« ПретходнаНастави »
patent that the necessity for representation in international organizations has brought forward what is practically a new voice in international relations, the non-sovereign territory. And this fact, applied to the practical matter of juridic equality, seems to warrant certain conclusions which are likely to have an important bearing upon the development of representation in conferences. Descriptively phrased these conclusions are:
1. Short of diplomatic participation and so long as it is definitely understood that the basis or object of the organization is administrative rather than diplomatic, there seems to be no inclination to exclude nonsovereigns from international organs. The test in this connection seems to be that the non-sovereign shall possess a distinct administrative department properly coming within the scope of the organ.
2. Self-governing non-sovereigns, which, in the British Empire, have practically assumed independent status except for a common bond of imperial interest, are showing a disposition to participate in international organs in a more definite manner than by the present theoretical representation through the diplomats of the actual sovereign. For the present, this tendency is satisfied by means of consultation and discussion of policy around what may be termed the family table of the sovereign. Self-governing non-sovereigns, however, are likely to have interests very diverse from the sovereign, and it is a grave question whether these interests can be successfully espoused through the envoys of the latter, especially when the actual political bond in all other respects is so tenuous. The problem of the admission of self-governing non-sovereigns is almost sure to come before international diplomatic conferences in the future, because of a presumptive desire of the sovereign to exert a voting power more in accordance with its actual importance than can be granted under the present system, and also to avoid the unsatisfactory necessity of representing, at second hand, the interests of considerable territories which practically control their own affairs.
DENYS P. MYERS.
BOARD OF EDITORS OF THE AMERICAN JOURNAL
OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
CHANDLER P. ANDERSON, New York, N. Y.
Editor in Chief JAMES BROWN SCOTT, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
Washington, D. C.
THE EIGHTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY The Eighth Annual Meeting of the Society will be held this year as usual during the last week of April.
The Committee on the Eighth Annual Meeting has decided to divide the sessions into three groups for the separate consideration of three different subjects which the Committee has deemed it advisable that the Society should consider.
In the first place, the prominence given by recent events to the Monroe Doctrine and its application, led the Committee to decide that a thorough discussion of the Monroe Doctrine in all its phases by competent and impartial speakers would be a useful piece of work for the Society to undertake. It is expected that the subject will be subdivided
into topics which will allow separate treatment of the history of the inception of the doctrine, of its history during certain periods of time, and of examples of its practical application. It is also expected that other topics will include misconceptions and misapplications of the doctrine, and the attitude of other governments toward it. The topics and speakers have not yet been arranged by the Committee, but as soon as they are arranged tentative programs will be sent to the members of the Society.
Secondly, the Committee decided to accede to a request of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, made through the Director of its Division of International Law, that the Society place upon the program of its Eighth Annual Meeting the subject of the teaching of international law in American institutions of learning. It appears that the Endowment is working upon a “plan for the propagation, development, maintenance and increase of sound, progressive and fruitful ideas on the subject of arbitration and international law and history as connected with arbitration." The Endowment desires the Society to cooperate in carrying out this plan by placing the above mentioned subject on the program of its next annual meeting and inviting the teachers of international law and the deans of all law schools in which international law is not now taught to attend the meeting and participate in the discussions, the travelling expenses of such instructors to be paid by the Endowment. A list of seven specific questions which the conference of teachers will be asked to consider is included in the communication from the Endowment. These questions will be printed in the tentative program. The Endowment also requested permission from the Society to circulate at the Endowment's expense among the educational institutions of the country the Proceedings of the next annual meeting containing the discussions and conclusions on the questions referred to.
The third subject to be considered at the meeting will be the report of the Committee on Codification, which the Committee on the Annual Meeting understands the Committee on Codification is now ready to make.
It is expected that this program will make it necessary to add a day to the length of the meeting, so that instead of opening on Thursday night as heretofore, the meeting will begin on Wednesday night, April 22nd, at 8 o'clock, continue throughout Thursday, Friday, and Saturday morning and end with a banquet on Saturday evening April 25th.
The three evening sessions will be devoted to the consideration of the Monroe Doctrine, the morning and afternoon sessions of Thursday and Friday will be taken up with the consideration of the subject of the teaching of international law in American institutions of learning, and the session of Saturday morning will be devoted to the report of the Committee on Codification and to the business of the Society. The meeting will be held this year at the New Willard Hotel.
All members who can possibly do so are urged to attend the annual meeting. The subjects should interest every international lawyer and every teacher and student of international law. They will be presented by men of authority and ability, and all members who desire to discuss the questions will be at liberty to do so after the formal papers are read. The printed proceedings for this year should form one of the most valuable publications of the Society. In addition, the annual banquet is always a most enjoyable ending to the meeting. It is expected that the annual banquet will be up to the high standard already set for the excellence and prominence of the speakers.
MR. BACON'S MISSION TO LATIN AMERICA
Last fall the Honorable Robert Bacon, formerly Secretary of State and Ambassador to France, undertook a journey to South America on a mission for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “to secure the interest and sympathy of the leaders of opinion in the principal Latin American Republics, in the various enterprises for the advancement of international peace which the Endowment is seeking to promote; and by means of personal intercourse and explanation to bring about practical coöperation” in these undertakings. With the exception of Mr. Root's official visit, as Secretary of State in 1906, no journey by a citizen of the United States has done quite so much to encourage and stimulate the development of cordial and helpful international relations between the republics of North and South America, as this memorable trip of Mr. Bacon. He visited Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile and Peru, being prevented by difficulties in arranging steamship and railroad connections from visiting the other countries as planned in his itinerary. In each country visited, Mr. Bacon was received with the utmost cordiality by the government, and officially entertained. The diplomatic representatives of the United States did everything in their power to render his stay in the capital cities effective of results; and prominent citizens representing all elements of the business, professional and social life vied with each other in imparting to his mission the dignity and significance which its importance bespoke. The University of Santiago gave him an honorary degree, as did also the University of Lima; and various scientific and legal societies elected him to honorary membership. His mission was everywhere welcomed sympathetically in the newspaper press, which fully reported his public addresses. The success of his mission was greatly promoted by his ability to address his audiences in the Spanish, Portuguese and French languages.
Mr. Bacon's more important addresses were delivered in Rio de Janeiro, under the auspices of the Brazilian Academy, the Institute of the Order of Advocates, and also at the American Embassy; in Montevideo at the Ataneo, under the auspices of the University; in Buenos Aires, before the Faculty of Law of the University; in Santiago, at the University of Chile; and in Lima, at the University of San Marcos and before the Colegio de Abogados.
In each of these addresses and in his numerous conferences with the government officials, with educators and distinguished citizens, Mr. Bacon directed attention to certain of the specific plans of the Endowment, one of the most important of these being the formation of national societies to be affiliated with the American Institute of International Law. In each country visited, committees were at once appointed to organize such societies, and in several of them the organization has already been effected. This feature of Mr. Bacon's work is of especial interest to the readers of this JOURNAL; and we may safely predict that as a result of it this promising institution will soon become an actual reality, establishing a new point of contact and a new bond of sympathy between the jurists and the statesmen of the northern and southern hemispheres. Both political circumstances and geographic situation have created new and special conditions, making possible understandings which, while not inconsistent with or antagonistic to the principles of European international law, permit agreements upon matters regarding which the rest of the world cannot yet agree. A distinguished professor of law at Padua stated the case concisely and completely, when he said that “the probable coöperation of two autonomous institutes is preferable to the practically impossible collaboration between dissimilar elements of the same association.”
Mr. Bacon suggested the active participation of the several govern