ERNEST NYS, 1851-1920

In the death of M. Ernest Nys on September 5, 1920, the science of international law lost one of its most fruitful contributors, internationalism a leading advocate, the University of Brussels perhaps its most distinguished professor, and Belgium one of her most eminent jurists and publicists.

Professor Nys was born at Coutrai, Belgium, in 1851, and received his higher education at the Universities of Ghent, Heidelberg, Leipzig, and Berlin. Later he was granted honorary degrees by the Universities of Oxford, Edinburgh, and Glasgow. He began life as a member of the bench at Antwerp-his judicial career culminating in his appointment as member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, and President of the Chamber in the Court of Appeals at Brussels.

It was, however, in pursuance of his duties as Professor of International Law at the University of Brussels, and as one of the editors of the Revue de Droit International et de Législation Comparée, that he was most active as a contributor to the science of international law. For many years preceding the Great War, the files of the Revue bear witness to his prolific researches in the history of international law, more particularly during the Middle Ages. In 1894 many of these studies were published in book form under the title Les Origines du Droit International. This interesting collection was followed by two others (in 1896 and 1901 respectively) bearing the title Etudes de Droit International et de Droit Public. These volumes constitute a treasure containing a mine of historical research for any library that possesses them.

It would be impossible for us to give anything like a complete résumé or even bibliography of the many and various writings of Professor Nys. They include, for example, a valuable introduction to the text and translation of Francisci de Victoria's De Indis et de jure belli relectiones, published by the Carnegie Institution at Washington, in 1917. Suffice it to say that the work of Professor Nys as an authority on international law culminated in a sense in the publication (in three volumes, 1904-06) of a treatise entitled Le Droit International, Les Principes, Les Theories, Les Faits. This work was characterized by great learning, originality and vigor, and is a distinct contribution to the history and theoretical development of our science.

M. Nys was a distinguished member of a number of learned societies, including the Institute of International Law, of which he was a very active member, and the American Society of International Law, of which he was one of the few honorary members.

The writer of this memorial notice never had the good fortune of personal contact with Professor Nys; but if a deep and sympathetic appreciation of a man's writings confers a title of friendship, then one may perhaps be permitted to express a strong sense of personal sorrow over the passing of this wise, cultivated and liberal spirit. Certainly the cause of internationalism has suffered a great loss.

AMOS S. HERSHEY.

CURRENT NOTES

THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

With the advent of peace in Europe, consequent upon the deposit of ratifications of the Treaty of Versailles on January 10, 1920, the trustees of the Nobel Peace Prize were able to consider in an atmosphere of peace the services rendered to the cause of peace.

The peace prize was not awarded in 1914, 1915 or 1916. It was felt that the award for 1917 might properly be made to the International Red Cross of Geneva. This was accordingly done. No further award was made until December 10, 1920, when the peace prize for the year 1919 was awarded to Woodrow Wilson, then President of the United States, and for 1920 to Léon Bourgeois, of France.

The awards to these eminent publicists are not difficult to understand. Mr. Wilson had, before the entry of the United States into the World War, labored incessantly to bring the war to a close. After the armistice of November 11, 1918, he sought to secure a peace which would, in his opinion, render less likely, if it could not wholly prevent, the recurrence of future

wars.

The case of Mr. Bourgeois, if not stronger, extends over a longer period of years. His advocacy of arbitration at the First Hague Peace Conference of 1899, was largely responsible for the acceptance of the Pacific Settlement Convention of that body. To his championship of peaceful settlement at the Second Hague Peace Conference of 1907, is likewise due in large measure whatever was accomplished in that line at that gathering, in which Germany blocked, as it seemed to many, every approach to peace. Mr. Bourgeois' advocacy of the League of Nations was the advocacy in concrete form of an intimate association of nations of which he had been the champion for many years.

That the award to each falls within the scope of the Nobel Prize is evident from the following extract from the will of Alfred Nobel, which creates, "a fifth [prize] to the person who shall have done most or the best work in the interest of the brotherhood of peoples, of the abolition or reduction of standing armies, as well as of the formation and propagation of peace congresses."

It is interesting to note the manner in which each recipient acknowledged the prize. Thus, Mr. Wilson said in a letter read by the American Minister to Norway:

In accepting the honor of your award, I am moved by the recognition of my sincere and earnest efforts in the cause of peace, but also by the very poignant humility before the vastness of the work still called for by this cause.

May I not take this occasion to express my respect for the far-sighted wisdom of the founder in arranging for a continuing system of awards? If there were but one such prize, or if this were to be the last, I could not, of course, accept it, for mankind has not yet been rid of the unspeakable horror of war.

