Chapter 16

“The rules of justice, far from checking their prejudices, had been themselves warped and adapted to their bias. It is no exaggeration to say that all the Teutonic nations entertained opinions on this subject quite opposite to the theory of our times. They looked upon war as a real act of justice, and esteemed it an incontestable title over the weak, a visible mark that God had intended to subject them to the strong. They had no doubt but the intentions of this divinity had been to establish the same dependence among men which there is among animals, and setting out from the principle of the inequality of men, as our modern civilians do, from that of their equality, they inferred thence that the weak had no right to what they could not defend. This maxim which formed the basis of the law of Nations among the ancient inhabitants of Europe being dictated by their most darling passion, we cannot wonder that they should so steadily act up to it in practice. And, which after all is worst, to act and think as they did, or, like the moderns, with better principles, to act as ill? As to the ancient nations, we attribute nothing to them here but what is justified to them by a thousand facts. They adopted the above maxim in all its rigour and gave the name of Divine Judgment not only to the Judiciary Combat, but to conflicts and battles of all sorts: victory being in their opinion the only certain mark by which Providence enables us to distinguish those which it has appointed to command others.”

The very notion of the “right of conquest,” and that the victorious are entitled to an indemnity without reference to any question of right and wrong or of justice and injustice, shows that there are principles in actual practice whichWhat is a civilized state?lie outside and have no analogy in the principles of private law. In the partition of Africa native states have been treated as non-existent except as local bodies. They have been annexed to European states without reference to their will or consent. Treaties have indeed been made with them, but they have rather been regarded as evidence of prior occupation than as involving any question of native right. The test in the distinction between civilized and uncivilized states which is regarded as warranting exclusion from enjoyment of the right to consideration as independent states, and admission to the community of the civilized world, is in practice the possession of a regular government sufficient to ensure to Europeans who settle among them safety of life and property. Every country, in principle, possessing such a government has prima facie the rank of a state and is entitled to treatment as a civilized community. Treaties made with it for the purpose of extra-territorial jurisdiction are intended merely to take into account a difference of judicial institutions but are not supposed to detract otherwise from the possession of such equality and independence. This principle has no analogy in private morals, and has been, slight as it is, more honoured in the breach than the observance. If indifference to native right has provoked reaction, it has been on the part rather of philanthropists than of statesmen. Their movement for the protection of African aborigines has, however,resulted in at least one great international charter for the prevention of the further degradation of African aborigines, viz. the General Act of Brussels of 1885. A vigorous outcry has also been raised against the methods of the government of the Congo State. But the agitation ought not to be confined to this part of Central Africa. Other governments are also in fault. In fact, the contact of the European with Central Africa has, throughout, with few exceptions, been one of barbarous practice quite inconsistent with the principles which Christian missionaries have been sent to teach the African native.

In the case of European enterprise in Asia, the “good old rule” has had still less justification. The action taken for the repression of the Boxer movement in China, like previous European incursions, had no essential characteristic distinguishing it from the expeditions of the Northmen described by Mallet in the above-quoted passage. The Japanese took part in the “Boxer” expedition, and the example of respect for native right and of orderly self-restraint they set has been universally acknowledged. But the lesson is one of greater significance than one of comparative ethics. The rise of the power of Japan and her obvious determination to constitute herself the champion of the races of eastern Asia has widened the scope of International Law, and we may now regard China as henceforth under the protection of the same principles as European states.

The three chief principles of interstate intercourse, those, in fact, on which International Law is based are:—

1. Recognition of each other’s existence and integrity as states.2. Recognition of each other’s independence.3. Recognition of equality, one with another, of all independent states.

1. Recognition of each other’s existence and integrity as states.

2. Recognition of each other’s independence.

3. Recognition of equality, one with another, of all independent states.

As regards the first o£ these principles seeState. From the principle of independence it follows that every state has a right to change its form of government and to enjoy the free exercise o£ its internal energies. This is subjectChief principles.only to the limitation that in the exercise of this right other states or their subjects shall not be molested or otherwise suffer. The equality of all independent states entitles them to respect by other states of all the forms of ceremonial and to the same treatment by others, where their interests are identical, whether they are strong or weak. This principle has often been violated, but it is, nevertheless, acknowledged wherever possible, as in diplomatic conferences relating to all matters of an economic, hygienic, industrial or social character. Even at the Conference of Algeciras, though the powers immediately concerned from a political point of view were only Great Britain, France, Germany and Spain, the following were also represented as having economic interests in Morocco, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Russia, Belgium, Holland, Portugal and Sweden.

Ships on the high sea being regarded as detached portions of the national territory, there is also the derived principle of the freedom of the high sea, of the independence and equalityHigh sea.upon it of the ships of all nations, subject only to due respect being paid to the independence and equality of all others and to such conventional restrictions as states may impose upon themselves (seeTerritorial Waters). This principle is re-enunciated in the preamble to the Convention of 1907 on the laying of automatic submarine contact mines (seePeace Conferences).

The Hague Conventions are based on these principles, to which there is a tendency to add another, viz. the right to arbitration in certain cases. This principle is set outThe right to arbitration.more or less tentatively, it is true, but it is being completed by separate treaties of compulsory arbitration in connexion with the cases referred to. It is enunciated in the following article of the Convention of 1907 for the pacific settlement of International disputes:—

“In questions of a legal nature, and especially in the interpretation or application of International Conventions, arbitration is recognized by the contracting powers as the most effective, and, at the same time, the most equitable means of arranging disputes which diplomacy has failed to settle. Consequently, it is desirable that, in disputes regarding the above-mentioned questions, the contracting powers should, if need be, have recourse to arbitration, in so far as circumstances permit” (Art. 28).

The principle of arbitration has also been adopted in reference to the recovery of contract debts under the following article of the “Convention respecting the limitation of the employment of force for the recovery of contract debts”:—

“The contracting powers agree not to have recourse to armed force for the recovery of contract debts claimed from the government of one country by the government of another country as being due to its subjects or citizens. This undertaking is, however, not applicable when the debtor state refuses or neglects to reply to an offer of arbitration, or, after accepting the offer, renders the settlement of theCompromisimpossible, or, after the arbitration, fails to comply with the award” (Art. 1).

The codification of International Law itself, begun at the Hague and London Conferences, is an admission of the binding character of the primary principles set out above.

One of the chief tendencies of contemporary reform is also to restrict the effect of fictions and reduce rights to the limits of their practical application. Between two alternatives, the one to assert rights which cannot possibly beRestriction of effect of fictions.maintained by force such as claims to dominion over portions of the high sea (seeHigh Sea,Territorial Waters), “paper blockades” (seeBlockade) and fictitious occupations of territory (seeOccupation), and the other to require actual physical assertion, a medium course is growing up, viz. that of recognizing potential assertion, that is assertion limited to physical possibilities.16With the aid of the Institute o£ International Law, the International Law Association and other reforming agencies (seePeace), expert opinion in these matters is becoming homogeneous throughout the civilized world, and the ground is being prepared for a clearer understanding of these fundamental principles by the statesmen and state officials who have to apply them in practice.

