien. On October 22, 1928, the court handed down its opinion in the case of Anna Marie Maney, Petitioner, v. The United States of America, in which it affirmed, on writ of certiorari, the judgment of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The latter court had directed the cancellation of the applicant’s certificate of naturalization as having been “illegally procured” because of her failure to file, at the prescribed time and in the required manner, the certificate of her arrival in the United States.
The United States-Panama General Claims Commission
Authors: Hunt Bert L.
Published: April 2006

Since the reasoned decisions of international arbitral tribunals are tending constantly to influence, in larger degree, the development of a sound body of international law, a broad interest naturally attaches to the decisions resulting from any such general claims arbitration as that of the Governments of the United States and Panama which was concluded on June 30, last.
The Rôle of the Great Powers in Treaty Revision
Authors: Tobin Harold J.
Published: April 2006

Discussion of the need for revising the peace settlement of 1919 has focussed attention on the methods and rules which in the light of past experience might govern such action should it be undertaken. As general settlements on such a broad scale as that of 1919 are made but seldom, the last preceding one having been in 1815, it is not to be expected that each will remain intact until the next. The problem therefore besets the parties to such treaties, as well as other states concerned, how to modify those parts the usefulness of which appears impaired.
The United States Neutrality Act of 1937
Authors: Garner James Wilford
Published: April 2006

By a joint resolution passed on April 30 Congress reënacted, with modifications in some cases, and made permanent the essential provisions of the temporary resolution of August 31,1935 (as amended February 29,1936), which by its own terms expired on May 1, 1937. With the exception of the new Section 6 dealing with restrictions on the exportation and transportation of commodities other than arms, ammunition and implements of war, the duration of which by its own terms is limited to two years, the present resolution is therefore intended to lay down a permanent neutrality policy for the United States.
Recognition of Belligerency and the Spanish War
Authors: O'Rourke Vernon A.
Published: April 2006

Few problems raised by the Spanish civil war are more interesting than those growing out of the fact that a state of war, in the legal sense, does not exist; belligerent rights have been accorded to neither of the contestants by third Powers. Consequently, on January 8 of this year, Germany turned over to the rebel authorities two Spanish loyalist vessels captured in retaliation to an “act of piracy”—an indictment earned by the loyalist government for its seizure of the German freighter, Palos. One may feel justifiably surprised that a government almost universally recognized as legitimate can be charged with piratical activities. Further reflection reveals that the Spanish situation presents many more questions concerning the rights and duties of the contestants as against third parties. In the absence of the recognition of belligerency, what are the rights of loyalist and rebel ships on the high seas? In the territorial waters of Spain? May the fascist or socialistic factions establish blockades? What are the powers and validity of their prize courts? Who is answerable for the illegal acts of the rebels should they lose—or be victorious? What claims will the Spanish Government have as against third Powers should one or the other prove successful? May the loyalist authorities by simple decree close to neutral trade the ports held by the insurgents? Moreover, how would all of these matters be affected if the maritime Powers of the world were to recognize the existence of a state of war, i.e., belligerency, in Spain? And, finally, in view of the magnitude and duration of the struggle, is there any justification for withholding such recognition?
The Problem of Aggression and the Prevention of War
Authors: Kopelmanas L.
Published: April 2006

It is not surprising that works on aggression have abounded during the past several years. As the author of a recent noteworthy contribution to the subject has said: “The problem of aggression is … intimately connected with that of international security.” Our present-day society, which seeks above all to stabilize its precarious security, is therefore compelled to preoccupy itself with the problem of aggression. It may, perhaps, seem unprofitable to add to the numerous pages which have already been devoted to this problem. We propose to do so only because we believe that we have established the existence of serious gaps in the doctrine of the subject, and, what is of greater importance, in its practice. Everyone admits, more or less explicitly, that the problem of aggression is inseparable from that of the prevention of war. However, when it is a question of defining the relations of the two or of showing how the solution of the former influences the practical construction of the latter, we find either a complete silence or fragmentary and empirical solutions which lack even the merit of leading to satisfactory positive results.
The Conflict Between Autocracy and Democracy
Authors: Williams E. T.
Published: April 2006