I am convinced that our generation has, despite its wounds, made notable progress, but it is the better part of wisdom to consider our work as only begun. It will be a continuing labor. In the definite course of the years before us there will be abundant opportunity for others to distinguish themselves in the crusade against the hate and fear of

war.

There is, indeed, a peculiar fitness in the grouping of the Nobel rewards. The cause of peace, and the cause of truth are of one family. Even as those who love science and devote their lives to physics or chemistry, even as those who create new and higher ideals for mankind in literature, even so with those who love peace, there is no limit set. Whatever has been accomplished in the past is petty compared to the glory of the promise of the future.1

Mr. Bourgeois received the announcement while in attendance upon the League of Nations, and was informed by the President of the Assembly of the honor conferred upon him. In reply, he said:

Mr. President and my dear colleagues, the emotion which I feel prevents me from replying at length to the touching words of the President. I feel profoundly the unanimity with which the Assembly has associated itself with the President's words, and I will only make a very short reply. But it is a reply which comes from the bottom of my heart. If I have been greatly honored in being awarded this prize, I wish to attribute all the honor to my country for the very high distinction. In choosing me the Nobel Committee chose a Frenchman because it wished to point out and distinguish particularly the part played by France in putting forward the ideas which are common to all of us— France, the soldier of Right, whose sacrifices have surpassed all other nations. If France has thus acted in defending its liberty during the War, it will do the same in peace on behalf of justice which is the foundation of all peace. I am glad that the news arrived at a time when we were met together here at Geneva, for thus it forms a further encouragement to us to continue in our labors and to lay the indestructible foundation on which the peace and the freedom of humanity depend.2

Whether we be advocates or opponents of the League of Nations, it must be admitted that President Wilson brought it into being, and whether we approve or disapprove the part which Mr. Bourgeois took in framing the Covenant and in directing the League of Nations, we must acknowledge that for many years, in season and out of season, he stood for the Hague Conferences and the juridical organization of the society of nations. The good in the work of each will survive. The ultimate form which a league, or an association, or a society of nations shall assume, the future alone can decide. JAMES BROWN SCOTT

1 New York Times, Dec. 11, 1920, p. 11.

2 Provisional Verbatim Record, 19th Plenary Meeting, First Assembly of the League of Nations, Geneva, Dec. 11, 1920, pp. 2-3.

FEDERAL LEGISLATION UPON CIVIL AERONAUTICS

Within the past year a large number of bills have been introduced in Congress to regulate the operation of civil aircraft in interstate and foreign The most recent of these is the bill (Senate 2448) of Senator Wadsworth, chairman of the Military Affairs Committee, which provides for the establishment of a Bureau of Aeronautics in the Department of Commerce, administered by a Commissioner of Civil Aeronautics. The Commissioner is given the power, with the approval of the Secretary of Commerce, to issue regulations having the force of law, to license pilots and register and license civil aircraft and airdromes; to establish the conditions under which civil aircraft may be used for transporting persons or property; to prohibit navigation over military, naval and postal areas; and to establish the rules of traffic applicable to air routes and stations. In addition to the exercise of these delegated legislative functions, the bill proposes that the Commissioner shall foster civil aeronautics by the establishment of air stations, meteorological services and signaling systems, as well as by research and the collection and publication of information upon a broad scale. The Commissioner is also charged with the duty of carrying into effect international aeronautical agreements and treaties.

The proposed legislation has evidently taken account of the difficulties in the way of complete national control of aerial navigation. It derives its authority under the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution and not under the treaty-making power or the admiralty clause; but the scope of national control is enlarged by extending its application to the airspace above navigable streams, rivers and waters of the United States, post roads and post routes, the District of Columbia, the Territories, dependencies and other areas over which the Federal Government has jurisdiction.

The necessity for national regulation has already been referred to in this JOURNAL. The special committee of the American Bar Association at its meeting at Cincinnati in September, recognized the imperative need of such legislation, and stated "that the law respecting aeronautics is the one fundamental vital problem of the actual commercial development of the art at the present time" (p. 27). While the committee has performed a valuable public service in emphasizing the importance of observing the constitutional requirements in adopting any new legislation upon aeronautics, it would appear to be most unfortunate if all national legislation upon the subject were to be deferred until an amendment to the Constitution be adopted granting complete jurisdiction to the Federal Government over aerial navigation. The committee seems to have favored this delay, and, indeed, it was upon this point that the report, although finally adopted, met with strong opposition when presented at Cincinnati. We believe, in