Bibliography.—The following are works on international law, diplomacy and treaty relations, from the beginning of the 19th century until 1910. Many of the older authors have been omitted to permit the inclusion of more recent writers.Alcorta,Tratado de derecho internacional(Buenos Aires, 1878); D. Anzilotti,Teoria generale della responsabilità dello Stato nel diritto internazionale(Florence, 1902); Arendt,Le Droit public et la neutralité de la Belgique(Brussels, 1845); Nagao Ariga,La Guerre russo-japonaise, au point de vue continental et le droit international(Paris, 1908),La Guerre sino-japonaise au point de vue du droit international(Paris, 1896); Sir Sherston Baker,First Steps in International Law(London, 1899); Barboux,Jurisprudence du conseil des prises pendant la guerre franco-allemande(1872); Sir T. Barclay,Problems of International Practice and Diplomacy(London, 1907); T. Baty,International Law(London, 1909); Bello,Principios de derecho internacional, 2nd ed. by Silva (Madrid, 1884); Norman Bentwich,The Law of Private Property in War with a Chapter on Conquest(London, 1907); Bergbohm,Staats-Verträge und-Gesetze als Quellen des Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1877); T. M. Bernard,Four Lectures on Subjects connected with Diplomacy(London, 1868); Bluntschli,Das moderne Völkerrecht der civilisirten Staaten als Rechtsbuch dargestellt(Nördlingen, 1868), trans. into French by Lardy (Le Droit international codifié) (Paris, 2nd ed., 1874),Die Bedeutung und die Fortschritte des modernen Völkerrechts(2nd ed., Berlin, 1873); De Boeck,Le Droit de la propriété ennemie privée sous pavillon ennemi(Paris, 1882); Henri Bonfils,Manuel de droit international public(1894, 4th ed., by Fauchille, 1904); Percy Bordwell,The Law of War between Belligerents—a History and Commentary(Chicago, 1908); Bornemann,Forelaesninger over den positive folkeret(Copenhagen, 1866); Brusa,Del modierno diritto internazionale pubblico(Florence, 1876); De Burgh,Elements of Maritime International Law(London, 1868); Aug. von Bulmerincq,Praxis, Theorie und Codification des Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1874),Das Völkerrecht(1887); Montagu Burrows,History of the Foreign Policy of Great Britain(London, 1897); Charles Henry Butler,The Treaty-making Power of the United States(2 vols., New York, 1902); Carlos Calvo,Le Droit international(5th ed., 6 vols., Paris, 1896); Cauchy,Le Droit maritime international considéré dans ses origines et ses rapports avec les progrès de la civilisation(2 vols., Paris, 1862),Du respect de la propriété privée dans la guerre maritime(Paris, 1866); Carnazza-Amari,Trattato di diritto internazionale de pace(2 vols., 1867-1875); Pitt Cobbett,Cases and Opinions on International Law and various points of English Law connected therewith(London, 1st ed. 1885,2nd ed. 1892, 3rd ed. 1909) (part I, “Peace”); Miguel Cruchaga,Nociones de derecho internacional(1899, 2nd ed. 1902); Cogordan,La Nationalité au point de vue des rapports internationaux(Paris, 1879); de Courcy,Réforme internationale du droit maritime(Paris, 1863); R. T. Crane,State in Constitutional and International Law(1907); Creasy,First Platform of International Law(London, 1876); G. B. Davis,Outlines of International Law, with an Account of its origin and sources, and of its historical development(New York, 1887);Elements of International Law, with an account of its origin, sources and historical development(new and revised edition, New York and London, 1900); de Clercq,Recueil des traités, conventions et actes diplomatiques conclus par la France avec les puissances étrangères, publiés sous les auspices du min. des aff. étrangères(Paris, 21 vols.); Descamps,L’Évolution de la neutralité en droit international(Brussels, 1898); F. Despagnet,Cours de droit international public(2nd ed., Paris, 1899),La Diplomatie de la Troisième République et le droit des gens(Paris, 1904); Professor Giulio Diena,Principi di diritto internazionale(Naples, 1908); Dufraisse,Histoire du droit de guerre et de paix(Paris, 1867); Jacques Dumas,Les Sanctions de l’arbitrage international(Paris, 1905); E. Duplessix,La Loi des nations, projet de code de droit international public(Paris, 1906);L’Organisation internationale(Paris, 1909); Charles Dupuis,Les Tarifs douaniers et les traités de commerce(Paris, 1895);Le Principe d’équilibre et le concert européen de la paix de Westphalie à l’acte d’Algesiras(Paris, 1909); Eden,Law of Nature and of Nations, Policy of Europe(London, 1823); Ed. Engelhardt.Du régime conventionnel des fleuves internationaux(Paris, 1879); Paul Errera,Das Staatsrecht des Königsreichs Belgien(Tübingen, 1909); T. H. S. Escott,The Story of British Diplomacy; Its Makers and Movements(London, 1908); Fauchille,La Diplomatie française et la ligue des neutres de 1780(1776-1783) (Paris, 1893);Du blocus maritime(Paris, 1882); Ferguson,A Manual of International Law(2 vols., London, 1884); David Dudley Field,Outlines of an International Code(New York and London, 2nd ed., 1876); Fiore,Trattado di diritto internazionale pubblico(3rd ed., Turin, 1888),Nouveau Droit international public(3 vols., Paris, 1885);Le Droit international codifié et sa sanction juridique—traduit de l’italien par A. Chrétien(Paris, 1889); Funck-Brentano et Sorel,Précis du droit des gens(Paris, 1877, new ed. 1894); Fusinato,Il Principio della scuola italiana nel diritto internazional pubblico(Macerata, 1884); François Gairal,Le Protectorat international(Paris, 1896); E. M. Gallaudet,International Law(New York, 1886); Guillaume de Garden,Histoire générale des traités de paix, et autres transactions principales, entre toutes les puissances de l’Europe depuis la paix de Westphalie(14 vols., Paris, 1848-1859); Gareis,Institutionen des Völkerrechts(1888, 2nd ed., 1901); L. Gessner,Zur Reform des Kriegseerechts(Berlin, 1875),Le Droit des neutres sur mer(2nd ed., Berlin, 1876), Guelle,Droit international. La guerre continentale et les personnes(Paris, 1879); Guéronnière,Le Droit public de l’Europe moderne(Paris, 1876); Guesalaga,Derecho diplomatico y consular(Buenos Aires, 1900); Hagerup, “La Neutralité permanente” (Revue générale du droit international public) (Paris, 1905); W. E. Hall,A Treatise on International Law(6th ed., edited by J. B. Atlay, Oxford, 1909);Foreign Powers and Jurisdiction of the British Crown(London, 1894); H. W. Halleck,International Law(Philadelphia, 1866, edit. by Sir Sherston Baker, 4th ed., 2 vols., London 1908); A. B. Hart,Foundations of American Foreign Policy(New York, 1901); Hartmann,Institutionen des praktischen Völkerrechts in Friedenszeiten(1887); L. B. Hautefeuille,Quelques questions de droit international maritime à propos de la guerre d’Amérique(Leipzig and Paris, 1861);Droits et devoirs des nations neutres(3 vols., 3rd ed., Paris, 1868);Questions de droit maritime international(Paris, 1868);Histoire des origines, des progrès et des variations du droit maritime international(Paris, 1858, 2nd ed. 1869); Heffter,Das europäische Völkerrecht der Gegenwart(Berlin, 1855, trans. into French by Bergson,Le Droit international de l’Europe, 4th ed., enlarged and annotated by Geffcken, Berlin and Paris, 1883); Amos E. Hershey,The International Law and Diplomacy of the Russo-Japanese War(New York, 1906); Hertslet’sCommercial Treaties(24 vols., London, 1840-1907); Sir Edward Hertslet,Map of Europe by Treaty, showing the territorial changes since the general Peace of 1814-1891(4 vols., London, 1875-1891);Map of Africa by Treaty (1778-1895)(3 vols., London, 1896), Index to British and Foreign State Papers, vols. 1 to 63 (1879); A. Pearce Higgins,The Hague Peace Conferences and other International Conferences concerning the Laws and Usages of War(Cambridge, 1909); Historicus (Sir William Harcourt),Letters on some Questions of International Law(1863); Albert E. Hogan,Pacific Blockade; T. E. Holland,The Elements of Jurisprudence(London, 1880, 10th ed., Oxford, 1906),Studies in International Law(Oxford, 1898),The Laws of War on Land(Oxford, 1908),Letters to The Times upon War and Neutrality(1881-1909) with some commentary (London, 1909),British Admiralty Manual of the Law of Prize(1888); G. F. W. Holls,The Peace Conference at The Hague(New York, 1900); Holtzendorff,Handbuch des Völkerrechts(4 vols., Hamburg, 1885-1889); J. Hosack,On the Rise and Growth of the Law of Nations from the earliest Times to the Treaty of Utrecht(London, 1882); Huber,Die Staaten-Succession, völkerrechtliche und staatsrechtliche Praxis im 19. Jahrhundert(Leipzig, 1898); International American Conference,Plan of Arbitration for the settlement of disputes between the American Republics, Report and Recommendations(Washington, 1890); International American Conference,Report and Recommendations concerning a Uniform Code of International Law(Washington, 1890); Joseph Imbart Latour,La Mer territoriale(Paris, 1889); Atherley Jones,Commerce in War(London, 1907); Kaltenborn,Critik des Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1847),Zur Geschichte des Natur- und Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1848); L. Kamarowsky,Le Tribunal international(trans. into French by Serge de Westman, Paris, 1887); Wilhelm Kaufmann,The Egyptian State Debt and its Relation to International Law(London, 1892);Die Rechtskraft des internationalen Rechtes(Stuttgart, 1899); Kennedy,Influence of Christianity on International Law(Cambridge, 1856); James Kent,Commentary on International Law(rev. with notes and cases by J. T. Abdy, 2nd ed. rev., London, 1877); Kleen,De la contrebande de guerre(Paris, 1893),Lois et usages de la neutralité(2 vols., Paris, 1898-1900),Krigets historia ur folkrättelig Synpunkt(Stockholm, 1906),Kodificerad Handbok i Krigets Lagar till lands och till Sjös(Stockholm, 1909); Otto Krauske,Die Entwickelung der ständigen Diplomatie vom 15ten Jahrhundert bis zu den Beschlüssen von 1815 und 1818(Leipzig, 1885); Jean Lagorgette,Le Rôle de la guerre. Étude de la sociologie générale(Paris, 1905); Lammasch,Fortbildung des Völkerrechts durch die Haager Conferenz(Munich, 1900); Almá Latifi,Effects of War on Property, being Studies in International Law and Policy(London, 1909); François Laurent,Histoire du droit des gens et des relations internationales, continued at vol. iv. under title ofÉtudes de l’histoire de l’humanité(18 vols., Brussels, 1861-1880); Laveleye,Du respect de la propriété privée en temps de guerre(Brussels, 1875); T. J. Lawrence,Essays on Disputed Questions of Modern International Law(Cambridge, 1884),The Principles of International Law(London, 1895, 3rd ed. 1900),Handbook of Public International Law(4th ed., London, 1898),War and Neutrality in the Far East(London, 1904); Emile Lefèvre,Réorganisation du consulat français à l’étranger(Paris, 1883); Ernest Lehr,La Nationalité dans les principaux états du globe(Paris, 1909); Ernest