Autocracy and Democracy are mutually antagonistic. A dictatorship, whether that of the proletariat or one established by a totalitarian state, is a menace to popular government. We have all seen in the recent past how it has shown itself a foe to liberty; to freedom of the person, freedom of opinion and speech, freedom of the press, and hostile to religious toleration. Autocracy, relying upon force, is necessarily militaristic and readily assumes an aggressive attitude towards other forms of government.
International Responsibility for Hostile Propaganda against Foreign States
Authors: Preuss Lawbence
Published: April 2006

Intensive campaigns of hostile and subversive propaganda against the territorial integrity and political order of foreign states have constituted one of the most disturbing factors in the international life of the postwar period. Powerful groups, frequently with governmental toleration or support, clamor for the incorporation in their several states of territories inhabited by populations of like nationality. Vigorous and systematic incitement of foreign subjects to disaffection or revolt against their own governments is the method generally adopted to attain this end. The consequent state of tension in the relations of the states concerned presents a real and actual threat to international peace. The dangerous situations which always result from a lack of coincidence between national and political frontiers have been intensified by the rise in several states of dictatorial régimes, which are disposed to press with special vigor their territorial claims. Hostile propaganda, especially if carried on with the sanction of nationalistic governments, “inevitably results in what might be termed the obliteration of the border-line between the state of peace and the state of war.” It tends always to create an atmosphere conducive to the occurrence of those “incidents” which have so frequently led to major conflicts.
The Problem of Revision in International Law
Authors: Kunz Josef L.
Published: April 2006

Perhaps no other problem of international law plays at the present time such an important rôle as the problem of revision, or, as it is now called with a new and rather ambiguous term, “peaceful change.” This is in itself a change. For whereas advanced municipal laws naturally contain provisions for the change of the positive law by legislation or by constitutional amendments, the problem was, up to a short time ago, nearly wholly neglected in international law, both practically and theoretically. International law was primarily static, as indeed are all primitive juridical orders. Not only were the great peace treaties since 1648 meant to be perpetual, but even proposals de lege ferenda were purely static.
Treaty-Making Procedure in the British Dominions
Authors: Stewart Robert B.
Published: April 2006

The British Dominions prior to the World War had already achieved practically unrestricted freedom with respect to technical and commercial treaties. They had not attained any comparable freedom with respect to “political” treaties. They were, with rare exceptions, excluded from participation in the conclusion of such treaties but were, nevertheless, bound automatically by the obligations undertaken by the mother country. The Government of the United Kingdom, subject to its responsibility to the Imperial Parliament at Westminster, exercised sole authority in all matters relating to the conduct of foreign policy, the maintenance of peace, and the declaration of war. That authority, Prime Minister Asquith declared at the Imperial Conference of 1911, could not be shared with the Dominions. Yet at the close of the War the Dominions were given separate representation at the Paris Peace Conference.
The Free Sea—Produce the Evidence!
Authors: Baty T.
Published: April 2006

Two subjects of high importance have recently claimed general attention. Thirty years ago everyone would have said they were settled. Now they are again in the melting-pot. And both concern that all-important matter the freedom of the sea. Both are in dire confusion because assertion has been mistaken for proof.
State Immunity and the Requisition of Ships During the Spanish Civil War
Authors: Preuss Lawrence
Published: April 2006

