« ПретходнаНастави »
The principles constituting the American philosophy of government must, the author holds, be made in like manner the foundation of whatever international institutions may be established between the nations for the regulation of their mutual relations. A cooperative union of nations is, indeed, desirable, but the government which it sets up must be of a limited character, guaranteed by its very organization against the possibility of exercising arbitrary power. As a model for such a "cooperative union," the author points to the Pan American Union and shows how a similar organization might be adapted to the larger union of the nations. The government of the union might take the form of a " directorate," whose duty it would be to give counsel to the nations by investigating facts and proposing awards, leaving it to the voluntary act of the separate nations to put the counsel given into effect. Enlightened self-interest, seen to be the interest of the community of nations as a whole, would replace compulsion as a factor in international government.
Judging it by this test, the author felt it necessary to reject the League of Nations as a solution of the problem of international union. Until the American philosophy of individual rights was more generally accepted it was unwise, and indeed unconstitutional, for the United States to enter the new "body politic and corporate" which would have a "political and legal personality distinct from that of the United States" (p. 157). Moreover, the Covenant failed to impose upon the organization it created the restraints necessary to substitute justice and law for force as a factor in international relations. Before there could be any "general obligatory union of States" there was still much work for political scientists in all countries, in introducing into the constitutions of their states the checks needed to bring the foreign offices of their governments under more direct control.
While there is a note of idealism—a belief in law and reason as the agencies of international progress—in the position taken by Mr. Snow with which the reviewer is heartily in accord it is impossible at times to follow him in his abstract theory of individual rights and in his belief in the superior wisdom and justice of the United States. The record of American foreign policy does not seem to justify the statement that it is "the failure of other nations to accept our philosophy and system" which particularly stands in the way of international arbitration (p. 31); nor does it appear that "the wars which the United States has fought have all been for the purpose of protecting the fundamental rights of the individual and maintaining the nation as the guardian of those rights" (p. 33). The political ideals of the United States have doubtless contributed largely to the progress of good government in the world; they have not always been followed in its own domestic and foreign policies.
C. G. Fenwick.
Manuel de Droit International Privi. By André Weiss. 8th ed. Paris: Librairie de la Société du Recueil Sirey. 1920. pp. xxviii, 712.
The public has set its seal of approval upon this work by requiring eight editions within the space of a generation, and since, as the author tells us, this edition does not differ noticeably from the preceding one, it is not necessary to enter into a detailed consideration of the contents. The primary purpose of the manual is to discuss the theory of the conflict of laws, but Professor Weiss, to meet the requirements of the French educational program, has also included the subjects of nationality and the rights of aliens, which, as he truly remarks, constitute a natural introduction.
In a short preliminary chapter the principles of international law are stated with truly French clarity and precision. The conflicts which it is the purpose of international law to settle may be divided as regards the interests concerned into two classes. The first of these comprises the conflicts which relate to matters of general interest. They fall within the province of public (international) law. In such differences, Professor Weiss explains, the interests of the state as a Power—or international person—are at stake, and the state acts in its own name. In controversies of the second class we have to do with the interests of individuals, and the state intervenes only as the guardian of the private interests of its nationals. Since two sovereignties are here in conflict, just as in the preceding cases, we have to do with an international controversy, only the interests affected are not the same and this difference corresponds to the difference between the two important branches of international law: that of Public and that of Private International Law. Accordingly, Professor Weiss defines Private International Law to be "the collection of rules applied to the settlement of conflicts which arise between two sovereignties, either in regard to their respective laws governing individual interests (lois priveis) or in regard to the individual interests of their nationals" (p. xxv).
Clear as this definition appears at first sight, the author confesses that "nothing is more difficult than to determine its exact application" (p. xxvi). For instance, he does not, as he explains, entirely agree with the late Professor Renault that extradition pertains to public rather than to private international law, but he essays to avoid this difficulty by classing extradition under a separate heading entitled International Criminal Law (Droit international criminel). May not this difficulty of application be due to a defect in the basic conception and definition of private international law? When these controversies of private international law are regulated by treaty stipulations do they not pass forthwith into the realm of public international law? In the case of interposition for any denial of the rights of a state's nationals is not the interest primarily individual? The answer to these questions must be left to the specialists who are thoroughly conversant with all the intricacies of the matter, but the student of international relations may perhaps be permitted to question whether they have as yet supplied him with a satisfactory definition and system of classification.
Be that as it may, no one is better qualified to speak with authority than M. Weiss, who has been for so many years professor of public and private international law at the University of Paris, who is a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, and who has through his position of legal advisor to the French Foreign Office kept in the closest touch with practical affairs.
Ellery C. Stowell.
An Introduction to the Problem of Government. By Westel W. Willoughby and Lindsay Rogers. Garden City, N. Y., and Toronto: Doubleday, Page & Co. 1921. pp. x, 545. Index.
This is a joint work by the Professor of Political Science in the Johns Hopkins University and the Associate Professor of Government in Columbia University. The purpose of the volume, as stated by the authors, is to introduce the reader to the problems of constitutional and popular government. This they undertake to do, not by simply furnishing an outline of the manner in which modern governments are organized, but by giving an insight into the principles behind the facts.
Numerous and copious footnotes contain summary treatment of phases of the subject which do not come within the full treatment of the text, and a list of topics for further investigation appended to each chapter directs the student who would know more of the subject after reading this introduction.
The twenty-four chapters of text are followed by an appendix of illustrative documents, including the Overman Act of May 20, 1918, authorizing the President to redistribute the functions of the executive departments; a reprint from the Literary Digest of October 30, 1920 on "Lobbies and Lobbyists in Washington"; Rules for the operation of Proportional Representation drafted when the British Reform Act of 1918 was under consideration; the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921; and the Constitution of Japan.
