« ПретходнаНастави »
the ground stated in the judgment as reported, it is contrary not only to The Oostzee (supra), but to the judgment of Lord Stowell himself in The Actæon (supra), and it cannot now be followed. It may well be that in addition to the point which is stated in the judgment in The Luna (supra) as reported, and which is, as Lord Stowell truly said, a point which ought not to be left out of consideration, there were also in the facts of that case circumstances connected with the ship which were in Lord Stowell's mind. It is clear on the face of the report that the whole judgment is not reported. Even if San Sebastian was not in strictness a blockaded port under the Order in Council, nevertheless a ship going there was obviously taking goods to the enemy, who were in actual occupation of it, and on that or some other ground, in addition to what appears in the judgment, the decision may have been justified. It has, however, been treated as a decision that the facts referred to in the judgment as matters to be taken into consideration would in themselves be sufficient, and so understood it is contrary to at least one decision binding on this board. Their Lordships will therefore humbly advise his Majesty that this appeal should be dismissed with costs.
BOOK REVIEWS *
Contemporary French Politics. By Raymond Leslie Buell. With an intro
duction by Carlton J. H. Hayes. New York: D. Appleton and Co. 1920. pp. xxviii, 524.
The author of this book is a studious young American, who, having served his country in arms, lingered on foreign soil long enough, and worked diligently enough, to gather a remarkable mass of information concerning the political attitudes, methods, and tendencies of the French people; and he has brought this information together in a very readable book. He deals mainly with domestic politics—party alignments, woman suffrage, proportional representation, syndicalism, the regionalist movement, the press and the censorship, and constitutional reform. Three chapters, however, are devoted to matters that may fairly be termed international. One explains what the French peace terms might have been; a second discusses the French conception of a league of nations; the third tells us what France thought of American “idealism.”
Reviewing the demands of various extremer French elements—the total dismemberment of Germany, or the annexation of the left bank of the Rhine, or the creation of a cis-Rhenish republic, or the annexation of at least the valley of the Saar (coupled with the total reduction of German armament and the establishment of a permanent alliance among the existing Allies)—the author shows that such a peace would merely have followed the lines of the old diplomacy and, although having much to justify it in morals, would probably have proved as ineffectual as settlements of the old diplomacy have commonly proved hitherto. He shows how, starting from an attitude of incredulity, French opinion gradually swung to the support of the League of Nations idea as an alternative plan of settlement, only to be grievously disappointed with the character of the League as established. Only a League vastly stronger than that which actually came into being could have compensated, in the French view, for the safeguards which the old diplomacy would have secured; and “responsibility for the failure to provide the League of Nations with the security upon which France justly insisted was largely due to the American Peace Delegation.” This suggests an analysis of the French attitude toward the United States during and after the peace negotiations; and Mr. Buell's final chapter is devoted to a singularly clear exposition of this
* The JOURNAL assumes no responsibility for the views expressed in signed book reviews.-ED.
important matter. Copious quotations from newspapers and speeches show in startling fashion how far the reaction went-how generally it came to be believed that “although the foremost republic in the world has its virtues, it is perhaps controlled as much by self-interest and as little by altruism as any other nation in the world;" and the volume closes with the cheerless thought, not only that America, despite all her effort, managed merely to disillusion her European friends, but also that the most that one dare hope for the world at large is that each war and each peace conference henceforth may yield “some betterment” and “some progress."
FREDERIC A. OGG.
La cuestion de Tacna y Arica. E. Castro y Oyanguren. Lima: Impr. del
Estado. 1919. pp. 93.
The outcome of the World War and the announced principles upon which it was fought by the Allies have served to reinvigorate the longstanding claims of various countries based upon alleged wrongdoing of other nations. Prominent among these claims is that of Peru against Chile, arising out of the non-performance of Article 3 of the Treaty of Ancon of October 20, 1883, concluding the war of the Pacific, according to which “the provinces of Tacna and Arica . . . shall continue in the possession of Chile, subject to Chilean legislation and authority for a period of ten years. ... At the expiration of that term, a plebiscite will decide by popular vote, whether the territory ... is to remain definitely under the dominion and sovereignty of Chile or is to continue to constitute a part of Peru.”
The plebiscite has never been held, and the provinces are still controlled by Chile. Naturally, a controversy, resting on Peruvian assertions of bad faith on the part of Chile, has been raging ever since between the two countries, manifested in a voluminous polemic literature and a wealth of diplomatic correspondence. Peru in particular has untiringly sought to bring her case to the attention of the world, and the recovery of the “lost provinces" is the central point of her foreign policy.