Lemonon,La Seconde Conférence de la paix(Paris, 1908, an exhaustive volume in 790 pp.); de Leval,De la protection diplomatique des nationaux à l’étranger(Brussels, 1907); Leone Levi,The Law of Nature and Nations as affected by Divine Law(London, 1855),International Law, with Materials for a Code of International Law(London, 1888); Liszt,Das Völkerrecht(1898, 6th ed., 1910); Lorimer,The Institutes of the Law of Nations(2 vols., London, 1883); Lueder,Der neueste Codificationsversuch auf dem Gebiete des Völkerrechts(1874); Theo. Lyman,Diplomacy of the United States(Boston, 1828); Mackintosh,Discourse on the Study of the Law of Nature and Nations(2nd ed., London, 1828); Sir Henry S. Maine,International Law(London, 1888); Terenzio Mamiani,Des traités de 1815 et d’un nouveau droit européen, traduit par Léonce Lehmann(Paris, 1862); Mancini,Diritto internazionale(Naples, 1873); Manning,Commentaries on the Law of Nations(London, 1839, 2nd ed., by Sheldon Amos, 1875); Mariotti,Du droit des gens en temps de guerre(Paris, 1883); C. de Martens,Causes célèbres du droit des gens(Leipzig, 5 vols., 1858-1861); G. F. de Martens,Recueil de traités des puissances et états de l’Europe(1761, continued under other editors down to present time),Cours diplomatique, ou tableau des relations extérieures des puissances de l’Europe, tant entre qu’avec états dans les diverses parties du globe(Berlin, 1801, 3 v. o),Précis du droit des gens modernes de l’Europe. Augmenté des notes de Pinheiro-Ferreira, avec bibliographie par C. Vergé(2 vols., Paris, 1864),Law of Nations, trans. by W. Cobbett (London, 1829); F. de Martens,Le Droit international actuel des peuples civilisés, trans, by Léo (Traité de droit international) (3 vols., Paris, 1883); Edwin Maxey,International Law(St Louis, 1909); A. Merignhac,Traité de droit public international, vol. i., “Les Prolégomènes,” “Les Théories générales,” vol. ii., “Le Droit de la paix” (Paris, 1905-1907),Traité théorique et pratique de l’arbitrage international(Paris, 1895);La Conférence international de la paix(Paris, 1900); Christian Meurer,Die Haager Friedenskonferenz(2 vols., 1905-1907); Massé,Le Droit commercial dans ses rapports avec le droit des gens(4 vols., Paris, 1844-1848); Mohl,Encyclopädie der Staatswissenschaften, Staatsrecht, Völkerrecht und Politik(3 vols., 1860-1869); John Bassett Moore,History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to which the United States has been a Party(6 vols., Washington, 1898, official), “Asylum in Legations and Consulates and in Vessels” (Political Science Quarterly, vol. vii., Nos. 1, 2 and 3, New York, 1902);Digest of International Law, as embodied in diplomatic discussions, treaties and other international agreements, international awards, the decisions of municipal courts and the writings of jurists and especially in documents published and unpublished issued by presidents and secretaries of state of the United States, the opinions of the Attorneys-General and the decisions of courts, federal and state (8 vols., Washington, government printing office, 1906); Morin,Lois relatives à la guerre selon le droit des gens modernes. Droit public et droit criminel des pays civilisés(Paris, 1872); Negrin,Derecho maritimo internacional(Madrid, 1873); Neumann,Grundriss des heutigen europäischen Völkerrechtes(Vienna, 1856, 3rd ed., 1885, trans, into French by Riedmatten,Éléments du droit des gens européens, Paris, 1885); Nippold,Fortbildung des Verfahrens in völkerrechtlichen Streitigkeiten(1907); Ernest Nys,Le Droit international(4 vols., Brussels and Paris, 1904-1906);Le Droit de la guerre et les précurseurs de Grotius(Paris, 1882);Les Théories politiques et le droit international en France jusqu’au XVIIIesiècle(Brussels and Paris, 2nd ed., 1899);Études de droit international et de droit politique(2esérie, Brussels andParis, 1901,Le Droit romain, le droit des gens et le collège des docteurs en droit civil(Brussels, 1910); Marquis de Olivart,Trattato y notas de derecho internacional publico(2 vols., 1887, 4th ed., 1903); Luigi Olivi,Di alcune odierne tendenze del diritto internazionale(Venice, 1907); Onezimo,Discurso sobre la historia del derecho internacional(Buenos Aires, 1872); Oppenheim,System des Völkerrechts(Frankfort, 1845); L. Oppenheim,International Law, vol. i. “Peace,” vol. ii. “War and Neutrality” (London, 1905-1906);International Incidents for Discussion in Conversation Classes(Cambridge, 1909; solutions are not given);Gerechtigkeit und Gesetz(Basel, 1895); Ortolan,Règles internationales et diplomatie de la mer(4th ed., Paris, 1864); Paiva,Elementos de direito des gentes(Coimbra, 1864); Pando,Elementos de derecho internacional(Madrid, 1843, 2nd ed., 1852); Pardessus,Us. et coutumes de mer(Paris, 1847); Paroldo,Saggio di codificazione del diritto internazionale(Turin, 1851); Perels,Das internationale Seerecht der Gegenwart(Berlin, 1882-1903; transl. Arendt,Manuel de droit maritime international(Paris, 1884); Perez-Gomar,Curso de derecho de gentes(Montevideo, 1864-1866); Pertille,Elementi di diritto internazionale nel seculo XIX.(Naples 1877),Trattato di diritto internazionale(1881); Sir R. Phillimore,Commentaries upon International Law(4 vols., 3rd ed., London, 1879-1889); Coleman Phillipson,Effect of War on Contracts(London, 1909),Studies in International Law(London, 1908); Robert Piédelièvre,Précis de droit international public(2 vols., 1891-1895); Pierantoni,Storia del diritto internazionale nel seculo XIX.(Naples, 1877),Trattado di diritto internazionale(1881-1887); Sir F. T. Piggott,Nationality, including Naturalization and English Law on the High Seas and beyond the Realm(2 vols., London, 1907),Exterritoriality, Law relating to Consular Jurisdiction and to Residence in Oriental Countries(Hongkong and London, 1907); Pillet,Recherches sur les droits fondamentaux des états dans l’ordre des rapports internationaux(Paris, 1899); Pinheiro-Ferreira,Droit public interne et externe(Paris, 1830); Sir Frederick Pollock, “The Monroe Doctrine” (Nineteenth Century, 1902); Polson,Principles of the Law of Nations(London, 1848); J. N. Pomeroy,International Law in Time of Peace, ed. by Theo. D. Woolsey (New York, 1886): Pradier-Fodéré,La Question de l’Alabama et le droit des gens(Paris, 1872),Traité de droit international public européen et américain(7 vols., Paris, 1885-1897); Quaritsch,Compendium der europäischen Völkerrechts(Berlin, 1873); Carman F. Randolph,The Law and Policy of Annexation with special reference to the Philippines together with Observations on the Status of Cuba(London, New York and Bombay, 1901), “Notes on the Foreign Policy of the United States suggested by the War with Spain” (New York, 1898, pamphlet), W. F. Reddaway,The Monroe Doctrine(Cambridge, 1898); Reddie,Inquiries in International Law(London, 1842);Maritime International Law(Edinburgh, 1844-1845), Emil Reich,Foundations of Modern Europe(London, 1904); Renault,Introduction à l’étude du droit international(Paris, 1879); Riquelme,Elementos de derecho publico internacional(Madrid, 1849); A. Rivier,Principes du droit des gens(2 vols., Paris, 1896); Saalfeld,Grundriss eines Systems des europäischen Völkerrechts(Göttingen, 1809); C. Salomon,L’Occupation des territoires sans maître, étude de droit international(Paris, 1889); Sanchez,Elementos de derecho internacional publico(Madrid, 1866); Eugene Schuyler,American Diplomacy and Furtherance of Commerce(New York, 1886); James Brown Scott,Cases on International Law(Boston, 1902),The Hague Peace Conference of 1899 and 1907(2 vols., Baltimore, 1909); R. F. Seijas,El Derecho internacional hispano-americano, publico y privado(6 vols., Caracas, 1884); Senior,Law of Nations, &c.(London, 1865); Sheldon Amos,Lectures on International Law(London, 1874); Sierra,Lecciones de derecho maritime internacional(Mexico, 1854); F. E. Smith,International Law(London, 1900, “Temple Primers” series),International Law as interpreted during the Russo-Japanese War(in collaboration with N. W. Sibley; London, 2nd ed., 1907); Stephen,International Law and International Relations(London, 1884); Ellery C. Stowell,Consular Cases and Opinions from the Decisions of the English and American Courts and the Opinions of the Attorneys-General(Washington, D.C., 1909); Sakuyé Takahashi,Cases on International Law during the Chino-Japanese War(Cambridge, 1900),International Law applied to the Russo-Japanese War with the Decisions of the Japanese Prize Courts(London, 1908); H. L. Strisower, “Die Donaufrage”Zeitschrift für das privat. und öffentliche Recht der Gegenwart(Vienna, 1884); Hannis Taylor,Treatise on International Public Law(Chicago, 1901); Tetens,Droits réciproques des puissances belligérantes et des puissances neutres sur mer. Principes du droit de guerre en général(Copenhagen, 1805); Tétot,Répertoire des traités de paix, de commerce, d’alliance, &c., conventions et autres actes conclus entre toutes les puissances du globe principalement depuis la paix de Westphalie jusqu’ à nos jours(Partie chronologique, 1866, partie alphabétique, 1873, supplément, 1895); Alberto Torres,Vers la paix. Études sur l’établissement de la paix générale et sur l’organisation de l’ordre international(Rio de Janeiro, 1909); Heinrich Triepel,Völkerrecht und Landesrecht(Leipzig, 1899); Sir Travers Twiss,The Law of Nations considered as Independent Communities(2 vols., 2nd ed., London, 1875-1892); von Ullmann,Völkerrecht(1895; 2nd ed. 1908); Verraes,Les Lois de la guerre et la neutralité(Brussels, 1906); T. A. Walker,The Science of International Law(London, 1893),Manual of Public International Law(London, 1895),History of the Law of Nations(London, 1899); John Westlake,Chapters on the Principles of International Law(Cambridge, 1894),International Law, vol. i. “Peace” (Cambridge, 1904), vol. ii. “War” (1907); Francis Wharton,Digest of the International Law of the United States, taken from documents issued by Presidents and Secretaries of State, from decisions of Federal Courts and Opinions of Attorneys-General(Washington, 1886, 3 vols., official),The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States(6 vols., Washington, 1889, official); H. Wheaton,History of the Law of Nations in Europe and America from the earliest times to the Treaty of Washington, 1842(New York, 1845);Elements of International Law(1st ed., 1836; edit. Lawrence, 1855; edit. Dana, 1866; edit. Boyd, London, 1880; edit. Abdy, Cambridge, 1888; 3rd Eng. ed. by Sir Sherston Baker, 1893; 4th Eng. ed. by Atlay, 1904); Wildman,Institutes of International Law(London, 1849); Theodore D. Woolsey,Introduction to the Study of International Law(6th ed., New York, 1891); Spencer Walpole,Foreign Relations(“English Citizen” series, London, 1882); André Weiss, “Crimes et délits politiques dans les rapports de l’Autriche et de la Russie” (Journal de droit international privé, Paris, 1883).

