modifications of Turkey's commercial policy and agrees to the abrogation of the capitulary régime, provided agreements be negotiated by Turkey with the Powers enjoying the benefit of the capitulations.

Without further commenting upon the treaty or entering into the causes of the war, which have been stated in a previous number of the JOURNAL, it is clear that Italy has accomplished her purpose, namely, the acquisition of Tripoli and Cyrenaica. That she may wisely administer these provinces and, by the benefits conferred upon them, make amends as far as possible for the lawless manner of acquiring them, is now the hope of those who believe that the war against Turkey for their acquisition was as unjustifiable in law as it was in morals and fair dealing.

THE CHINESE SOCIETY AND JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

In the Peking Daily News of November 7 and 8, 1912, there are two exceedingly interesting articles entitled "The New Spirit in Chinese Diplomacy," which will not merely interest the readers of the JOURNAL, but will be a source of satisfaction to those who believe that the diffusion of international law and its application by nations are factors of the greatest moment not only in international organization, but in the movement for international peace. The articles call attention to the fact that the Wai-chiao Pu, the Chinese Foreign Office, has been reorganized in such a manner that "responsibility has been centered on a single head instead of half a dozen co-ordinate chiefs"; that "all the members of the ministry, from the minister down to the junior assistant, excepting possibly one or two of them, are able to speak at least one foreign language"; that a commission for the study of treaties has been formed, composed "of a councillor, a secretary, three senior assistants and two junior assistants of the ministry, chosen solely because of their experience in the field of research"; that the commission thus constituted "holds its meetings three times a week to discuss the results of study and research of the various questions of law and treaty which are entrusted to it for advice."

The editorial assigns the credit of founding this institution to Mr. Lou Tseng-Tsiang, the former minister of foreign affairs, and Dr. W. W. Yen, the Vice-Minister, "whose keen insight into the fundamentals of successful diplomacy enable them to perceive the wisdom and necessity of having such a body as the commission under notice. But its continued

usefulness, however, is also due to the sympathetic approval and support which Mr. Liang Meng-ting, the present Minister, is extending to it. The members of the commission enjoy the confidence of the Minister and the Vice-Minister; and every facility of access to the archives of the Ministry is willingly afforded them."

It is interesting to note that Mr. Lou Tseng-Tsiang was Chinese delegate to the First and Second Hague Peace Conferences; that he was Minister to Belgium and Ambassador to Russia before becoming Minister of Foreign Affairs, so that he was able from his personal experience and knowledge of affairs to know the needs of a foreign office, and the creation of the republic enabled him, as its Minister of Foreign Affairs, to carry his views into effect. It will particularly interest our readers to learn that Dr. W. W. Yen is a young Chinese scholar of exceptional attainments, who was educated in the United States, and that he is a member of the American Society of International Law.

But the enlightened statesmen of the republic recognize that it is not enough to have a foreign office comparable in organization and efficiency to the foreign offices of European civilization, for the conduct of international relations. They recognize that the principles of international law must be studied and mastered by leaders of thought, and that appropriate organs should be created for their study and dissemination. Therefore a society has been organized in Shanghai "for the purpose of studying and examining the theories of foreign international jurists, the history of the past, the questions of the day, and the problems of the future, with a view to the determination of the legal principles involved therein." The writer of the article states that, "Like the American Society of International Law and the International Law Association in England, this new organization proposes to take in a large number of people, the sole qualification prescribed for admission to membership therein being 'interest in the study of international law."

The organization of the society in Shanghai, which occurred some months ago, has evidently met with approval, for in the second article. in the Peking Daily News, to which reference has been made, we are informed that a society for the study of international law has been formed in Peking, somewhat similar to the society at Shanghai. The moving spirits of this new society are Mr. Lou Tseng-Tsiang, formerly prime minister and minister of foreign affairs, and Mr. Chang Chien. The Peking society is organized upon a scientific basis. Thus, Article 4 of its constitution declares its objects to be: "The study of international

law and the maintenance of international peace on the foundation of law and justice"; and restricts membership to (1) graduates of a course in law or political science in a Chinese or foreign university; (2) experienced diplomats; (3) authors of works on or related to international law. The Institute of International Law is evidently taken as the model in determining the qualifications for membership, but it would appear from the article that, while limited to persons technically qualified, its founders have not made it a close corporation but intend to open it to all, not merely a certain number of those qualified for admission. Serious investigations are to be undertaken and will be placed in charge of a general director, aided by four assistant directors. As in the case of the Institute, any member may be assigned to a particular topic, but, differing from the Institute, he may select one of his own choice and devote himself to its study. In order to popularize the results of the investigations, a quarterly journal is to be established by the society, to be directed by an editor-in-chief and four associate editors.

