tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21409646153716691942024-02-07T17:49:29.628-08:00The Gomberg Map of World UnionsA WORLD WITHOUT CANADAUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2140964615371669194.post-37122865251944163142011-12-19T05:05:00.000-08:002011-12-19T05:05:04.902-08:001941 POST-WAR NEW WORLD MAP - "NEW WORLD MORAL ORDER" by MAURICE GOMBERG, 1941-1942Please be kind enough to leave your comments after viewing the pages.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2140964615371669194.post-14221269315936057042011-11-10T08:25:00.000-08:002011-11-15T15:01:11.600-08:001941 POST-WAR NEW WORLD MAP - "NEW WORLD MORAL ORDER" by MAURICE GOMBERG, 1941-1942<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">THE MAP (downloadable):</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7"><span style="font-size: small;">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7</span></a></div><br />
<br />
<center style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <object height="500" id="calameo-viewer-000111790b4f6e810268e-1320942255" width="400"><param name="movie" value="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cviewer.swf?bkcode=000111790b4f6e810268e&langid=en" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cviewer.swf?bkcode=000111790b4f6e810268e&langid=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="400" height="500"></embed></object></span> </center><br />
<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE MAP:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b>Authenticity of The Map</b>:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">"The Map" was found in an online exhibition at the United States Library of Congress in its map collection. The map is authentic, and there are authentic depository records in the name of Maurice Gomberg, himself.</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Here are the original map display pages at the Library of Congress:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query">http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">After all, I had to put the next display page url into "tinyurl" to shorten it, it's a mile long and was warping this page:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://tinyurl.com/25wn9bc">http://tinyurl.com/25wn9bc</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I pdf'd the map display pages at the Library of Congress as a permanent record:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span> <a href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=2140964615371669194&postID=2454137737922794367" id="avg_ls_anch" style="-moz-background-inline-policy: continuous; background: none repeat scroll 0pt 0pt transparent; display: none;"><img id="avg_ls_image" src="chrome://searchshield/content/clock12.png" style="border: medium none; display: none; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt 3px; width: 12px;" /></a> <br />
<table border="0" bordercolor="#e6f0f8" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="3" style="background-color: #e6f0f8; font-family: Verdana,sans-serif; width: 470px;"><tbody>
<tr> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/0001117909293532bbb11" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMVGP0IFd6N-OrpHTPuNk85_DjBTJmtHkPZUO4xY2oav0U-3g3Swz2hwiyuZQa4tdNMBOQIpXczb563yPaAf4dZNGLs1L6OG8YiuA8y8BjsWYSZzXRjh0HpKORog9jEjehI-j_prTa8Vg/s1600/1.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/0001117909293532bbb11"><center>NEW WORLD (MORAL) ORDER</center></a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b2ce60837c2f" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxZF4yje0hrwuzbsaPNXJ6r7Wk-oQ1VIHe3fTZKcW_MXx6oO7biSWjujD8oJW8v4ORV9wcTocbTkzulF3vmu13djHvwjV8ud_g2In1JuFNXprumVjLeOEJirdYDKL6T1adXdSQWoxQVpI/s1600/2.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b2ce60837c2f"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><center>list-world</center></span> </a></span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOWkrxQehb4nFrhc15-CnSF76d0w99O_zUQM0wf1it1aCz9qMzddFUITspR4Z-NxBm0JesioK0lA0CnFv5_UJKuFbAw5gSMPjHH14_sSPFiRqwvuXKqk97to34YHgGXeDzcdBoWDHSzdk/s1600/3.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90"><center>1941MAPLCC</center></a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKNTVqJpnc8sj4xGvXsZSX0z04fTm14I9fK0mvNTyytmhQYB_hHpSDymdS70QZ9S8HviwlWxXl5TlWj0VK-v046uGkBkUUk8bwj8X8TQ7q7JH0a1Ez5g96w1FstzLzZ6YmtINN_U626YA/s1600/4.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08"><center>memory.loc.gov_cgi-bin</center></a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgI2ejhKxpoHgyLRfrp4NA78wOUmXWrhXnMKA6Mc9lkTQN0dyDWFYF98QKzNLuVe3zd1V1KH6Wa-ugVlYPRdLoOjg5oAS3KexWFA0WfL8BSdtnlia6qTwi91x4SZh3S2kmLl6kWjnU3nzA/s1600/5.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><center>MAPA GOMBERGA</center></span></a></span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjP6TRIneYOL8TxIb1u5vh-xQuVMgI_1xKgIHcIJ-cIdJYDk7ay3td9VIBuxMI8KbqiPhmdT4nVnQPelvYxQ69o1Dd-90OJ2Ux-fJdl3P2-Ijh9YGfehFjaxfVqcOMoRJvl6rvSyJsfAg/s1600/6.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e"><center>1942 POST-WAR NEW WORLD MAP</center></a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="33%"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="33%"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> </tr>
</tbody></table><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><br />