Alcorta,Tratado de derecho internacional(Buenos Aires, 1878); D. Anzilotti,Teoria generale della responsabilità dello Stato nel diritto internazionale(Florence, 1902); Arendt,Le Droit public et la neutralité de la Belgique(Brussels, 1845); Nagao Ariga,La Guerre russo-japonaise, au point de vue continental et le droit international(Paris, 1908),La Guerre sino-japonaise au point de vue du droit international(Paris, 1896); Sir Sherston Baker,First Steps in International Law(London, 1899); Barboux,Jurisprudence du conseil des prises pendant la guerre franco-allemande(1872); Sir T. Barclay,Problems of International Practice and Diplomacy(London, 1907); T. Baty,International Law(London, 1909); Bello,Principios de derecho internacional, 2nd ed. by Silva (Madrid, 1884); Norman Bentwich,The Law of Private Property in War with a Chapter on Conquest(London, 1907); Bergbohm,Staats-Verträge und-Gesetze als Quellen des Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1877); T. M. Bernard,Four Lectures on Subjects connected with Diplomacy(London, 1868); Bluntschli,Das moderne Völkerrecht der civilisirten Staaten als Rechtsbuch dargestellt(Nördlingen, 1868), trans. into French by Lardy (Le Droit international codifié) (Paris, 2nd ed., 1874),Die Bedeutung und die Fortschritte des modernen Völkerrechts(2nd ed., Berlin, 1873); De Boeck,Le Droit de la propriété ennemie privée sous pavillon ennemi(Paris, 1882); Henri Bonfils,Manuel de droit international public(1894, 4th ed., by Fauchille, 1904); Percy Bordwell,The Law of War between Belligerents—a History and Commentary(Chicago, 1908); Bornemann,Forelaesninger over den positive folkeret(Copenhagen, 1866); Brusa,Del modierno diritto internazionale pubblico(Florence, 1876); De Burgh,Elements of Maritime International Law(London, 1868); Aug. von Bulmerincq,Praxis, Theorie und Codification des Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1874),Das Völkerrecht(1887); Montagu Burrows,History of the Foreign Policy of Great Britain(London, 1897); Charles Henry Butler,The Treaty-making Power of the United States(2 vols., New York, 1902); Carlos Calvo,Le Droit international(5th ed., 6 vols., Paris, 1896); Cauchy,Le Droit maritime international considéré dans ses origines et ses rapports avec les progrès de la civilisation(2 vols., Paris, 1862),Du respect de la propriété privée dans la guerre maritime(Paris, 1866); Carnazza-Amari,Trattato di diritto internazionale de pace(2 vols., 1867-1875); Pitt Cobbett,Cases and Opinions on International Law and various points of English Law connected therewith(London, 1st ed. 1885,2nd ed. 1892, 3rd ed. 1909) (part I, “Peace”); Miguel Cruchaga,Nociones de derecho internacional(1899, 2nd ed. 1902); Cogordan,La Nationalité au point de vue des rapports internationaux(Paris, 1879); de Courcy,Réforme internationale du droit maritime(Paris, 1863); R. T. Crane,State in Constitutional and International Law(1907); Creasy,First Platform of International Law(London, 1876); G. B. Davis,Outlines of International Law, with an Account of its origin and sources, and of its historical development(New York, 1887);Elements of International Law, with an account of its origin, sources and historical development(new and revised edition, New York and London, 1900); de Clercq,Recueil des traités, conventions et actes diplomatiques conclus par la France avec les puissances étrangères, publiés sous les auspices du min. des aff. étrangères(Paris, 21 vols.); Descamps,L’Évolution de la neutralité en droit international(Brussels, 1898); F. Despagnet,Cours de droit international public(2nd ed., Paris, 1899),La Diplomatie de la Troisième République et le droit des gens(Paris, 1904); Professor Giulio Diena,Principi di diritto internazionale(Naples, 1908); Dufraisse,Histoire du droit de guerre et de paix(Paris, 1867); Jacques Dumas,Les Sanctions de l’arbitrage international(Paris, 1905); E. Duplessix,La Loi des nations, projet de code de droit international public(Paris, 1906);L’Organisation internationale(Paris, 1909); Charles Dupuis,Les Tarifs douaniers et les traités de commerce(Paris, 1895);Le Principe d’équilibre et le concert européen de la paix de Westphalie à l’acte d’Algesiras(Paris, 1909); Eden,Law of Nature and of Nations, Policy of Europe(London, 1823); Ed. Engelhardt.Du régime conventionnel des fleuves internationaux(Paris, 1879); Paul Errera,Das Staatsrecht des Königsreichs Belgien(Tübingen, 1909); T. H. S. Escott,The Story of British Diplomacy; Its Makers and Movements(London, 1908); Fauchille,La Diplomatie française et la ligue des neutres de 1780(1776-1783) (Paris, 1893);Du blocus maritime(Paris, 1882); Ferguson,A Manual of International Law(2 vols., London, 1884); David Dudley Field,Outlines of an International Code(New York and London, 2nd ed., 1876); Fiore,Trattado di diritto internazionale pubblico(3rd ed., Turin, 1888),Nouveau Droit international public(3 vols., Paris, 1885);Le Droit international codifié et sa sanction juridique—traduit de l’italien par A. Chrétien(Paris, 1889); Funck-Brentano et Sorel,Précis du droit des gens(Paris, 1877, new ed. 1894); Fusinato,Il Principio della scuola italiana nel diritto internazional pubblico(Macerata, 1884); François Gairal,Le Protectorat international(Paris, 1896); E. M. Gallaudet,International Law(New York, 1886); Guillaume de Garden,Histoire générale des traités de paix, et autres transactions principales, entre toutes les puissances de l’Europe depuis la paix de Westphalie(14 vols., Paris, 1848-1859); Gareis,Institutionen des Völkerrechts(1888, 2nd ed., 1901); L. Gessner,Zur Reform des Kriegseerechts(Berlin, 1875),Le Droit des neutres sur mer(2nd ed., Berlin, 1876), Guelle,Droit international. La guerre continentale et les personnes(Paris, 1879); Guéronnière,Le Droit public de l’Europe moderne(Paris, 1876); Guesalaga,Derecho diplomatico y consular(Buenos Aires, 1900); Hagerup, “La Neutralité permanente” (Revue générale du droit international public) (Paris, 1905); W. E. Hall,A Treatise on International Law(6th ed., edited by J. B. Atlay, Oxford, 1909);Foreign Powers and Jurisdiction of the British Crown(London, 1894); H. W. Halleck,International Law(Philadelphia, 1866, edit. by Sir Sherston Baker, 4th ed., 2 vols., London 1908); A. B. Hart,Foundations of American Foreign Policy(New York, 1901); Hartmann,Institutionen des praktischen Völkerrechts in Friedenszeiten(1887); L. B. Hautefeuille,Quelques questions de droit international maritime à propos de la guerre d’Amérique(Leipzig and Paris, 1861);Droits et devoirs des nations neutres(3 vols., 3rd ed., Paris, 1868);Questions de droit maritime international(Paris, 1868);Histoire des origines, des progrès et des variations du droit maritime international(Paris, 1858, 2nd ed. 1869); Heffter,Das europäische Völkerrecht der Gegenwart(Berlin, 1855, trans. into French by Bergson,Le Droit international de l’Europe, 4th ed., enlarged and annotated by Geffcken, Berlin and Paris, 1883); Amos E. Hershey,The International Law and Diplomacy of the Russo-Japanese War(New York, 1906); Hertslet’sCommercial Treaties(24 vols., London, 1840-1907); Sir Edward Hertslet,Map of Europe by Treaty, showing the territorial changes since the general Peace of 1814-1891(4 vols., London, 1875-1891);Map of Africa by Treaty (1778-1895)(3 vols., London, 1896), Index to British and Foreign State Papers, vols. 1 to 63 (1879); A. Pearce Higgins,The Hague Peace Conferences and other International Conferences concerning the Laws and Usages of War(Cambridge, 1909); Historicus (Sir William Harcourt),Letters on some Questions of International Law(1863); Albert E. Hogan,Pacific Blockade; T. E. Holland,The Elements of Jurisprudence(London, 1880, 10th ed., Oxford, 1906),Studies in International Law(Oxford, 1898),The Laws of War on Land(Oxford, 1908),Letters to The Times upon War and Neutrality(1881-1909) with some commentary (London, 1909),British Admiralty Manual of the Law of Prize(1888); G. F. W. Holls,The Peace Conference at The Hague(New York, 1900); Holtzendorff,Handbuch des Völkerrechts(4 vols., Hamburg, 1885-1889); J. Hosack,On the Rise and Growth of the Law of Nations from the earliest Times to the Treaty of Utrecht(London, 1882); Huber,Die Staaten-Succession, völkerrechtliche und staatsrechtliche Praxis im 19. Jahrhundert(Leipzig, 1898); International American Conference,Plan of Arbitration for the settlement of disputes between the American Republics, Report and Recommendations(Washington, 1890); International American Conference,Report and Recommendations concerning a Uniform Code of International Law(Washington, 1890); Joseph Imbart Latour,La Mer territoriale(Paris, 1889); Atherley Jones,Commerce in War(London, 1907); Kaltenborn,Critik des Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1847),Zur Geschichte des Natur- und Völkerrechts(Leipzig, 1848); L. Kamarowsky,Le Tribunal international(trans. into French by Serge de Westman, Paris, 1887); Wilhelm Kaufmann,The Egyptian State Debt and its Relation to International Law(London, 1892);Die Rechtskraft des internationalen Rechtes(Stuttgart, 1899); Kennedy,Influence of Christianity on International Law(Cambridge, 1856); James Kent,Commentary on International Law(rev. with notes and cases by J. T. Abdy, 2nd ed. rev., London, 1877); Kleen,De la contrebande de guerre(Paris, 1893),Lois et usages de la neutralité(2 vols., Paris, 1898-1900),Krigets historia ur folkrättelig Synpunkt(Stockholm, 1906),Kodificerad Handbok i Krigets Lagar till lands och till Sjös(Stockholm, 1909); Otto Krauske,Die Entwickelung der ständigen Diplomatie vom 15ten Jahrhundert bis zu den Beschlüssen von 1815 und 1818(Leipzig, 1885); Jean Lagorgette,Le Rôle de la guerre. Étude de la sociologie générale(Paris, 1905); Lammasch,Fortbildung des Völkerrechts durch die Haager Conferenz(Munich, 1900); Almá Latifi,Effects of War on Property, being Studies in International Law and Policy(London, 1909); François Laurent,Histoire du droit des gens et des relations internationales, continued at vol. iv. under title ofÉtudes de l’histoire de l’humanité(18 vols., Brussels, 1861-1880); Laveleye,Du respect de la propriété privée en temps de guerre(Brussels, 1875); T. J. Lawrence,Essays on Disputed Questions of Modern International Law(Cambridge, 1884),The Principles of International Law(London, 1895, 3rd ed. 1900),Handbook of Public International Law(4th ed., London, 1898),War and Neutrality in the Far East(London, 1904); Emile Lefèvre,Réorganisation du consulat français à l’étranger(Paris, 1883); Ernest Lehr,La Nationalité dans les principaux états du globe(Paris, 1909); Ernest Lemonon,La Seconde Conférence de la paix(Paris, 1908, an exhaustive volume in 790 pp.); de Leval,De la protection diplomatique des