International Law

Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)

that code of rules by which nations have agreed to be governed in their relations with each other. It differs from the codes of law governing the internal affairs of individual states in the fact that its rules are less definitely fixed and that there is no authority behind and above it, with power to interpret or enforce its provisions and to punish those guilty of violating them. In the absence of such judicial and administrative authority, it depends for its vitality upon the good faith and mutual understanding of those by whom and for whom it has been created, quickened by a wholesome respect for the opinion of the world and an equally wholesome realization of the consequences which may follow upon its violation. The world has recently had a striking demonstration of what these consequences may be in an extreme case, and as a result of this demonstration it is safe to say that International Law which in 1914 seemed to be dead, is in 1921 more vigorously alive than it has ever been at any previous period in its history. The fundamental principles of International Law are fairly well established. In theory they coincide with the principles of justice, humanity, courtesy and reasonableness which are supposed to regulate the relations of individuals in their intercourse with each other in any civilized and especially in any Christian community. The rules governing the ap plication of the principles to specific questions arising between nations are less clear, and it is in this field chiefly that differences arise between nations, passing frequently into disputes and not infrequently into wars. It is in this field, also, that progress is being constantly made through international conferences and arbitral decisions. If the progress thus far made does not give promise of immediate universal peace, it gives promise at least of a general ding such understanding as will make it constantly more difficult to justify war by manufactured grievances. The beginnings of International Law coincide with the beginnings of international relations. No sort of peaceful intercourse between nations or cities or even tribes can be conceived without assuming some rules governing such intercourse. A well developed, though limited, code existed between the citystates of Greece of which Athens and Sparta were the leaders, and between the Latin city-states of early Roman history . With the extension of the Roman power until it covered the civilized world, the necessity for "international" rules ceased to exist. The law of Rome was the law of the world. In the first few centuries following the fall of Rome, Roman civilization and culture, including Roman Law, were assimilated by the new nations of Western Europe. With the conquests of Charlemagne and his assumption of the imperial title in 800, the Roman tradition took on a new lease of life; and for many centuries thereafter the fiction persisted of a "Holy Roman Empire" with a dual government of Church and State, claiming universal sovereignty and so keeping alive the conception of a superstate and a super-law. Thus it came about that when the modern world, in the middle of the seventeenth century emerged from the desolation of the Thirty-Years War, and thoughtful men began to seek for something in the way of an agreement that should make for a better understanding between nations, they found a code existing whose underlying principles could be adapted to internationalization, and a world to which the conception of such internationalization was not entirely strange. They found existing also a treatise on "The Law of Peace and War" in which the transition from national to international law was indicated with remarkable precision and a new and broader code developed in which full weight was given to international customs already existing and to the principles of humanity and morality which are the basis of Christian civilization and ethics. This treatise, published at Paris in 1625 by a Dutch jurist, Hugo Grotius, the "Father of International Law," marks the beginning of a new era in international relations and in the development of International Law as a science. Among the writers who have followed Grotius, the following are deserving of mention as having contributed something of precept or enlightenment to the subject: Pufendorf, 1632-1694; Bynkershoek, 1673-1743; Vattel, 1714-1767; Wheaton, 1785-1848; Kent, 1763-1847; and more recently, the following: following ng: W. E. Hall, T. J. Lawrence, L. Oppenheim, A. P. Higgins, Englishmen; and J. B. Moore, G. G. Wilson, and T. D. Woolsey, Americans. Among the most important subjects dealt with by International Law may be mentioned the following: The rights and privileges of the subjects of one country residing in another country. The rights and privileges of Ambassadors, Envoys and Consuls. The Extradition of criminals. Rules of Commerce and Navigation. Rules for international postal systems. Rules of Land and Sea Warfare; including neutral and belligerent rights and responsibilities, blockade, visit and search, contraband of war, immunity of hospitals, ambulances, etc. The most important advances in International Law since the days of Grotius have come about through international conferences, of which many have been held during the last three-quarters of a century. The most notable of these are the following: I. The Peace Conference following the Crimean War. This Conference appended to the treaty of peace a declaration known as "The Declaration of Paris" in which the following important principles were adopted by the signatory powers and proposed for acceptance by the world. (1) Privateering is and remains abolished. (2) A neutral flag goods from capture on the sea, except protects enemy contraband of war. (3) Neutral goods under an enemy's flag are not subject to capture at sea, except contraband of war. (4) A Blockade to be binding must be effective. The United States refused to accept the Declaration of Paris, not because of any objection to its provisions, but because provisions (2) and (3) did not go far enough. The historical American policy has always favored the complete mption from capture capture of private prop property on the sea, whether belonging to neutral or enemy subjects, always with the exception of contraband of war. Thus the immunity granted by the Declaration of Paris to enemy property only when under a neutral flag was not acceptable. The doctrine that all private property except contraband is immune from capture at sea is the doctrine, much talked of and little understood, of "The Freedom of the Seas." II. The Geneva Conference of 1864. This was a conference assembled to formulate rules for ameliorating the condition of the sick and wounded in time of war. It agreed upon a series of rules which, with some extensions growing out of later conferences, have been accepted by all civilized nations. Out of this conference came the "Red Cross" organization with its widely varied activities covering practically the whole world and with its sign, a red cross on a white ground, which is supposed to protect hospitals, ambulances, etc., with their operating staffs. The violations of the Red Cross flag are among the most barbarous of the acts of Germany during the World War. III. The First Hague Conference, 1899, This Conference called upon the initiative of the