Measures of expropriation and requisition enacted during the Spanish conflict by both the Republican and the Nationalist Governments have given rise to a series of cases which involve fundamental questions relating to state immunity, the effect of the acts of foreign states and governments, and the consequences of de facto recognition. While the decisions in general follow those laid down in similar cases growing out of the Soviet decrees of nationalization, the Spanish Civil War cases contain sufficient elements of novelty to justify their careful study. Both contending parties endeavored by requisition to obtain possession or control of Spanish vessels wherever situate, and the ensuing claims by the owners or the adversary government before foreign courts compelled an examination of the relative status of the de jure government of Spain and of the insurgent government of General Franco during a civil “war” which abounded in anomalous situations.
The Need for an International Legislative Drafting Bureau
Authors: Jenks C. Wilfred
Published: April 2006

The next few years are likely to be of critical importance in the development of the technique of international legislation by means of multipartite agreements. The interruption of the normal rhythm of international legislative activity by the war, the need to revise a substantial proportion of the principal existing multipartite legislative instruments in the light of the new conditions precipitated by the war, and the wide range of problems not dealt with in such instruments hitherto which have now been thrust into the foreground, will combine to produce an intensification of international legislative activity comparable to that of the years immediately following the first world war. The first steps are already being taken by the formulation of plans for a wide range of new international organisations, and when the necessary constituent instruments have been framed the whole of the existing corpus of international legislation is likely to be progressively reconsidered over a period of years.
War, Neutrality and Non-Belligerency
Authors: Borchard Edwin
Published: April 2006

At Havana on March 27, 1941, Attorney General Jackson delivered an address designed to prove that as a matter of law the United States was now obliged to render to England (and presumably others) all aid “ short of war,” while “ at the same time it is the declared determination of the government to avoid entry into the war as a belligerent.” Apparently convinced that United States military aid to one belligerent alone cannot be justified by the traditional international law, the Attorney General feels obliged first to explode as obsolete the international law conceptions of war and neutrality of the past two centuries, culminating in The Hague Conventions, and to maintain that a new international law has now been revealed in the Covenant of the League of Nations, the Kellogg Pact, the Budapest “ Articles of Interpretation” of 1934, and the Argentine Anti-War Treaty of 1933, all of which are alleged to make discrimination the new way of life for neutrals. The legislation of Congress requiring impartiality is not accorded even honorable mention. The “ new international law” is thus found in the vague and illusory monuments to the myth called “ collective security,” which crumbled under the impact of the first European crisis. It should be no surprise to the Attorney General that many international lawyers do not share his views on international law or how international law is created, or follow his unique construction of documents.
Exclusion and Expulsion Of Aliens In Latin America
Authors: y Puente J. Irizarry
Published: April 2006

Hardly another question is of greater practical interest in Latin America today, from the point of view of public order and national security, than the inadmission and expulsion of aliens. The question is specially deserving of reexamination in these days of revolutionary changes in political and legal thought, changes which suggest that legislation designed to safeguard the internal order and external security of a countryshould not be neglected lest it become powerless to cope with situations which those changes may carry in their wake. The historic events now taking place are in no small measure the symptoms of a profound transition in political and juristic ideas throughout the world.
The Inter-American Juridical Committee
Authors: Fenwick Charles G.
Published: April 2006

Even before the attack upon the United States by Japan at Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declarations of war by Germany and Italy, the Inter-American Neutrality Committee had already been forced into a position where it could not fulfill the purposes for which it was originally intended. At the time of its creation by the meeting of Foreign Ministers at Panama in 1939, the Committee represented a genuine desire on the part of the American Republics to observe “certain standards” of neutral conduct which would insure their being able to maintain their status as neutral States; and in fulfillment of the functions assigned to it, the Committee proceeded to make “recommendations” which it believed to be in accord with the traditional principles of neutrality. The recommendation on the Security Zone, while upholding a departure by the American Republics from the specific rules of neutrality, was justified by the Committee on the basis of the fundamental right of self-defense under the conditions of modern submarine warfare.
The Present Status of Neutrality
Authors: Wright Quincy
Published: April 2006

