Members of the League whose Representatives compose the Assembly.

"No such amendment shall bind any Member of the League which signifies its dissent therefrom, but in that case it shall cease to be a Member of the League."

At its first session in November, 1920, the Assembly provided for a Committee on Amendments, which was appointed by the Council in March, 1921. It must be noted that Article 26 contains no provision for the proposal of amendments of the Covenant, but only for the ratification of such amendments, whereas in the United States Constitution, Congress, by a vote of two-thirds of both houses, may propose amendments which shall take effect when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress. On the other hand, Article 26 does not forbid the proposal of amendments by the Assembly or by the Council. At its session in 1921, the Assembly unanimously agreed that for that session no amendments should be proposed except by a three-fourths majority of the Assembly including all the Members of the Council, and that for future sessions an amendment to this effect should be incorporated in Article 26 of the Covenant. The Assembly undertook to define the phrase, “the Members of the League whose representatives compose the Council" in Article 26, as meaning all those forming the Council when the vote was taken. The Assembly also provided that amendments are to be without effect if the required number of ratifications was not received within twenty-two months after the vote of the Assembly. Assuming that the Assembly has power to propose amendments, which seems to be taken for granted, the necessity of the ratification of such amendments within a reasonable time, and the power of the Assembly to fix a reasonable time for such ratification, is supported in principle by a decision of the United States Supreme Court.

In Dillon v. Gloss. 256 U. S. 368, the Supreme Court of the A full account of amendments, proposed and adopted, will be found in a valuable article by Professor Manley O. Hudson, 38 Harvard Law Review, 903.

United States, in construing Article V of the Constitution, holds that amendments submitted thereunder must be ratified within some reasonable time after their proposal; and that under this Article, Congress, in proposing an amendment, may fix a reasonable time for ratification, and that the period of seven years fixed by Congress in the Resolution proposing the Eighteenth Amendment was reasonable.

The Assembly also provided that any State dissenting from an amendment must notify its dissent within one year after the amendment becomes effective. This provision also seems entirely reasonable. As a matter of law, however, if an amendment should be proposed striking out the second paragraph of Article 26, it would be necessary for a dissenting member to notify its dissent prior to the ratification of the amendment by the other Members.

The Assembly also accepted certain drafting changes in Articles 12, 13 and 15 of the Covenant, to give equal prominence to judicial settlement with arbitrations, which became effective September 26, 1924.2

III. Amendments of the Constitution of the Organization of Labour.

Although the League of Nations and the Organization of Labour have identical membership, the provisions in regard to amendment of their constitutions are radically different. Article 422 of the Treaty is as follows:

"Amendments to this Part of the present Treaty which are adopted by the Conference by a majority of twothirds of the votes cast by the Delegates present shall take effect when ratified by the States whose representatives compose the Council of the League of Nations and by three-fourths of the Members."

In comparing Article 26 with Article 422, it should be noted: 1. That Article 26 contains no provision for the proposal "Hudson, 38 Harvard Law Rev., 931-933.

of amendments, whereas Article 422 provides for the adoption of amendments by the Conference by a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast by the delegates present.

2. That ratification under Article 26 must be by the Members of the League whose representatives compose the Council, and by a majority of the Members of the League whose representatives compose the Assembly, whereas Article 422 requires ratification by the States whose representatives compose the Council of the League of Nations, and by three-fourths of the Members.

3. Article 26 provides that no amendment shall bind any Member of the League which signifies its dissent therefrom, but in that case it ceases to be a member of the League, whereas, under Article 422, there is no provision for dissent, so that dissenting Members are absolutely bound by the amendment and have no right of secession.

The fact that constitutions of two bodies with identical membership are thus subject to such entirely different provisions as to amendments, offers a theoretical possibility of very great confusion. It may, perhaps, be assumed that by the withdrawal of membership from the League Nations, under Article 26, the Member withdrawing would, ipso facto, withdraw from the Organization of Labour, although nothing is said on that point in Part XIII of the Treaty. The right of withdrawal by dissent, however, is given to Members only in case that Part I of the Covenant of the League is amended, and it is obviously impossible to read that provision of Article 26 in regard to withdrawal, into Article 422. The difficulty with the framers of the Treaty seems to have been in their failure to distinguish between a mere co-operative enterprise, like the International Postal Union, and a super-government. Being afraid to set up one super-government with ordinary powers, like that of the United States, they set up two super-governments so rudimentary in their character that their fundamental legal nature is not clearly perceived. As the matter now stands, it is legally possible under Article 422 for the States composing the Council of the League of Nations and three-fourths of the Members of that League, to adopt an amendment to

Part XIII declaring that beer is a necessity for the health and happiness of the working-man, and must be allowed in all countries which are Members of the Organization. So, too, an amendment might be adopted that the right of free immigration from one country to another is essential to the welfare of the working-man, and that immigration laws should not be permitted to restrict that right. Both of these amendments are germane to Part XIII. It is true that Article 15 of the League Covenant may be claimed to exclude from the jurisdiction of the League matters which, by international law are solely within domestic jurisdiction, but Part XIII contains no such limitation as to matters within the domestic jurisdiction of Members. It is true also, that Part XIII does not at present undertake to regulate domestic legislation, but the broad proposition in the preamble that universal peace can be established only if it is based on "social justice," taken with the provision of Article 387 that the Permanent Organization is hereby established for the promotion of the objects set forth in the preamble, renders any amendment germane which expresses the opinion of the organization as to what is social justice in a particular case.

It is not a sufficient answer to the propositions above laid down to say that the theoretical possibility of amendment is of no practical consequence. The American Civil War offers sufficient evidence of the dangerous possibilities of controversies over constitutional questions, particularly where the question of the right of secession is involved.

Appendix

1. TREATY OF VERSAILLES

PART I

THE COVENANT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,

In order to promote international co-operation and to achieve international peace and security

by the acceptance of obligations not to resort to war, by the prescription of open, just and honourable relations between nations,

by the firm establishment of the understandings of international law as the actual rule of conduct among Governments, and

by the maintenance of justice and a scrupulous respect for all treaty obligations in the dealings of organised peoples with one another,

Agree to this Covenant of the League of Nations.

Article I.

The original Members of the League of Nations shall be those of the Signatories which are named in the Annex to this Covenant and also such of those other States named in the Annex as shall accede without reservation to this Covenant. Such accession shall be effected by a Declaration deposited with the Secretariat within two months of the coming into force of the Covenant. Notice thereof shall be sent to all other Members of the League.

223