George A. Finch.
PERIODICAL LITERATURE ON INTERNATIONAL LAW
Abbreviations: American Bar Association Journal (Amer. Bar Ass. J.); American Law Review (Amer. L. R.); American Political Science Review (Amer. Pol. Sc. R.); Archiv des offentlichen Rechts (Arch. d. dffenU. Reehts); British Year Book (Br. Y. Book); Canadian Law Times (Can. L. T.); Harvard Law Review (Harvard L. R.); Hispanic American Historical Review (Hispanic Amer. Hist. R.); Journal of American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology (J. Crim. L.); Juridical Review (Jur. R.); North American Review (N. Amer. R.); Revue de Droit International et de Legislation Comparee (R. Dr. Inter, et Ligis. Comp.); Revue de Droit International Priv6 et de Droit Penal International (R. Dr. Inter. Privi et Dr. Penal Inter.); Revue Generate de Droit International Public (R. Gen. Dr. Inter. Public); Revue Internationale du Droit Maritime (R. Inter. Dr. Maritime); University of Pennsylvania Law Review (Pa. U. L. R.); Yale Law Journal (Yale L. J.); Zeitzchrift fur Internationales Recht (Zeitzchrift fur Inter. Recht).
Aland Islands. La Convention relative a la non-fortification et a la neutralisation des lles d'Aland. R. Dr. Inter, et Ligis. Comp. 1921. 3rd series 2:568.
Argentine-Brazil. Treaty of Tortesillas and the Argentine-Brazilian Boundary Settlement. Mary Wilhelmine Williams. Hispanic Amer. Hist. R. Feb. 1922. 5:3.
Belgium-France. La Compétence forum contractus sous le régime par la Convention du 8 Juillet 1899. Albert Luyssen. R. Dr. Inter. et Ligis. Comp. 1922. 3rd series 3:82.
Bryce. Viscount Bryce, O. M. Historian and Publicist. D. P. Heatley. Jur. R. Mar. 1922. 34:58.
Bynkershoek. Histoire Litteraire du droit Corneille van Bynkershoek. Ernest Nys. R. Dr. Inter, et Ligis. Comp. 1922. 3rd series. 3:67.
Carilie. La question de la Carelie orientale. R. Erich. R. Dr. Inter, et Ligis. Comp. 1922. 3rd series. 3:1.
Central American Union. Edward Perry. Hisp. Amer. Hist. R. Feb. 1922. 5:30.
Colonization. Penal Settlement and. Robert Heindl. J. Crim. L. May 1922. 13:56.
Commercial Letters of Credit (concluded). Wm. E. McCurdy. Harvard L.R. Apr. 1922. 35:715.
Constitutions. The Government of Argentina. Austin F. MacDonald. Hispanic Amer. Hist. R. Feb. 1922. 5:30.
1 (Limited to articles published in the periodicals exchanged with the American Journal of International Law.)
Constitutions. New European Constitutions in Poland, Czechoslovakia and the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croates and Slovenes. Ralston Hayden. Amer. Pol. Sc. R. May 1922. 16:211.
Divorce. Les Rapports franco-suisses relatifs a la compétence des tribunaux respectifs en matiere de questions d'Etat et spécialement de divorce et de separation de corps (concluded). Camille Jordan. R. Dr. Inter. Privi et Dr. Pen. Inter. 1921. 17:481.
Extraterritoriality. American Consular Court system in China. Crawford M. Bishop. Amer. Bar Ass. J. Apr. 1922. S:221.
France in the Dock. Stephane Lauzanne. N. Amer. R. May 1922. 2/5:613.
International Labor organizations. "Yellow" and "Red" Trade Unions. Leo Pasvolsky. N. Amer. R. May 1922. 215:621.
International Law. How fundamental International Law is to be discovered. Jackson H. Ralston. Amer. L. R. Mar .-Apr. 1922. 55:236.
. Philosophie du Droit International. Louis Le Fur. 72. Gin.
Dr. Inter. Public. Nov.-Dec. 1921. 2nd series. 3:565.
International Law Institute. L'Institut de droit international. Session de Rome. (Octobre 1921) Marcel Sibert. R. Gin. Dr. Inter. Public. Nov.-Dec. 1921. 2nd series. 3:604.
International Maritime Law. La Conference d'Anvers du Comite Maritime International 28-30 juillet 1921. R. Inter. Dr. Maritime. 1922. 33:294.
. Les Règles de la Haye et leur mise en application. Le point de
vue des armateurs français. Paul de Roussiers. R. Inter. Dr. Maritime. 1922. 33:683.
. Les Règles de la Haye 1921. Compte rendue critique de la
Conference de la Haye. Leopold Dor. R. Inter. Dr. Maritime. 1922. 33:701.
. The Reception of the Hague Rules 1921 in the United Kingdom. W. R. Bisschop. R. Inter. Dr. Maritime. 1922. 33:260.
International Organization. Sanctions and Guaranties in International Organization. Pitman B. Potter. Amer. Pol. Sc. R. May 1922. 16:297.
. The United States and world organization. Edwin D. Dickinson. Amer. Pol. Sc. R. May 1922. 76:183.
Interparliamentary Union. Union interparlementaire de la paix, Session de Stockholm (1921). R. Gin. Dr. Inter. Public. Nov.-Dec. 1921. 2nd series. 3:631.
Mixed Arbitral Tribunals. Die Gemischten Schiedsgerichtshôfe. Ernst Zitelmann. Zeitschrift fur Inter. Recht. 1921. 25:248.