this body acquired a de jure character when on December 17, 1920, CHAP. by vote of the Assembly Albania was admitted as a member of the League of Nations. In 1906 Great Britain, France, and Italy agreed among them- Abyssinia selves to respect and protect the integrity of Abyssinia, while at the same time taking steps to adjust in an equitable manner their respective interests in the country. Not being itself a party to the treaty, and being powerless to assert an independent position Abyssinia was thus reduced to a state of involuntary wardship. The guardians pledged themselves, in the event of disturbances occurring in Abyssinia, not to intervene individually except after having come to an understanding with the others, and in any such case every effort was to be made to maintain the integrity of the country. This mutual self-denying ordinance came impliedly to an end in September, 1923, when Abyssinia was admitted as a member of the League of Nations. provinces In addition to vassal states and protectorates there are terri- Administered tories having so intangible a degree of international personality as to make their status a matter of doubt. The term "administered province" has been used to describe territory nominally subject to the sovereignty of one state while actually under the administrative control of another. By the Berlin Treaty of 1878 Bosnia and Herzegovina, while remaining subject to the sovereignty of Turkey, were to be "occupied and administered" by Austria-Hungary, which continued to exercise a sort of mandate over them until they were annexed by unilateral act in 1908.2 Great Britain, under agreement with Turkey, exercised a similar administrative control over Cyprus from 1878 until the annexation of the island in 1914.3 A self-assumed administrative mandate over Cuba was exercised by the United States from 1898 to 1902.* The international status of the British self-governing dominions British self-governing is anomalous. In theory, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and dominions South Africa were until 1919 colonial possessions of the British Empire and had no international personality. As a practical matter, however, these colonies had attained a degree of independence in the control of their foreign as well as their domestic affairs which placed them in the category of the more advanced CHAP. VI Irish Free Territories under mandate of the League of Nations protectorates. The practice of the British Government in making provision for separate adherence to and separate withdrawal from commercial treaties by the dominions seemed to give them a distinct, if limited, international personality, though the mothercountry remained responsible at international law for the fulfilment of their contracts. This limited status as international persons was given definite recognition at international law when the four dominions were made, each in its own name, signatories of the Treaty of Versailles and became in their separate personalities original members of the League of Nations. With them as a signatory of the treaty and member of the League was included India, which consists of the native states (protectorates having almost complete internal autonomy) and of British India, which was given a limited measure of self-government under the Government of India Act of 1919. Even more unique is the international status of the Irish Free State. It came into legal being by the conclusion of the treaty of December 6, 1921,2 between the British Government on the one hand and representatives of the Irish Sinn Fein on the other, the latter having at international law neither a de jure nor a de facto standing until the negotiations preceding the treaty. January 8, 1922, the treaty was ratified by the Dáil Eireann, whereupon Ireland became the Irish Free State. A subsequent act of Parliament embodying the treaty gave to the new "state" the same constitutional status "in the community of nations known as the British Empire" as was held by the British self-governing dominions, naming Canada as the dominion whose relations to the Imperial Parliament were to be paralleled by those of the Free State. Having adopted a constitution and organized its government, the Free State was admitted to membership in the League of Nations in September, 1923. 1 Article XXII of the Covenant of the League of Nations rep With the acquisition of international personality by the dominions came a corresponding change in their constitutional relations within the empire. Henceforth they were members of the British Commonwealth of Nations-a close confederation with Great Britain as the dominant partner and an Imperial Conference as the working bond of union. See M. M. Lewis, "The International Status of the British Self-Governing Dominions," British Year Book, 1922-23, p. 21. Newfoundland also ranks among the self-governing dominions, but its international relations have been of lesser importance than those of the other four. Technically known as "Articles of Agreement for a Treaty" and the "Scheduled Treaty." For the text, see Annual Register, 1921, p. 86. See Annual Register, 1921, Chaps. III, IV; Figgis, The Irish Constitution. VI resents an attempt to apply in a more logical and constructive CHAP. form1 the plan of international guardianship over backward territories illustrated by the action of the Great Powers in 1815 in respect to the Ionian Islands. The principle on which the Covenant proceeds is that