nationaux à l’étranger(Brussels, 1907); Leone Levi,The Law of Nature and Nations as affected by Divine Law(London, 1855),International Law, with Materials for a Code of International Law(London, 1888); Liszt,Das Völkerrecht(1898, 6th ed., 1910); Lorimer,The Institutes of the Law of Nations(2 vols., London, 1883); Lueder,Der neueste Codificationsversuch auf dem Gebiete des Völkerrechts(1874); Theo. Lyman,Diplomacy of the United States(Boston, 1828); Mackintosh,Discourse on the Study of the Law of Nature and Nations(2nd ed., London, 1828); Sir Henry S. Maine,International Law(London, 1888); Terenzio Mamiani,Des traités de 1815 et d’un nouveau droit européen, traduit par Léonce Lehmann(Paris, 1862); Mancini,Diritto internazionale(Naples, 1873); Manning,Commentaries on the Law of Nations(London, 1839, 2nd ed., by Sheldon Amos, 1875); Mariotti,Du droit des gens en temps de guerre(Paris, 1883); C. de Martens,Causes célèbres du droit des gens(Leipzig, 5 vols., 1858-1861); G. F. de Martens,Recueil de traités des puissances et états de l’Europe(1761, continued under other editors down to present time),Cours diplomatique, ou tableau des relations extérieures des puissances de l’Europe, tant entre qu’avec états dans les diverses parties du globe(Berlin, 1801, 3 v. o),Précis du droit des gens modernes de l’Europe. Augmenté des notes de Pinheiro-Ferreira, avec bibliographie par C. Vergé(2 vols., Paris, 1864),Law of Nations, trans. by W. Cobbett (London, 1829); F. de Martens,Le Droit international actuel des peuples civilisés, trans, by Léo (Traité de droit international) (3 vols., Paris, 1883); Edwin Maxey,International Law(St Louis, 1909); A. Merignhac,Traité de droit public international, vol. i., “Les Prolégomènes,” “Les Théories générales,” vol. ii., “Le Droit de la paix” (Paris, 1905-1907),Traité théorique et pratique de l’arbitrage international(Paris, 1895);La Conférence international de la paix(Paris, 1900); Christian Meurer,Die Haager Friedenskonferenz(2 vols., 1905-1907); Massé,Le Droit commercial dans ses rapports avec le droit des gens(4 vols., Paris, 1844-1848); Mohl,Encyclopädie der Staatswissenschaften, Staatsrecht, Völkerrecht und Politik(3 vols., 1860-1869); John Bassett Moore,History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to which the United States has been a Party(6 vols., Washington, 1898, official), “Asylum in Legations and Consulates and in Vessels” (Political Science Quarterly, vol. vii., Nos. 1, 2 and 3, New York, 1902);Digest of International Law, as embodied in diplomatic discussions, treaties and other international agreements, international awards, the decisions of municipal courts and the writings of jurists and especially in documents published and unpublished issued by presidents and secretaries of state of the United States, the opinions of the Attorneys-General and the decisions of courts, federal and state (8 vols., Washington, government printing office, 1906); Morin,Lois relatives à la guerre selon le droit des gens modernes. Droit public et droit criminel des pays civilisés(Paris, 1872); Negrin,Derecho maritimo internacional(Madrid, 1873); Neumann,Grundriss des heutigen europäischen Völkerrechtes(Vienna, 1856, 3rd ed., 1885, trans, into French by Riedmatten,Éléments du droit des gens européens, Paris, 1885); Nippold,Fortbildung des Verfahrens in völkerrechtlichen Streitigkeiten(1907); Ernest Nys,Le Droit international(4 vols., Brussels and Paris, 1904-1906);Le Droit de la guerre et les précurseurs de Grotius(Paris, 1882);Les Théories politiques et le droit international en France jusqu’au XVIIIesiècle(Brussels and Paris, 2nd ed., 1899);Études de droit international et de droit politique(2esérie, Brussels andParis, 1901,Le Droit romain, le droit des gens et le collège des docteurs en droit civil(Brussels, 1910); Marquis de Olivart,Trattato y notas de derecho internacional publico(2 vols., 1887, 4th ed., 1903); Luigi Olivi,Di alcune odierne tendenze del diritto internazionale(Venice, 1907); Onezimo,Discurso sobre la historia del derecho internacional(Buenos Aires, 1872); Oppenheim,System des Völkerrechts(Frankfort, 1845); L. Oppenheim,International Law, vol. i. “Peace,” vol. ii. “War and Neutrality” (London, 1905-1906);International Incidents for Discussion in Conversation Classes(Cambridge, 1909; solutions are not given);Gerechtigkeit und Gesetz(Basel, 1895); Ortolan,Règles internationales et diplomatie de la mer(4th ed., Paris, 1864); Paiva,Elementos de direito des gentes(Coimbra, 1864); Pando,Elementos de derecho internacional(Madrid, 1843, 2nd ed., 1852); Pardessus,Us. et coutumes de mer(Paris, 1847); Paroldo,Saggio di codificazione del diritto internazionale(Turin, 1851); Perels,Das internationale Seerecht der Gegenwart(Berlin, 1882-1903; transl. Arendt,Manuel de droit maritime international(Paris, 1884); Perez-Gomar,Curso de derecho de gentes(Montevideo, 1864-1866); Pertille,Elementi di diritto internazionale nel seculo XIX.(Naples 1877),Trattato di diritto internazionale(1881); Sir R. Phillimore,Commentaries upon International Law(4 vols., 3rd ed., London, 1879-1889); Coleman Phillipson,Effect of War on Contracts(London, 1909),Studies in International Law(London, 1908); Robert Piédelièvre,Précis de droit international public(2 vols., 1891-1895); Pierantoni,Storia del diritto internazionale nel seculo XIX.(Naples, 1877),Trattado di diritto internazionale(1881-1887); Sir F. T. Piggott,Nationality, including Naturalization and English Law on the High Seas and beyond the Realm(2 vols., London, 1907),Exterritoriality, Law relating to Consular Jurisdiction and to Residence in Oriental Countries(Hongkong and London, 1907); Pillet,Recherches sur les droits fondamentaux des états dans l’ordre des rapports internationaux(Paris, 1899); Pinheiro-Ferreira,Droit public interne et externe(Paris, 1830); Sir Frederick Pollock, “The Monroe Doctrine” (Nineteenth Century, 1902); Polson,Principles of the Law of Nations(London, 1848); J. N. Pomeroy,International Law in Time of Peace, ed. by Theo. D. Woolsey (New York, 1886): Pradier-Fodéré,La Question de l’Alabama et le droit des gens(Paris, 1872),Traité de droit international public européen et américain(7 vols., Paris, 1885-1897); Quaritsch,Compendium der europäischen Völkerrechts(Berlin, 1873); Carman F. Randolph,The Law and Policy of Annexation with special reference to the Philippines together with Observations on the Status of Cuba(London, New York and Bombay, 1901), “Notes on the Foreign Policy of the United States suggested by the War with Spain” (New York, 1898, pamphlet), W. F. Reddaway,The Monroe Doctrine(Cambridge, 1898); Reddie,Inquiries in International Law(London, 1842);Maritime International Law(Edinburgh, 1844-1845), Emil Reich,Foundations of Modern Europe(London, 1904); Renault,Introduction à l’étude du droit international(Paris, 1879); Riquelme,Elementos de derecho publico internacional(Madrid, 1849); A. Rivier,Principes du droit des gens(2 vols., Paris, 1896); Saalfeld,Grundriss eines Systems des europäischen Völkerrechts(Göttingen, 1809); C. Salomon,L’Occupation des territoires sans maître, étude de droit international(Paris, 1889); Sanchez,Elementos de derecho internacional publico(Madrid, 1866); Eugene Schuyler,American Diplomacy and Furtherance of Commerce(New York, 1886); James Brown Scott,Cases on International Law(Boston, 1902),The Hague Peace Conference of 1899 and 1907(2 vols., Baltimore, 1909); R. F. Seijas,El Derecho internacional hispano-americano, publico y privado(6 vols., Caracas, 1884); Senior,Law of Nations, &c.(London, 1865); Sheldon Amos,Lectures on International Law(London, 1874); Sierra,Lecciones de derecho maritime internacional(Mexico, 1854); F. E. Smith,International Law(London, 1900, “Temple Primers” series),International Law as interpreted during the Russo-Japanese War(in collaboration with N. W. Sibley; London, 2nd ed., 1907); Stephen,International Law and International Relations(London, 1884); Ellery C. Stowell,Consular Cases and Opinions from the Decisions of the English and American Courts and the Opinions of the Attorneys-General(Washington, D.C., 1909); Sakuyé Takahashi,Cases on International Law during the Chino-Japanese War(Cambridge, 1900),International Law applied to the Russo-Japanese War with the Decisions of the Japanese Prize Courts(London, 1908); H. L. Strisower, “Die Donaufrage”Zeitschrift für das privat. und öffentliche Recht der Gegenwart(Vienna, 1884); Hannis Taylor,Treatise on International Public Law(Chicago, 1901); Tetens,Droits réciproques des puissances belligérantes et des puissances neutres sur mer. Principes du droit de guerre en général(Copenhagen, 1805); Tétot,Répertoire des traités de paix, de commerce, d’alliance, &c., conventions et autres actes conclus entre toutes les puissances du globe principalement depuis la paix de Westphalie jusqu’ à nos jours(Partie chronologique, 1866, partie alphabétique, 1873, supplément, 1895); Alberto Torres,Vers la paix. Études sur l’établissement de la paix générale et sur l’organisation de l’ordre international(Rio de Janeiro, 1909); Heinrich Triepel,Völkerrecht und Landesrecht(Leipzig, 1899); Sir Travers Twiss,The Law of Nations considered as Independent Communities(2 vols., 2nd ed., London, 1875-1892); von Ullmann,Völkerrecht(1895; 2nd ed. 1908); Verraes,Les Lois de la guerre et la neutralité(Brussels, 1906); T. A. Walker,The Science of International Law(London, 1893),Manual of Public International Law(London, 1895),History of the Law of Nations(London, 1899); John Westlake,Chapters on the Principles of International Law(Cambridge, 1894),International Law, vol. i. “Peace” (Cambridge, 1904), vol. ii. “War” (1907); Francis Wharton,Digest of the International Law of the United States, taken from documents issued by Presidents and Secretaries of State, from decisions of Federal Courts and Opinions of Attorneys-General(Washington, 1886, 3 vols., official),The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States(6 vols., Washington, 1889, official); H. Wheaton,History of the Law of Nations in Europe and America from the earliest times to the Treaty of Washington, 1842(New York, 1845);Elements of International Law(1st ed., 1836; edit. Lawrence, 1855; edit. Dana, 1866; edit. Boyd, London, 1880; edit. Abdy, Cambridge, 1888; 3rd Eng. ed. by Sir Sherston Baker, 1893; 4th Eng. ed. by Atlay, 1904); Wildman,Institutes of International Law(London, 1849); Theodore D. Woolsey,Introduction to the Study of International Law(6th ed., New York, 1891); Spencer Walpole,Foreign Relations(“English Citizen” series, London, 1882); André Weiss, “Crimes et délits politiques dans les rapports de l’Autriche et de la Russie” (Journal de droit international privé, Paris, 1883).