<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">First and foremost, this important Map is entitled "Outline," it is not a final disposition of the shape of the future world as contemplated by its planners, who drew it up well before Pearl Harbor (i.e., the entry of the United States of America into WWII).</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b>A little bit more information concerning The Map</b>:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><i><span style="font-size: small;">Details discussed are illustrated at this page, in the "About" tab:</span></i><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><a href="http://the-gomberg-map-of-world-union.blogspot.com/p/about.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">http://the-gomberg-map-of-world-union.blogspot.com/p/about.html</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">1. A professor by the name of Alexander Gella wrote about Maurice Gomberg's POST-WAR NEW WORLD ORDER Map in Polish in London, England in 1985 under the article title "Mapa Gomberga". His article appeared in a Polish journal whose own title translates to "Polish Affairs in the World Perspective".</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">There was a link to an excerpt of the article at [ http://www.wirtualnapolonia.com/teks ], but it is now gone. However, someone has posted an excerpt of the Polish article online with scans of parts of the Map, and this link is good on 23 March 2009, the date of download:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www2.kki.pl/piojar/polemiki/novus/gomberg/gomberg.html">http://www2.kki.pl/piojar/polemiki/novus/gomberg/gomberg.html</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">That link has been PDF'd and that PDF is the document you are looking at right now, embedded from Calameo:</span></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<center><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d">MAPA GOMBERGA</a></div><div style="padding-top: 8px;"><object height="147" id="calameo-mini-000111790f34c120e4c1d" width="240"><param name="movie" value="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cmini.swf?bkcode=000111790f34c120e4c1d&langid=en&clickTo=embed&clickTarget=_blank&autoFlip=0&showArrows=1&page=1"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cmini.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" wmode="transparent" style="width:240px; height:147px" flashvars="bkcode=000111790f34c120e4c1d&langid=en&clickTo=embed&clickTarget=_blank&autoFlip=0&showArrows=1&page=1"></embed></object></div><div style="font-size: 11px;"><a href="http://www.calameo.com/upload/">Publish at Calaméo</a> or <a href="http://www.calameo.com/browse/">browse</a> others.</div></div></center><br />
<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">2. What is quite exciting is that the Map pictured in this Polish article has different marks on it in the upper left-hand corner than appear on the copy deposited into the United States Library of Congress in 1942. It therefore gives us new and vital information: the copy of the Map discussed by Professor Gella in Polish in 1985 is labeled "COMPLETED - OCT 1941" in the upper left-hand corner. The Map was definitely completed before Pearl Harbor. [It should therefore probably be referred to as the "1941" Map; elsewhere, I have called it the "1942 Map".] The United States entered World War II on 7 December 1941.</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">3. The sub-title of the Map, "New World Moral Order," as well as certain statements made in the text of the footer, comes from a speech delivered by President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt on 6 January 1941. </span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGizRZWDLwP3tCP0z7e7RnHQm2U2uRPVXqtcV3HOXg3p6RRRSQHBy9hg2aJSHVDKsjGhEyKLeI_BMtSQDObScqVKbaNOUJluw7Tjein_VfGo-0cCRNFUatANirZazwoICjJTplDXylyQ8/s1600/fdrin1936wapostphoto.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="246" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGizRZWDLwP3tCP0z7e7RnHQm2U2uRPVXqtcV3HOXg3p6RRRSQHBy9hg2aJSHVDKsjGhEyKLeI_BMtSQDObScqVKbaNOUJluw7Tjein_VfGo-0cCRNFUatANirZazwoICjJTplDXylyQ8/s320/fdrin1936wapostphoto.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">That speech is known as the "Four Freedoms" Address to Congress, and the text is here, along with a downloadable <u>sound file</u> of Roosevelt delivering the Address:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fdrthefourfreedoms.htm"><span style="font-size: small;">http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fdrthefourfreedoms.htm</span></a></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is interesting to evaluate these three dates: the completion date of the Map (October 1941), the date the U.S. entered WWII (7 December 1941), and the date of United States President Franklin Theodore Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" address to Congress (6 January 1941) in which he rationalized the conversion of the United States of America to a full-scale war-production economy. </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Two of the "Four Freedoms" bear directly on the post-war role envisaged for the USA <u>by the Gomberg Map</u>, thus President Roosevelt, by his unilateral pronouncement, appears to have altered the Constitution of the United States of America without any process of lawful amendment.