the well-being and development of such peoples "form a sacred trust of civilization" as represented by states parties to the Covenant. Three distinct groups of such territories are marked off. The first group consists of certain communities, formerly subject provinces of Turkey, which have reached a stage of development at which their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized, subject to a temporary régime of administrative assistance from a mandatory state. The mandate for Syria was accepted by France, and that for Mesopotamia by Great Britain. But while it would appear that these two new states are thus endowed with some degree of international personality and attain partial membership in the international community as represented by the League, their ultimate status is still a matter of doubt. 3 In addition to those territories which are emancipated under the protection of stronger states, there are the former colonies of Germany, some of which are to be administered by a mandatory state under a separate form of government, and others to be administered as integral portions of the territory of the mandatory state. In both cases provision is made in the Covenant that the administration shall be conducted under conditions approved by the League, by which equal opportunities for trade shall be allowed to all members of the League, and certain abuses, such as the trade in slaves, arms, and liquor, shall be prohibited; further, the requirement is laid down that the mandatory shall render to the Council of the League an annual report upon the territory committed to its charge. It is doubtful whether the territories in the first of these classes may claim any degree of international personality; and it is quite clear that those in the latter class may not do so." In addition to states having a legal status at international law, Belligerent Taking the terms of the Covenant at their face-value, as representing a legal relation rather than an actual condition. 'Designated by the Council of the League as Class A mandates. Am. For a discussion of the technical legal problems involved in the establishment of mandates, see Wright, "Sovereignty of the Mandates,' Journal, XVII (1923), 691. communities CHAP. VI whether that of full membership in the international community or that of partial membership, there are cases in which political communities struggling to attain a condition of separate statehood are recognized by international law as possessing a de facto as opposed to a de jure status. These communities, legally parts of the state from which they are endeavoring to separate themselves, may attain in the course of their struggle for freedom an actual position of independence which makes it necessary for third states to deal with them as if they possessed international personality, pending the determination of the question whether they will be formally admitted to membership or will be brought back to subjection by the state from which they have revolted. They are inchoative states, permitted by the other states to exercise temporarily certain of the rights and privileges of statehood, but having in their own name not a legal, but merely a moral, claim to the protection of international law.1 1 1 For the problems connected with the recognition of these de facto political communities, see below, p. 108. CHAPTER VII ACQUISITION OF MEMBERSHIP IN THE FAMILY OF NATIONS; CONTINUITY of inter persons As has been pointed out above, the persons of international law a. Changing differ in extent of territory, size of population, degree of civiliza- character tion, and stability of internal political organization. This diver- national sity is the result of a wide variety of physical and social forcesrace, language, religion, culture, geographical environment-which it is for the historian to analyze. International law merely recognizes that, from whatever cause, the various national groups pass through stages of development, and are found at times breaking up into component parts or coalescing into larger communities. New groups separate themselves from old and larger groups and assert a right of distinct international personality. A number of groups combine and come before the family of nations as single corporate units. In consequence international law is presented not only with problems connected with the personal diversities of the members of the international community, but with further problems bearing upon the acquisition and loss of membership in the community. In addition to these, the corporate nature of statehood raises questions concerning the continuity of international personality when passing through changes in the internal organization of the state. b. Acquimembership: of new Membership in the existing family of nations is either original or acquired. It is original in the case of the states maintaining members diplomatic relations since the time international law began to take recognition definite shape about the middle of the seventeenth century. States states subsequently admitted to the family of nations may be said to have acquired legal personality by grace of the existing members, manifested by the act of admission known as "recognition." Whether a state not a member of the family of nations has a right to demand. admission, or whether it actually becomes a member so soon as it acquires the marks of a state1 even though it may not be recog1See Hall, International Law, § 2. |