(T. Ba.)

1Introduction to thePrinciples of Morals and Legislation(Clarendon Press edition of 1879).2The Times, July 26, 1887.3R.v.Keyn, 2, Ex.D. 63.4Address at Saratoga Springs, N.Y., 1896 (Law Quarterly Review, October 1896).5Commentaries on the Law of England, 4th ed., iv. 66.6Austin’s view, as set out in theProvince of Jurisprudence Determined, is that laws proper, or properly so-called, are commands; laws which are not commands are laws improper or improperly so-called. A command implies a definite superior in a position to enforce the command. Where there is no superior to impose obedience there is no law. Rules which “are imposed among nations or sovereigns by opinions current among nations are usually styled the law of nations or international law. Now, a law set or imposed by public opinion is a law improperly so-called” (p. 147). For Sir H. Maine’s views see below.7Introduction to thePrinciples of Morals and Legislation(Oxford, 1879), pp. 24 et seq.8Province of Jurisprudence Determined(1861), p. 177; Austin explains his view more fully at p. 127.9International Law, p. 50.10Droit des gens(1896), i. 22. Compare Savigny: “A community of judicial conscience can be formed among nations like that which positive law creates in the bosom of one people. The foundations of that intellectual community are constituted partly by a community of race, partly and especially by a community of religious convictions. Such is the basis of the law of nations which exists principally among European Christian states, but which was not known to the peoples of antiquity. We are entitled to look upon this law as a positive law, although it is an incomplete judicial formation” (eine unvollendete Rechtsbildung),System des heutigen römischen Rechts(1840), i. § 11.11Elements(London, 1885), pp. 22 et seq.12“It seems to me,” says Professor L. Oppenheim, “that most writers confound the conception of ‘source’ with that of ‘cause,’ and through this mistake come to a standpoint from which certain factors which influence the growth of International Law appear as sources of rules of the Law of Nations. This mistake can be avoided by going back to the meaning of the term ‘source’ in general. Source means a spring or well, and has to be defined as the rising from the ground of a stream of water; and, wanting to know whence it comes, we follow the stream upwards until we come to the spot where it rises naturally from the ground. On that spot, we say, is the source of the stream of water. We know very well that this source is not the cause of the existence of the stream of water. ‘Source’ signifies only the natural rising of water from a certain spot of the ground, whatever natural causes there may be for that rising. If we apply the conception of source in this meaning to the term ‘source of law’ the confusion of source with cause cannot arise. Just as we see streams of water running over the surface of the earth, so we see, as it were, streams of rules running over the area of law. And if we want to know whence these rules come, we have to follow these streams upwards until we come to their beginning. Where we find that such rules rise into existence there is the source of them. Of course, rules of law do not rise from a spot on the ground as water does; they rise from facts in the historical development of a community. Thus a good many rules of law rise every year from the Acts of Parliament. Source of Law is therefore the name for an historical fact out of which rules of conduct rise into existence and legal force” (International Law, London, 1905, sec. 15.).13International Law(London, 1905) sec. 19.14Note 8 to Grotius, L., ii. c. iii. § 3.15Bishop Percy’s translation (1847), p. 138.16We have seen this in the progress made in the three instances given above at the Congress of Paris (1856), the Conference of Berlin (1878) and the Hague Conference of 1907.