The pamphlet under review is one among many presenting the Peruvian argument in the controversy. It is, in essence, an epitome of the more elaborate work of Dr. Victor M. Maurtua (published in 1901), which it supplements by adducing some recent documents. It embodies the history since 1842, when Chile, with the discovery of guano north of 27°, began her penetration northwards, and emphasizes the negotiations before, during, and subsequent to the war of 1879-1883, in order to show the intent of the negotiators with respect to Article 3 of the treaty of Ancon. It concludes with an appendix containing the circular instruction of the Peruvian Minister of Foreign Affairs of February 14, 1919, which consti. tutes a reply to a similar Chilean instruction of December, 1918, summar. izing the respective contentions of the parties. The author deals with the negotiations subsequent to 1894, when the plebiscite should have been held, to show the efforts of Chile to prevent its execution. He also points out Chile's uniform resistance to arbitration of the dispute, including her opposition to the principle of arbitration enunciated in a resolution at the Pan-American Congress of 1889, on which Chile abstained from voting.
The author might have mentioned Chile's arguments in support of her position, namely, that the plebiscite was a mere formality, intended to “save the faces” of the Peruvian negotiators with their own people; that an unconditional cession was intended; that Chilean “capital and workers" had made the territory productive; that the territory was ceded as “reparation” for the war losses of Chile; and that it was needed for the military security of Chile.
Impartial study and the effort to make the strongest Chilean case possible but emphasize its essential weakness and lack of substance. The above contentions of Chile are not, it is believed, sustainable from the record; and it can hardly be doubted that Chile has had little or no desire to have the plebiscite held. The reason is clear: being already in control of the territory, and having the physical force to maintain such control, she had no interest in jeopardizing her position. Recent events in Europe would indicate that reliance upon force is still the major sanction of international relations and the keynote of the foreign policy of many nations. Nevertheless, Chile has exposed herself to the continued propaganda of what is essentially a valid claim of Peru, and the dispute, unless settled, threatens the peace of the American continent and the moral standing of Chile. The pamphlet under review manifests much patriotic fervor, apparently inseparable from the polemics to which the dispute has on both sides given rise.
EDWIN M. BORCHARD.
De internationaalrechtelijke betrekkingen tusschen Nederland en Venezu
ela, 1816–1920. By K. H. Corporaal, LL.D., Pol.Sc.D. Leiden: Eduard Ydo. 1920. pp. 672.
President Cleveland in one of the Princeton lectures he delivered after retiring from public life has demonstrated to what extent the relations between Venezuela and European states may affect America's attitude towards both. A book therefore dealing with Venezuela's relations with another country must be of interest to Americans; especially when-as in the present instance—that other country has colonial possessions in the Caribbean.
This is a book of applied political science, in which the author considers problems diplomatic, political, legal and economic as they actually arose between two countries of our day. By far the greater part is a lucid and exhaustive narrative, the work of a gardener in the green bushes of diplomatic history; whilst a final chapter, which savors more of laboratory dissection, gives a theoretical analysis of the legal problems with which statesmen of the Netherlands and Venezuela found themselves confronted in the course of the latter's existence as an independent international entity. Official and other documents complete the text.
The relations between the Netherlands and Venezuela are determined by the existence of a Dutch colony, the Island of Curaçao, close to the Venezuelan coast. Curaçao, with its excellent harbor, has no resources of its own, and, in an economic sense, is entirely dependent on traffic with neighboring countries. Of these, Venezuela, owing to its proximity, is the most important. The existence in that country of a high customs tariff gave rise to lively smuggling, and Curaçao naturally became the center of activity of this illicit traffic. In spite of constant and energetic endeavors on the part of the Netherland authorities, this could not be totally suppressed, and Venezuela, thus deprived of part of the income derived from her customs, had not unnaturally several times some feeling against the neighboring island.
Venezuela, on which Curaçao is economically dependent, is at the same time to a certain extent politically dependent on Curaçao. Frequent changes of a more or less revolutionary character in the government of the Republic made the Netherland colony the refuge of those who for political reasons are not tolerated in their home country. It is obvious that such a situation is likely to affect the relations between the two states. As the author remarks, this dependence, coupled with the fact that the Netherlands are here confronted with a state in which revolutions have by no means been infrequent, and where, about a century after the separation from the mother-country, lasting tranquillity did not yet appear to be quite firmly established, leaves its mark on the relations of the two countries.
Consequently the Netherland authorities have been faced with a number of problems whose solution has called into existence a peculiar system of international law between the two states. The existence of this peculiar system may be inferred from the attitude adopted by the Netherlands towards Venezuelan Governments following revolutionary movements in that country. The geopolitical situation of Curaçao and the interests of the island, forced Holland to proclaim her neutrality at an earlier moment than would be in accordance with the strict rule of international law, and to postpone the recognition of such Governments to a later date than would be legally necessary.
The revolutionary character of the Venezuelan state, which in the beginning of this century seemed not yet entirely mature and therefore not over-anxious to put an end to unstable conditions, did not encourage the Netherlands to conclude treaties. Recently, however, a treaty of amity