</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">4. Someone re-posted the Polish article of Professor Gella, garbled together with broken English from a machine translation done online. I re-ran the translation through <a href="http://poltran.com/">poltran.com</a>, and have been able to glean the following in regard to Maurice Gomberg, whose name appears at the end of the MAP footer text, as if he were the author of the text, as well as appearing on the copyright notice at top left:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">MAURICE GOMBERG was likely an immigrant from Eastern Europe, originally a clockmaker or a watch maker, who sympathized with the Communist Party of America, though [apparently] he was not a member [says the article!]. He had no formal education, but he was nonetheless considered extremely intelligent. </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">This information is based on recollections of some of his contemporaries (who were apparently interviewed by professor Alexander Gella, for his article, written in Polish about Maurice Gomberg and his famous Map: <i>Przeciw polskiej mitologii politycznej</i> (Counter to the polish political mythology), in: <i>Sprawy polskie w perspektywie światowej</i> (Polish Affairs in the World Perspective), London, 1985.</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">5. The new world planned on that map is largely heading toward completion today. We have the European Union, the South American Union (UNASUR) signed on 23 May 2008, and North American Union well under way. In essence, the European Union, which sprang from the European Economic Community, which was developed out of the Coal and Steel treaties (Treaty of Paris), was the template for a world government. </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The purpose of the template is to merge the nations on each continent, and then merge the continents in each hemisphere, and then merge the hemispheres under a one-world government.</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">6. The Gomberg Map is said to have been:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">"[...] discovered by Helen Somers in a window in Philadelphia during World War II. It was completed in October 1941, before Pearl Harbor, was printed in bright colors by a cartographer named Maurice Gomberg in Philadelphia in 1942, and was displayed in his store window. Helen Somers immediately recognized the significance of the map and purchased several. At least a few original copies are still in existence, including one in the Library of Congress in Washington, DC."</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">It looks as if somebody else made a colored hand-drawing of an outline of the map for that story, which is here:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_nwo06.htm">http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_nwo06.htm</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_nwo06.htm" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwD-L47JNLTi72TrB8JL7cqrPOU7WVXzOY1xD3UZEqI-KtuJ3Yenh6-L8tiVuMlq7AsNg6RHUh5lNYHYWa0ej2o7QpGEnELiqWDYBnTDXEESrVwe2hRO13uRc4VqOblnM6ASqUAzOV_So/s1600/299x180-cartoon-map-gomberg.png" /></a></div><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><b>Other links showing the Gomberg Map</b>:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">(These links are active on 21 September 2010)</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Can you read these? Would be great to have a translation in English or in French of the discussion on these pages:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://homepage.interaccess.com/%7Enetpol/POLISH/public/NieZaniechano.html">http://homepage.interaccess.com/~netpol/POLISH/public/NieZaniechano.html</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://homepage.interaccess.com/%7Enetpol/POLISH/historia/41pkt.html">http://homepage.interaccess.com/~netpol/POLISH/historia/41pkt.html</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">TOTAL COLLECTION OF TAGS:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Philadelphia, socialism, Stalin, Roosevelt, Japan, communism, pa, churchill, U.S.A., globalism, 1941, axis, U.S.S.R., New World Order, 1942, United Kingdom, pearl harbor, new world moral order, postwar new world map, world reconstruction, maurice gomberg, world federation, world federalism, world socialism, soviet socialist republics, united states of south america, federated united states of europe, federated united states ot scandinavia, federated union of african republics, union of arabian federated republics, federated republics of india, federated united republics of china, federated republic of greece, independent republic of eire, independent republic of hebrewland, independent republic of turkey, world league of nationalities, western hemisphere, u.s.a. protectorates, population control policy, nationalization of all natural resources, nationalization of international banking, nationalization of an armaments production, world common monetary system, supreme war command of the united nations, supreme military and economic council, North American Union, NAU, SPP, Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, 9/11, September 11th, 2001,</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2140964615371669194.post-12807998220049958252011-10-09T20:19:00.000-07:002011-10-10T03:32:11.198-07:00THE INTERNATIONAL LAW 0F THE FUTURE<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"></div><br />