1Introduction to thePrinciples of Morals and Legislation(Clarendon Press edition of 1879).

2The Times, July 26, 1887.

3R.v.Keyn, 2, Ex.D. 63.

4Address at Saratoga Springs, N.Y., 1896 (Law Quarterly Review, October 1896).

5Commentaries on the Law of England, 4th ed., iv. 66.

6Austin’s view, as set out in theProvince of Jurisprudence Determined, is that laws proper, or properly so-called, are commands; laws which are not commands are laws improper or improperly so-called. A command implies a definite superior in a position to enforce the command. Where there is no superior to impose obedience there is no law. Rules which “are imposed among nations or sovereigns by opinions current among nations are usually styled the law of nations or international law. Now, a law set or imposed by public opinion is a law improperly so-called” (p. 147). For Sir H. Maine’s views see below.

7Introduction to thePrinciples of Morals and Legislation(Oxford, 1879), pp. 24 et seq.

8Province of Jurisprudence Determined(1861), p. 177; Austin explains his view more fully at p. 127.

9International Law, p. 50.

10Droit des gens(1896), i. 22. Compare Savigny: “A community of judicial conscience can be formed among nations like that which positive law creates in the bosom of one people. The foundations of that intellectual community are constituted partly by a community of race, partly and especially by a community of religious convictions. Such is the basis of the law of nations which exists principally among European Christian states, but which was not known to the peoples of antiquity. We are entitled to look upon this law as a positive law, although it is an incomplete judicial formation” (eine unvollendete Rechtsbildung),System des heutigen römischen Rechts(1840), i. § 11.

11Elements(London, 1885), pp. 22 et seq.

12“It seems to me,” says Professor L. Oppenheim, “that most writers confound the conception of ‘source’ with that of ‘cause,’ and through this mistake come to a standpoint from which certain factors which influence the growth of International Law appear as sources of rules of the Law of Nations. This mistake can be avoided by going back to the meaning of the term ‘source’ in general. Source means a spring or well, and has to be defined as the rising from the ground of a stream of water; and, wanting to know whence it comes, we follow the stream upwards until we come to the spot where it rises naturally from the ground. On that spot, we say, is the source of the stream of water. We know very well that this source is not the cause of the existence of the stream of water. ‘Source’ signifies only the natural rising of water from a certain spot of the ground, whatever natural causes there may be for that rising. If we apply the conception of source in this meaning to the term ‘source of law’ the confusion of source with cause cannot arise. Just as we see streams of water running over the surface of the earth, so we see, as it were, streams of rules running over the area of law. And if we want to know whence these rules come, we have to follow these streams upwards until we come to their beginning. Where we find that such rules rise into existence there is the source of them. Of course, rules of law do not rise from a spot on the ground as water does; they rise from facts in the historical development of a community. Thus a good many rules of law rise every year from the Acts of Parliament. Source of Law is therefore the name for an historical fact out of which rules of conduct rise into existence and legal force” (International Law, London, 1905, sec. 15.).

13International Law(London, 1905) sec. 19.

14Note 8 to Grotius, L., ii. c. iii. § 3.

15Bishop Percy’s translation (1847), p. 138.

16We have seen this in the progress made in the three instances given above at the Congress of Paris (1856), the Conference of Berlin (1878) and the Hague Conference of 1907.

INTERNATIONAL LAW (PRIVATE).There is in every territory the law of the land, or territorial law, by which the courts decide all cases that include no circumstances connected with any foreign territory. Often, however, such a circumstance suggests the question whether justice does not require that the law of some other territory shall be applied. Thus the Gretna Green marriages, by which English minors escaped the necessity of banns or the consent of parents or guardians, suggested the question, which was answered in the affirmative, whether even in England their validity ought not to be tried by the law of Scotland, where they were celebrated. Often, again, the question is suggested whether justice does not require that the courts of law should allow some effect to foreign legal proceedings, such as a judgment obtained or litigation pending abroad. Such questions as these are answered by private international law, which, since both laws and legal proceedings are emanations of public authority, may be defined as the department of legal science which is concerned with the effect to be given in the courts of law of any territory to public authority of another territory. The extradition of criminals is also an effect given to foreign public authority, but rather by the government which surrenders the criminal (seeExtradition) than by the courts of law, whose only function is to check the surrender so far as the domestic legislation allows them to do so. If private international law were defined as the effect to be given by any mode in one territory to the public authority of another, extradition would be included in it, as is often done; but since the principles governing extradition have little to do with those applicable to other cases, it seems best to treat it as a separate department of law, as is generally done in England.

Comity of Nations.—In the 17th century the Dutch jurists Paul and John Voet and Huber brought forward a view which has since been largely adopted in England and the United States, namely, that the effect given by courts of law to foreign public authority is only due to the comity of nations, but for which every possible question before them would have to be decided by the law of the land. Comity, in that phrase, may only be intended to express the truth that foreign public authority has no inherent effect, without denying that the effect which domestic public authority allows to it is dictated by justice. But the limitations implied in the popular meaning of comity have sometimes been made the ground for deciding questions of private international law in the manner supposed to be most for the interest of litigants belonging to the territory; the phrase is consequently reprobated by most European continental writers, and had better be dropped. The justice on which private international law is founded acknowledges no interest but the general one of intercourse between persons sharing a common civilization in different countries. This interest, as manifesting itself in the domain of law, it seeks to satisfy and it is therefore a true legal justice, rightly classed underlaw,droit,recht,diritto,derechoand other corresponding terms.

Of the two words which, together withlaw, make up the title of our subject,privateis justified by the fact that its application is between litigants in courts of law, and not between governments except so far as they may be such litigants.International(althoughinterterritorialwould be better) is justified by thefacts that public authority, which may be internationally foreign, has to be considered, and that governments display a great interest in the question by concluding treaties about it, and occasionally even by suspending diplomatic relations when a court of one country has applied to the subjects of another a rule which the government of the latter deems unjust. But those who think that the primary division of law should be into public and private, and not into international (or interterritorial) and territorial, object to the order in which the three words of the name are usually placed, and call the subject “international private law.”

Conflict of Laws.—This is another name for our subject, and indeed an older one than “private international law,” besides being still much used. But although laws may differ, they cannot properly be said to conflict, unless each can lay a just claim to application in the same circumstances. Now this does not happen. The justice which points out that in certain cases effect ought to be given in one territory to the laws or legal proceedings of another really traces the limits of laws and legal proceedings in space; and the tracing of limits is rather the prevention of conflict than its solution. Savigny has well pointed out that our subject is analogous to the determination of the limits of laws in time, which has to be made when the just application of a new enactment is to be distinguished from theex post factoapplication which cannot justly be allowed it. The truth which is aimed at in the phrase “conflict of laws” is that the main problem of our subject is the selection of a law for each given case; but different laws are candidates for selection, not from anything in them as laws, but from differing opinions about the justice of the case. From this selection, again, will be seen the contrast between private international law and attempts at the assimilation of the laws of different countries. To a great extent such assimilation is desirable, especially in mercantile law, but it must always be limited by different views of social order and differences in national habits of thought and action. So far as it is realized, private international law comes to an end with the occasion for selection.

Territory.—This word, as entering into the definition of private international law, does not imply a separate state, whether sovereign or semi-sovereign; it includes every geographical area having a separate legal system, England and Scotland, as well as France or Germany. The case of the Gretna Green marriages illustrates the necessity of rules of private international law between all such, as well as between areas internationally foreign to one another; and indeed the rules are so applied, and in the language of our subject, the area of every separate legal system is foreign to every other such area. Only where a rule contemplates a person as attached more or less permanently to a particular territory, the tie which so attaches him to it may be either nationality or domicile if the territory is a separate state, as France; but it can only be domicile if the territory is combined with others in one state. Nothing but domicile can distinguish British subjects as belonging to England, Scotland or Jamaica, or citizens of the United States as belonging to New York or Pennsylvania.