President Wilson asserted in 1917 that “neutrality is no longer feasible or desirable where the peace of the world is involved and the freedom of its people.” In March, 1920, at its second session, the League of Nations Council affirmed that “the conception of neutrality of the members of the League is incompatible with the principle that all members will be obliged to cooperate in enforcing respect for their engagements.” In 1929 the British Foreign Office officially declared that “as between members of the League there can be no neutral rights because there can be no neutrals.” And in 1932 Secretary of State Stimson declared in reference to the Pact of Paris that “hereafter when two nations engage in armed conflict either one or both of them must be wrongdoers—violators of the general treaty. We no longer draw a circle about them and treat them with the punctilios of a duelist’s code. Instead we denounce them as law-breakers.”
The Sabotage Claims Against Germany
Authors: Woolsey L. H.
Published: April 2006

On October 30, 1939, a series of 153 awards in the so-called Sabotage Claims against Germany was handed down by the Mixed Claims Commission under the Agreement of August 10, 1922, between the United States and Germany. These awards were made pursuant to the decision of the Commission rendered on June 15, 1939, and the order entered the same day, which held that German sabotage agents in this country were responsible for the destruction of the Black Tom Terminal on the night of July 29,1916, and the Kingsland Plant on January 11, 1917, and that Germany was liable for the damages resulting from these destructions. After the pleadings had been filed in 1927-1928, together with considerable evidence, and after the argument in Washington in April, 1929, and the reargument at The Hague in September, 1930, the Commission withdrew to Hamburg and rendered a decision dated October 16, 1930, dismissing all of the claims as not involving German responsibility. The Commission, however, found that the German Government had authorized a general campaign of sabotage in the United States during the period of neutrality and had sent men to this country for that purpose. The efforts of the American Agent in opposition to the German Agent to obtain a reconsideration of this decision resulted in several decisions of interest to the science of international law. The limited space permits only a summary discussion of the main questions.
Relations Officieuses and Intent to Recognize: British Recognition of Franco
Authors: Briggs Herbert W.
Published: April 2006

The decisions of the British courts in The Arantzazu Mendi and Banco de Bilbao v. Sancha and Rey that the British Government had accorded de facto recognition to the Franco insurgents become all the more curious in the light of unequivocal denials by the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary in the House of Commons that such recognition had been accorded prior to the dates of these decisions. An examination of these statements in the House of Commons raises an interesting question: What constitutes de facto recognition? More particularly, do (1) the conclusion of an agreement of a “provisional” nature with an unrecognized régime, or (2) the institution of “unofficial” relations (relations officieuses) therewith, or (3) the granting of immunities to executive agents, constitute de facto recognition of the régime so treated?
Recent Developments with Respect to the Continental Shelf
Authors: Young Richard
Published: April 2006

The proclamation of the President of the United States on September 28, 1945, declaring as a matter of policy that the natural resources of the subsoil and sea bed of the continental shelf appertain to the United States,
proves to have offered a marketable concept in the marts of international law. Six States have followed the example in the last three years, with certain notable modifications of their own, and it appears not improbable that the principle thus put forward may gain increasing acceptance in international practice. It seems appropriate therefore briefly to review various developments with respect to jurisdiction over the continental shelf, the epicontinental sea, and their resources.
The Twenty-Eighth Year of the World Court
Authors: Hudson Manley O.
Published: April 2006

Substantial contributions to the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice were made during its twenty-eighth year—in two judgments in the Corfu Channel Case, and in an advisory opinion on Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations. The prospect for the greater activity of the Court improved notably during the year, as a result of the institution of proceedings in three contested cases—between the United Kingdom and Norway, France and Egypt, and Colombia and Peru, respectively; and as a result of three requests emanating from the General Assembly for advisory opinions—concerning questions arising under the Treaties of Peace with Bulgaria, Hungary and Rumania; the competence of the General Assembly to admit new Members of the United Nations; and the international status of South West Africa. On the other hand, the year has not been marked by a great increase in the jurisdiction conferred on the Court under Article 36 (2) of the Statute or otherwise.
Procedural Problems in International Arbitration
Authors: Carlston Kenneth S.
Published: April 2006