The society is to have a library of important collections of treaties and works relating to international law, and it is gratifying to learn that “a substantial fund" has already been raised for this purpose. That the undertaking is serious and deserving of respect and that the society will be conducted in such a manner as to accomplish its purposes, appear from the following extract from the Peking Daily News:

Among the two-score of its members are such well-known personages as the two ex-Premiers of the Republic, Mr. Tang Shao-yi and Mr. Lou Tseng-tsiang; Dr. Wang Chung-hui, Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Nanking Government; Mr. Hu Wei-teh, formerly Minister to Japan and Russia and some time acting Minister of Foreign Affairs; Mr. Sun Pao-chi, formerly Minister to Germany; Mr. Chang Chien, the noted Chinese scholar; Mr. Ma Liang, President of the National University; Mr. Alfred Sze, at one time Minister-appoint to the United States; Dr. W. W. Yen, present Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, etc. Besides these, there are in the list of members also Chinese jurists, lawyers, legislators and special students of international law.

The American Society of International Law and the Editorial Board of the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW extend their sincere congratulations to the enlightened statesmen, jurists and publicists, who have reorganized the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who have created a society for "the study of international law and the maintenance of international peace on the foundations of law and justice," and have established as the organ of the society a quarterly journal of international

law. That their endeavors be crowned with complete success must be the wish of all who are interested in the study of international law and the maintenance of international peace on the foundations of law and justice.

GOVERNMENT MONOPOLY OF WAR INDUSTRIES

In an interesting communication addressed to the New York Times and printed in its issue of October 20, 1912, Mr. J. P. de Souza Dantas, first secretary of the Brazilian Legation at Paris, proposes "the nationalization of war industries and state monopoly of all enterprises dealing with the construction of armaments and engines of war." He states that the reform would only be possible through an international agreement, but that, if the United States "would take the lead in negotiating a treaty between the six or seven great countries in which the war industries flourish, with a view to creating such a state monopoly," he believes "that the first and most important step toward universal peace would have been made." He felt that other Powers would join the six or seven parties to the international agreement, and that instead of starting manufactories of their own they would "become the customers of one or others of the countries already manufacturing, according to their reasons for special preference."

Mr. de Souza Dantas is aware of the many difficulties which stand in the way of realizing his proposal, but he observes that all recommendations of this kind are bound to meet with opposition both from interested manufacturers, who would lose financially by the establishment of government monopolies, and from those classes who object on principle to the government going into business which heretofore has been carried on by private parties. Without discussing European conditions, with which the writer of the present comment is not sufficiently familiar, it is difficult to see how the United States could justify itself in calling an international conference to discuss this matter, as Mr. de Souza Dantas proposes, when the difficulties in the way of executing the agreement, supposing it could be negotiated, would be, at least for the present, apparently insuperable. Heretofore the United States has had its vessels of war constructed by contract with shipbuilders, although the experiment has been made of constructing vessels of war in federal navy yards. But the proposition does not stop here. Not merely is the government requested to take over the "construction

of armaments and engines of war," but war industries as such are to be nationalized and conducted by the government. Supposing that there were no constitutional objections to the proposed plan, it is doubtfulwhether our people, who oppose the construction of two battleships a year, would be willing to appropriate the money needed to equip navy yards with the machinery necessary to construct vessels of war, for by so doing the government would necessarily have freer initiative in planning and constructing such vessels. It is no doubt true, as Mr. de Souza Dantas states, that manufacturers of war material endeavor to create a market for their wares, which would not be the case if they were not actively engaged in the business. But it is questionable whether nations would be willing to change existing principles of international law to the extent that would be required, even although they might not be unwilling to discuss the project, for materials of war may be manufactured and sold to belligerents, although as contraband they run the risk of capture and confiscation. If the manufacturers of war materials, using the term in its largest and most comprehensive sense, were government agencies, nations would be unable to dispose of their war materials during hostilities to belligerents, as sales of government property by a government under such circumstances are forbidden by international law.

The result would be that nations which do not manufacture their own war materials would have to have on hand a plentiful supply of them and would be obliged to make very elaborate preparations in time of peace for a future war, the outbreak and extent of which they could not well forecast. In the next place, even those nations which manufacture war materials would have to have their arsenals well supplied, as they would have to rely upon their own resources and could not replete their stores by purchase on the market.

If it be true that the possession of war materials and an equipped navy incline a nation to make use of the materials and of its fleet, it would appear that Mr. de Souza Dantas' proposal would not promote the cause of peace to the extent which he anticipates. Add to this the difficulty of procuring an agreement upon principles of international law and the inherent difficulties of the project, at least so far as the United States is concerned, it would seem that, however interesting it may be in itself, it will nevertheless fail to commend itself either to the nations at large or to the United States.