I twenty-six to forty-four, which included practically the entire CHAP. family of nations. As a law-making body, the second conference did not differ essentially from the first conference, but the number and scope of the conventions adopted gave it a greater importance. During the interval between the two conferences the prestige of arbitration as a means of settling disputes had been greatly increased in consequence of the submission to the Hague Court of a number of important cases. But the conference was unable to reach an agreement upon even a limited obligation to arbitrate, although it was unanimous in admitting "the principle of compulsory arbitration." With the object of correcting the defects shown by the experience of the past eight years, amendments were introduced into the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes adopted by the conference of 1899. In addition a draft project for the creation of a Judicial Arbitration Court received the approval of the delegates, but remained unsigned owing to the difficulty of deciding upon a method, satisfactory to large and small states alike, for the election of the judges of the court. A second constructive agreement was reached in the convention restricting the use of force in the collection of contract debts. All of the eleven other conventions and three declarations related to war and neutrality, consisting in a further codification of existing rules and the creation of new ones. In spite, however, of the fact that the great bulk of the work of the conference related to the law of war, the meeting was officially designated as a peace conference and is popularly known by that title. A recommendation was adopted providing for the holding of a third peace conference within a period corresponding to the interval between the first and second conferences.1 Owing to the failure of the delegates attending the second peace conference to agree upon a code of maritime warfare corresponding to the code of warfare on land, the leading maritime powers assembled in conference at London on December 4, 1908. The result of their deliberations was the formulation of the Declaration of London, signed on February 26, 1909.2 This important code covered the chief points in dispute between belligerent and neutral 1 For a study of the work of the Hague peace conferences see Higgins, Hague Peace Conferences; Scott, Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907. For the effect of the failure of the signatory powers to ratify the declaration, see below, p. 64. 2 The Declara tion of London CHAP. I Effect of the Covenant of the League of Nations states, and thus provided a body of rules which could be applied by the prize courts of the several states and, it might be, by the International Prize Court established at the second peace conference. The limited membership of the London conference marked a tendency on the part of the Great Powers to legislate for themselves in matters in which they were primarily concerned, leaving it to the smaller states to be governed by the new rules or to appeal more or less successfully to the uncertain customary law. It is too soon to estimate the full effect of the World War upon the development of international law. The violation by Germany, on plea of military necessity, of the treaty of 1839 by which Belgium was permanently neutralized showed that even the fundamental doctrine of the faith of treaties could not stand the pressure of alleged national self-preservation in a war between the guarantors of the treaty. The rigorous measures attending the invasion and occupation of Belgium made a mockery of the agreements reached at the Second Hague Conference. New and more drastic rules of contraband and blockade were put forth by Great Britain, with corresponding protest from neutrals. Belligerent merchant ships were sunk by German submarines without warning. New instruments of combat, such as poisonous gases, were devised, aërial warfare put an end to the rules regulating the bombing of unfortified towns; and intimidation was resorted to as a means of breaking the spirit of the civilian population. The entrance of the United States into the conflict was marked by an announcement that the old law of neutrality was at an end and that henceforth the nations must assume a collective responsibility for the peace of the world. New principles of international law were announced by President Wilson as properly forming the basis upon which a permanent peace might be concluded.1 In the popular mind the term "international law" as relating to the existing rules and their imperfect sanction was a term that no longer bore any relation to the realities or to the needs of international life. The Treaty of Versailles, by which the war with Germany was concluded by all of the belligerents except the United States, contains among its specific provisions numerous modifications of international law, in addition to including as its first twenty-six articles the fundamental agreement of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The significance of the Covenant of the League of Nations lies both in the changes which it has effected in the organ'See below, under appropriate headings, pp. 107, 297. 