<center style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><object height="500" id="calameo-viewer-000111790b7c289b9b81c-1317285371" width="520"><param name="movie" value="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cviewer.swf?bkcode=000111790b7c289b9b81c&langid=en" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cviewer.swf?bkcode=000111790b7c289b9b81c&langid=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="520" height="500"></embed></object></span></center><br />
<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><span style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif; font-size: small;">It is intriguing that the World Map of future Soviet Socialist Republics was <br />
copyrighted and published by Maurice Gomberg (a cartographer) in Philadelphia, <br />
PA. in 1942 -- about a month before this Canada-US meeting on the “International <br />
Law of the Future”, described in the article below.<br />
<br />
The map was “completed October 1941” according to one copy in circulation; and <br />
deposited into the United States Library of Congress which stamped it as received <br />
on February 25, 1942, and stamped it again as entered into the "Division of Maps" <br />
on March 31, 1942, according to "Copy 1" in its archives.<br />
<br />
There is speculation that either the Communist Party of America (CPA) or the <br />
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace might have sponsored the map. A <br />
representative of the Carnegie foundation participated in this Canada-USA joint <br />
meeting on the International Law of the Future in 1942-1943.<br />
<br />
It is interesting to speculate whether this meeting or anyone attending might <br />
have had the Gomberg map at their disposal. This article in the CBA contains a <br />
list of names of quite a number of the meeting participants. It would be a useful <br />
exercise for someone with the time to check the names against membership in the <br />
CFR, Rhodes scholarships, Vincent Massey scholarships (similar to the Rhodes), <br />
Communist Party of America, leftist think-tanks and various organizations and <br />
foundations of that nature. I am Canadian, so I have highlighted the Canadian <br />
attendees in bold.<br />
<br />
This 100-page OCR is almost impossible to edit. I am leaving most as-is, and I <br />
hope it benefits someone. KM/HCC<br />
</span><br />
<hr noshade="noshade" size="1" style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;" /><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 1-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
THE CANADIAN BAR REVIEW<br />
<br />
VOL. XXII April, 1944 No. 4<br />
THE INTERNATIONAL LAW 0F THE FUTURE<br />
<br />
<br />
THE CANADIAN BAR REVIEW feels privileged to have the<br />
opportunity of bringing to members of the Canadian profession<br />
the results of two years' deliberations in Canada and the United<br />
States on The International Law of the Future. Cooperation with<br />
the American Bar Association Journal resulting in simultaneous<br />
publication to the Canadian and American professions is tangible<br />
evidence of the desire of the two Bar Associations, always bound<br />
closely by common professional and spiritual ties, to perform<br />
that service to the public which is their raison d'être.<br />
<br />
Naturally, neither the American nor Canadian Association,<br />
by the mere fact of publication, can be considered as endorsing<br />
wholly or partially the views here set forth. What is important,<br />
however, is that both bodies, realizing that the vitality of demo-<br />
cracy lies in knowledge and better understanding, are anxious<br />
to assist in the clarification of issues on the solution of which<br />
depends the security of world peace and the maintenance of<br />
civilization. No greater task has ever challenged the intelligence<br />
of man.<br />
<br />
If our belief in law and a legal ordering of the relations of<br />
men and of communities is to be more than an empty shibboleth,<br />
the legal profession must now face and meet squarely the most<br />
exacting demands ever made upon it to answer that challenge.<br />
In the belief and hope that the labour which has produced the<br />
present statement will help to prepare lawyers to face that<br />
challenge from which they dare not shrink, the Canadian Bar<br />
Association dedicates this issue of the REVIEW.<br />
<br />
C.A.W.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 2-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
278 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XX11<br />
<br />
FOREWORD<br />
<br />
Having courteously arranged to publish the Canadian-<br />
American statement on "The International Law of the Future",<br />
the Editor of the CANADIAN BAR REVIEW has graciously asked<br />
me to write a brief foreword. I feel sure that this statement,<br />
representing as it does the result of a collaboration between<br />
Canadians and Americans, will have an interest for the legal<br />
profession of Canada.<br />
<br />
Two world wars in a single generation have brought a<br />
staggering challenge to our generation. The United Nations<br />