Legal rules must have relation to the physical and mental characters, and the consequent habits of action, of the populations for which they are intended; they would not satisfy legal justice if they endangered social order as understood and desired by those populations, or if they failed to give due effect to the expectations of parties. This must be true for the rules of private international law as well as for those of any territorial law, and it leads us to ask whether the differences which preclude the universal identity of the latter must not also preclude the existence of the former. The answer is: (1) That where circumstances connected with different territories are concerned, wise rules for the selection of a law will generally give better effect to the expectations of the parties than an exclusive adherence to the territorial law of the court; (2) That the circumstances in which a foreign law is held to apply are exceptional as compared with those in which the domestic law applies, and naturally occur oftenest among the persons and in the affairs having most of a cosmopolitan character, so that the moral shock of applying to them a law founded on a foreign social order is greatly attenuated; (3) That throughout Christendom (to which Japan has now been added for legal purposes) there does exist, though not an identity, yet a considerable similarity in views of social order and prevalent habits of thought and action. Within the same geographical limits there also exists another requisite for the working of a system of private international law, namely, a mutual confidence between countries in the enlightenment and purity of their respective judicatures, to whose proceedings the respect enjoined by the rules of our subject is to be mutually given.

Even within the geographical limits just mentioned there are certain differences on points of social order, especially on marriage or divorce, which have hitherto prevented a complete agreement being attained in the rules of private international law. But no attempt has ever been made to establish any system of the kind as between Christian communities and Mahommedan or other polygamous ones, or between countries enjoying a Christian standard of civilization and those, of which China may be taken as an example, which, whether polygamous or not, do not inspire the necessary confidence in their judicatures. In Turkey and other Eastern countries (in which designation Japan is no longer included for purposes of law) Christians are placed by treaty under the jurisdiction in civil matters of their respective consuls. When in the courts of Christian countries Eastern persons or circumstances connected with Eastern laws have to be dealt with, the peculiar institutions of those countries are not enforced; and while in other respects the judges may be assisted by some of the rules of private international law, especially such as have for their object to carry into effect the reasonable intentions of parties, yet those rules are not applied as parts of an authoritative system.

Rules for the selection of the territorial law to be applied in the different classes of cases, or for the recognition of foreign legal proceedings, have sometimes been made the subject of international treaties, and have often been enacted by territorial legislatures. England possesses a few such enactments, as in the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, and many other countries possess them to a much larger extent in their codes. Where such enactments exist, or where treaty stipulations have been entered into, and the territorial law makes such stipulations binding on the judges, the courts of law must obey and apply them as they must obey and apply any other part of the law of the land. If, as in England, judicial precedents are held to be binding, so that the law of the land consists in part of judge-made law, a similar result is produced; an English court must follow English precedents on the application of foreign law or the refusal to apply it, to the same extent to which it would be bound to follow them on any other point. So far as our matter remains open for a judge, he has, to assist him towards a just decision, the treaties, written laws and judicial precedents of other countries as examples, and a vast literature which has grown up in all Christian countries. That this apparatus is far from having furnished concordant results is due, not only to the divergences on points of social order referred to, but also to the different bases of the legal systems with which the respective governments and writers have been familiar. The legal systems of different countries have been founded on Roman law, feudal law, English common law and still other bases. The arguments of lawyers are affected by the prepossessions thence arising, and they have consequently failed to arrive by their unaided efforts at so much agreement on the rules of private international law as would have been compatible with the conditions and modes of life and action surrounding them. But the general acceptance of a complete body of rules on private international law is a goal which for other countries than England is well within sight by the road of international treaties concluded under the joint direction of professional and non-professional minds.

The most remarkable steps taken in or towards the conclusion of such treaties are those initiated, to its high credit, by thegovernment of the Netherlands. That government first moved in the matter in 1874, and has succeeded in assembling at the Hague the official representatives of nearly all European powers in conferences held in 1893, 1894, 1900 and 1904. At these conferences rules on many branches of private international law were agreed on for submission to the respective governments, which has led to conventions, one of the 14th of November 1896, three of the 12th of June 1902, and four of the 19th of July 1905, regulating the selection of the laws for determining the validity of marriage and of contracts made on the occasion of marriage, their effects on property and on the status of the wife and children, divorce and judicial separation, the guardianship of minors and of interdicted persons, the validity of testamentary dispositions and the rules of intestate succession, and many points of judicial procedure. These conventions may be found at length in theRevue de droit international et de legislation comparée, t. 28, pp. 574-579; 2esérie, t. 4, pp. 485-500; and 2esérie, t. 7, pp. 646-678. A draft relating to bankruptcy was also prepared at the conference of 1904, but was intended to serve, not as a general convention, but as the base of separate conventions to be concluded between particular states. The extent to which the continent has become united with regard to private international law appears from the fact that France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Rumania and Sweden are parties to all the conventions—that Luxemburg, Russia and Spain are parties to those relating to judicial procedure—and that all the ten except Russia, but with the addition of Austria, Belgium and Switzerland, are parties to those on the validity of marriage, divorce and judicial separation, and the guardianship of minors; while all remain open to adhesion by other powers. It is much to be regretted that the British government has declined all invitations to take part in this great international work. The fact must in part be ascribed to the hindrance which the difference between the English common law and the Roman law places, even for lawyers, in the way of joint action with the continent, and in part to the necessity that the rules laid down in any convention should be enacted for the United Kingdom by parliament, the leaders of which belonging to either party take no interest in any such matters.

Next in importance among combined official efforts should be mentioned the congress of seven South American states at Montevideo in 1888-1889, which on many branches of private international law drew up rules intended for adoption by treaty on that continent.

Nationality: Domicile.—Coming now to the particular rules of private international law which are received in England, or have been most widely received elsewhere, the most obvious cases which present themselves for admitting foreign circumstances to influence the decision of a judge are those in which rights are so connected with the person of an individual that the justice of deciding on them by a law having relation to his person speaks almost for itself. Hence arises the notion of a personal law, which must be that either of the person’s political nationality or of his domicile, these being the only circumstances that for the time being are fixed for the individual, irrespectively of the spot where he may happen to be, and of the transaction in which he may happen to engage. We have seen in the article on Domicile what is the legal meaning of that term, how its existence is ascertained, that in and long after the middle ages it was the usual criterion of the personal law, and that in modern times political nationality has largely replaced it as such criterion on the continent of Europe. Thus as well by the conventions mentioned as by the codes of many states—France, Italy and Germany among the number—the capacity and status of persons is now governed by the law of their political nationality. In Latin America the criterion of the personal law is still generally held to be domicile, which is among the reasons why the South American states prefer to pursue the codification of private international law independently of European conferences and conventions.

The English courts were slow to recognize a personal law at all and as late as Lord Eldon’s time they held that the competency of a person to contract depended on the law of the place where the contract was made. Their decisions have since come into line with the continental decisions so far as to make capacity and status depend on a personal law, but not so far as to make nationality its criterion. Hence in England, and in a minority of European continental countries, of which Denmark is an example, the capacity of a party to enter into a contract, whether it be disputed on the ground of his age, or, in the case of the contract of marriage, on the ground of his consanguinity or affinity with the other party, will be decided by the law of his domicile. Guardians, curators and committees of foreign minors or lunatics, deriving their authority from the law or jurisdiction of the latter’s domicile or nationality, can sue and give receipts for their personal property. A court will not decree the divorce of persons not domiciled within its jurisdiction, and it will recognize foreign divorces if, and only if, they have been decreed by a jurisdiction to which the parties were subject by domicile or nationality. And the legitimation of a child by the subsequent marriage of its parents will be held to depend on the law of its father’s domicile or nationality. But the reference to the place of contract, carried to North America with the rest of the English jurisprudence of that date, still maintains in the courts of the United States a struggle with the doctrine of personal law as governing capacity and status.

Here must be noticed a difficulty which arises about the application of any foreign law to the capacity for contracting. It will be understood by the German provision intended to meet it, namely, that “if a foreigner enters in Germany into a transaction for which he is incapable or has only a restricted capacity, he is to be treated for that transaction as being so far capable as he would be by the German legislation. This, however, does not apply to transactions with regard to rights of family or of succession, or to those disposing of foreign immovable property” (Art. 7 of the statute enacting the code). In a spirit similar to that which dictated the German enactment, the French courts have not generally allowed a Frenchman to suffer from the incapacity, by his personal law, of a foreigner who contracts in France, when the foreigner would have been capable by French law, and the Frenchman was in good faith and without great imprudence ignorant of his incapacity. Lately a disposition has been shown to limit this protection of nationals to the case in which the foreigner has been guilty of fraud. English courts usually hold themselves to be more stringently bound by rules, whether those enacted by parliament or those adopted for themselves; and if they should continue to profess the doctrine that capacity depends on the law of the domicile, it is not probable that they will deem themselves entitled to make exceptions for the protection of persons contracting in England with foreigners not enjoying such capacity. The point furnishes an illustration of the fact that to deal satisfactorily with so complex a subject as private international law requires the assistance of the legislature, which again cannot be given with full utility unless uniform provisions, to be enacted in different countries, are settled by international convention.

Another ground for the application of a personal law is furnished by the cases in which masses of property and rights have to be dealt with collectively, by reason of their being grouped around persons. The principal instances of that kind are when it is necessary to determine the validity and operation of a marriage settlement or contract, or the effect of marriage on the property of the husband and wife in the absence of any express settlement or contract, and when property passes on death, either by a will or by intestate succession.

Back to Index Next