1 ization of the community of nations and in the amendments intro- CHAP. duced into the substantive as well as the procedural parts of international law. The system of the balance of power was impliedly, if not formally, repudiated in the collective responsibility assumed by all the members of the League for the future peace of the world. While the membership of the Council of the League gave formal sanction to the political domination of the Great Powers, their domination was modified by the admission of four other states to their group. Inchoate legislative powers within their separate fields were conferred upon both the Council and the Assembly of the League. Limited executive functions were assigned to the Council. Provision was made for the creation of a permanent International Court of Justice. Qualified guarantees were given to the members of the League in respect to the enjoyment of their independence and territorial sovereignty. Constructive provisions were laid down for the administration by mandates of backward and undeveloped countries. Finally, an International Labor Bureau was established for the improvement of labor conditions in all countries. In addition to the original signatories of the Treaty of Versailles, states not parties to the treaty were invited to enter the membership of the League, with the result that by November, 1923, the membership included fifty-four states. The failure, however, of the United States to ratify the Treaty of Versailles and with it the Covenant of the League, together with the absence of Germany, Russia, and Mexico from the League's membership, raises the question whether the principles and rules laid down in the Covenant can be said to have become incorporated into the body of general international law as distinguished from the more limited agreements or "particular international law" binding only upon a definite group of powers. Aside from the Covenant of the League of Nations, the several treaties of peace effected fundamental changes in the structure of the society of nations, and in the relations of its component parts. The boundaries of France were enlarged by the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, while those of Belgium received a slight increase by the cession of Moresnet, Eupen, and Malmédy. To Denmark was ceded the northern part of Schleswig, and to Italy part of the Austrian Trentino and a strip of the Adriatic coast-line. Rumania was enlarged by the annexation of Bessarabia, Transylvania, and part of the Hungarian plain. A number of new states were created. Albania advanced from a condition of wardship under Changes in the structure of the inter national community CHAP. I The Assembly of the League the Great Powers to the status of an independent state. Poland was formed from territory taken from Germany, Austria, and Russia, while Czechoslovakia was formed of Austrian and Hungarian territory. Jugoslavia was formed of the existing states of Serbia and Montenegro and of cessions from Austria and Hungary; while Finland, Esthonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were formed of territory taken from Russia. The Arabian state of Hedjaz was carved out of Turkey. Dantzig was made a free city under the protection of the League of Nations. The German colonies were apportioned among the victors under a system of mandates superintended by the League of Nations. Many constructive provisions were inserted in the several treaties, looking to the protection of minorities, the facility of international transportation, and the protection of international social interests. The later Treaty of Lausanne, entered into by the Allied Powers with Turkey, July 24, 1923, radically altered the position of Turkey in the Near East, and introduced important changes in the status of the Dardanelles and Bosphorus.1 The first meeting of the Assembly of the League of Nations took place at Geneva, November 15 to December 24, 1920. Among the legal issues to which it gave rise was the question as to the respective jurisdictions of the Council and of the Assembly. The issue involved, though not explicitly, the fundamental problem of the equality of states in international law. Was the more exclusive Council, or was the entire body of states represented in the Assembly, to determine the future of international relations along the lines laid down in the Covenant of the League? The decision reached was not conclusive, being in the nature of a compromise recognizing the concurrent jurisdiction of both Council and Assembly over certain subjects and leaving other subjects, such as the control over mandates, a controversial issue between the two bodies. The most significant constructive work of the Assembly at this meeting was the adoption of a plan approved by the Council for the establishment of a Permanent Court of International Justice. This plan had been formulated by a committee of jurists appointed by the Council under the terms of the Covenant.2 A number of new For a survey of the political effects of the several peace treaties, see Temperley, History of the Peace Conference of Paris, Vols. II, IV; Hazen, Europe Since 1815, rev. ed., Vol. II, 726 ff.; Bowman, The New World; Haskins and Lord, Some Problems of the Peace Conference; Gibbons, Europe Since 1918. 'See below, p. 413. I states were admitted to the League, including Austria, Bulgaria, CHAP. Luxemburg, Finland, Costa Rica, and Albania.1 3 Succeeding meetings of the Assembly took place in 1921, 1922, and 1923, beginning the first Monday in September. Esthonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were admitted as new members in 1921. Approval was given to the decision of the Council of the League to increase the non-permanent members of the Council from four to six. A number of amendments to the Covenant were passed upon and submitted to the individual states for ratification. The judges of the Permanent Court of International Justice were elected, the Assembly collaborating with the Council in this function. In addition, the Assembly exercised functions of the widest variety, debating public questions relating to international peace, hearing appeals from individual members under the terms of the Covenant, and in particular carrying on by committees the administrative work relating to general social and industrial welfare. At the meeting of 1923, the Irish Free State and Abyssinia were admitted to membership, bringing the number of members up to fifty-four. 5 1 For a brief summary of the proceedings of the first meeting of the Assembly, see Am. Pol. Science Rev., XV (1921), 94 ff. Full details may be found in The First Assembly of the League of Nations, World Peace Foundation, 1921. See below, p. 138. See Appendix A, foot-notes. 'See below, p. 413. * See below, p. 66. A survey of the administrative work of the League may be found in Handbook on the League of Nations, 1920-1923. |