Czar of Russia for the consideration of certain large questions of International Law and relations adopted three conventions, dealing with: (1) The creation of an International Court of Arbitration for the settlement of international disputes without recourse to war. (2) Revision and improvement of the Laws of War on Land. (3) The adaptation of the rules of the Geneva Convention to warfare on the sea. IV. The Second Hague Conference, 1907. This Conference revised, extended and confirmed the work of the First Hague Conference and took up a large number of new questions among the most important of which were: (1) The rights and duties of neutral states in time of war. (2) The use of submarine contactmines. (3) The bombardment of undefended places by Naval forces. (4) The establishment of an International Court of Appeal for Prize cases. New principles and practices in Inter- L national Law are frequently established, either temporarily or permanently, by the acts or declarations of a single government. It is interesting to note that the United States has in a number of important instances assumed leadership of this character, and always along lines of enlightened liberality and unselfishness. The following are among the most notable cases of this kind: The proclamation of neutrality as between Great Britain and France issued by Washington in 1793 constituted a new epoch in the usages of nations and has since been adopted as a model by all other governments. The Monroe Doctrine of 1820 has protected the weak republics of this continent against the monarchial governments of Europe for a hundred years. The "Laws of Land Warfare," issued by the United States Government in 1863 for the government of its armies in the field represented an immense advance upon previous rules and have been copied by all other military powers and followed by all except Germany. Secretary Hay's policy of the "Open Door" for China has been generally accepted, though not always followed, as establishing the attitude of the world toward the troublesome "Far Eastern Question." As has been already explained, the United States has always occupied advanced ground on the "Freedom of the Seas." The developments of the World War have modified the conditions of warfare in many directions and introduced many new factors, some of them of great significance. Both submarine and aerial warfare have taken on a character never before anticipated, or anticipated only as possible developments of the indefinite future. Contact submarine mines, heretofore limited in their application to shoal waters bordering a coast line, have been planted by thousands in the open sea, in depths up to hundreds of feet. The dropping of bombs from airships on crowded and undefended cities, contrary to all existing laws of warfare, has been common. The use of asphyxiating gases not only in shells projected from guns but in great waves sent down upon an enemy's trenches and battle lines before a favoring breeze, has been, perhaps, the most appalling feature of all. But the tendency of all has been in the same direction, away from every feature that in past wars has tended to soften in some degree the inevitable horrors of warfare and to preserve a semblance of humanity and even of chivalry. The world has now before it the great problem of assimilating into its scheme of Law such of these features as it may elect to retain, with suitable rules for their employment; and rejecting, once for all, those which it may see fit to eliminate. This is the task for a third Hague Conference, and the sooner such a Conference is assembled, the better it will be for humanity. It is true, of course, that the dictates of a new conference may be defied by some future Germany, but there is much reason to hope that the lessons of the recent war and its results will never be entirely forgotten. TRADE, the INTERNATIONAL theory of which has caused more confusion among economists, statesmen and men of affairs than any other economic problem. The important question, which is: has been the bone of controversy, whether or not that country which has the balance of trade in its favor is really the gainer, or in other words, is it better for a country to export more than it imports, receiving the balance in gold? At one time, it was universally believed, and it still is, to a wide extent, extent, derived that the gain which any country by from foreign trade could be estimated into the the amount of money it brought policy of country. Therefore it was the exports every government to encourage idea being and discourage imports, the imports that the more exports exceeded , be the more money, or wealth, would . This was havbrought into the country its favor ing the "balance of trade" in . exceeded If, on the other hand, imports to be exports, obviously gold would have this sent out of the country and, if it was continued for a long period, so be impoverbelieved, the country would ished. To guard against this, many governments gave bounties to exporters and heavy duties were imposed on imports, leading to a system protection. Adam Smith, in his "Wealth of Nations," was the first to expose this fallacy, with so much conviction that largeadopted ly through his influence England countries a free trade policy, and those do so which follow a protectionist policy , trade, but not to interfere with foreign industries. to encourage certain The fallacy was based on the theory, or belief, that gold was actual wealth, wealth. whereas it merely represents Therefore, that gold which a country receives for the "balance of trade" in its favor, represents the difference in value between the goods it has imported and those which it has exported. Having sent out of the country more actual wealth than it has received in return, obviously it is the poorer to the extent of just that difference. If this balance is only temporary, no harm results, as, at a later date, heavier imports will make up for the deficit. But should there be continuous tendency to accumulate a gold, paid for a continuous excess of exports over imports, then the country will gradually grow poorer, unless, as has been the case with England, this gold is invested in foreign countries. Otherwise the increasing supply of gold has a tendency to decrease in value intrinsically, and in the wealth it represents. The nation which hoards gold, its which it has received in exchange for wealth, is inclined toward the condition of the miser, who turns all his possessions into money and, while theoretically very rich, is as poor as the lowest paid laborer. The highest benefits from international trade, therefore, are attained where the exchange of goods is actually trade; that is, where exports are paid with for by their equivalent in value imports. INTERPARLIAMENTARY UNION FOR INTERNATIONAL ARBITRA- TION, an association of members of the legislative branch of the different counintertries to promote arbitration in in 1888 it is national disputes. Formed meeting chiefly famous for its St. Louis in 1904, where it adopted a set of resoluthe United tions urging the President of the States to call a second meeting of In compliance with Hague Conference. the conthis wish the President called to ference which in the main adhered meeting of the program of the St. Louis 1906, the Interparliamentary Union. In at London, the Union drew up a model arbitration treaty for the consideration of the nations.