The procedural aspects of international arbitration have largely been neglected. Tribunals are prone to borrow their rules of procedure from one another without considering their suitability for the particular arbitration at hand. Time rarely permits then to act otherwise in the hurry and pressure attendant upon the opening of an arbitration. Agents and counsel are anxiously preparing their cases and awaiting the opening of oral arguments. During the course of the arbitration the ever-nearing date fixed for its completion, the mounting expense of maintaining the staffs, and the burdens of other official duties awaiting the arbitrators and advocates upon the completion of their tasks all tend to discourage the deliberate consideration of procedural problems.Though the need for procedural reform was long ago recognized, the problem has received relatively little attention from writers.
The International Court of Justice, the Senate, and Matters of Domestic Jurisdiction
Authors: Preuss Lawrence
Published: April 2006

It has been remarked that the Government of the United States “seldom loses an opportunity to profess its loyalty to international arbitration in the abstract. … The expression of this sentiment has become so conventional that a popular impression prevails that it accords with the actual policy of the United States.” This ambivalent attitude is nowhere more clearly illustrated than in a memorandum addressed by Mr. John Foster Dulles on July 10, 1946, to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. “The United States, since its formation,” Mr. Dulles states, “has led in promoting a reign of law and justice as between nations. In order to continue that leadership, we should now accept the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. If the United States, which has the material power to impose its will widely in the world, agrees instead to submit to the impartial adjudication of its legal controversies, that will inaugurate a new and profoundly significant international advance.” Although the initial step of accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court would in itself be “of profound moral significance,” it would, Mr. Dulles continues, “assume greatly increased practical significance” only when “limiting factors” have been removed, for the “path is as yet so untried that it would be reckless to proceed precipitately,” the Court “has yet to win the confidence of the world community,” and “international law has not yet developed the scope and definiteness necessary to permit international disputes generally to be resolved by judicial rather than political tests.”
The Egyptian Mixed Courts and Foreign Armed Forces
Authors: Brinton Jasper Y.
Published: April 2006

In the April issue of this Journal, Colonel Archibald King contributed, under the title “Further Developments Concerning Jurisdiction over Friendly Foreign Armed Forces,” a study designed to bring down to date his previous article on the same subject which appeared in the issue for October 1942.
Captured Enemy Property: Booty of War and Seized Enemy Property
Authors: Downey William Gerald
Published: April 2006

In an address before the 1949 annual meeting of the American Society of International Law this writer remarked that the laws governing captured enemy property have never been codified or collected in one place and are very difficult to find and apply. The lack of a handy tool in the field of captured property has been noted at times by others, including Professor H. A. Smith, formerly a colonel with the British 21st Army Group, who observed that the “law of booty is almost unwritten” and Judge Manley O. Hudson, who wrote some years ago in an editorial in this JOURNAL that the “literature on captured property and war booty seemed inadequate.”
Access–to–Courts Provisions in United States Commercial Treaties
Authors: Wilson Robert R.
Published: April 2006

A well-known English judge declared three decades ago that “an alien ami is never exlex . . . whatever rights he has he can enforce by law just as an ordinary subject can.” Nor was this a new thought at that time. More than a hundred years earlier a prominent American judge had affirmed that:
The Radio Amateur in International Legislation and Administration
Authors: Schroeder Peter B.
Published: April 2006

The 150,000 radio amateurs of the world today operate on groups of frequencies and under broad regulatory measures determined by the international radio conference and implemented in considerable detail by the various national administrations comprising the international community.
The Position of International Treaties in Swiss Law
Authors: Rice William G.
Published: April 2006

In any legal system there is an order of rank of types of law. This order in countries where courts are independent of other branches of government, where there is both a “separation of powers” and a “rule of law,” is established and maintained by the courts through their decisions. As “interpreters” of the constitution, written or customary, the courts are really the artisans of this standard of rank, for it is rarely stated explicitly in constitutional documents.