have stated it as our common aim in this war to “lay the basis<br />
of a just and enduring world peace securing order under law to<br />
all nations.” The Moscow Declaration of October 30, 1943,<br />
calls for “the reestablishment of law and order and the inaugu-<br />
ration of a system of general security.” These high purposes<br />
give proper emphasis to the role of law in international affairs.<br />
<br />
Two years ago a number of Canadians and Americans<br />
actively interested in international law began a series of dis-<br />
cussions concerning the direction which might be taken in its<br />
future development. We felt it a duty to seek to make some<br />
contribution toward meeting the need signalized in statements<br />
made by the Secretary of State of the United States and the<br />
Secretary of State for External Affairs of Canada in 1937[1], when they<br />
called for a "revitalizing and strengthening of international law."<br />
<br />
In thirty conferences held in various North American centres,<br />
judges, lawyers, professors, and officials came together to hammer<br />
out the community of views embodied in this statement. It is<br />
therefore not the product of a lone thinker working in the<br />
privacy of his study.[2] Instead, it presents considered and care-<br />
fully wrought conclusions, based upon the experience of the past and<br />
framed to take account of the dire needs of our immediate future.<br />
<br />
On this side of the border we have esteemed it a high<br />
privilege to work with so many able colleagues from various<br />
provinces of Canada. The unity of our national outlook created<br />
between us a sympathetic understanding, and where our ap-<br />
proaches diverged we found advantage on both sides in taking<br />
account of the differences of view.<br />
<br />
We venture to hope that the statement will serve to stimu-<br />
late discussion among members of the legal profession, not<br />
merely in North America but also in other parts of the world.<br />
Its simultaneous publication in the official journals of the<br />
Canadian Bar Association and the American Bar Association<br />
will greatly contribute to that end.<br />
<br />
MANLEY O. HUDSON.<br />
<br />
[1] KM: Neither is it the product of democratic government or public debate.<br />
These people elected themselves to draft the basic notions of a world<br />
government, without apparently bothering to first to investigate who was<br />
actually causing and bankrolling the wars.<br />
<br />
[2] KM: Prime Minister of Canada, Canada, William Lyon Mackenzie King, served as his own Secretary of State for External Affairs (foreign minister). Vincent Massey was a great friend of MacKenzie King. Massey was a member of the inner circle of initiates of the secret society of Cecil Rhodes, whose goal was world government. The tactic of the Rhodes society was to penetrate domestic governments in order to influence foreign affairs and move the nations towards world government. Here, we see Prime Minister King -- whom we know to be under the direct influence of a Rhodes initiate, Vincent Massey -- retaining control over the External Affairs portfolio for Canada and issuing a call, at a strategic moment, for the "revitalizing and strengthening of international law". A "call" this self-appointed committee of some 200 men conveniently purport to answer in drafting the "principles and postulates" that will underlie the Charter of the United Nations, intended basis of world government. (As we learn from a tape of future Prime Minister Louis Stephen Saint-Laurent, addressing the U.N. in 1946.) In other words, the noose of world government is being tightened around the nations in answer to a "call" from a controlee of the Rhodes secret society: the U.N. is about to be set up with a Charter based on the principles derived from these private meetings on “The International Law of the Future”. As will be seen below, these "principles" and the U.N. Charter which adopts them, will contain the germ of "regionalism" required to convert the world map of nation-states to a map of continental unions strongly resembling the Gomberg map completed in Philadelphia in October of 1941. There is as yet no direct evidence of a link between this meeting and "the map", but the facts, as we will see, make it unwise to reject the inference. King then helped found the United Nations in 1945 and attended the opening meetings in San Francisco.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 3-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 279<br />
<br />
Prefatory Note<br />
<br />
Early in 1942, a number of Americans and Canadians began<br />
to consider the possibility of arriving at a community of views<br />
with reference to the steps which might be taken at the end<br />
of the war to increase the usefulness of international law. The<br />
discussions led to numerous investigations, and to a series of<br />
exploratory meetings held at Washington, April 24, 1942; at<br />
New York, May 30-31 and June 27-28, 1942; at Washington,<br />
July 26, 1942; and at Boston, August 8-9, 1942.<br />
<br />
A draft then prepared was considered at a second series<br />
of meetings held at New York, September 20, 1942; at Wash-<br />
ington, September 26-27, 1942; at Chicago, October 10-11,<br />
1942; at Philadelphia, October 17-18, 1942 [FN1]; and at Montreal,<br />
November 14-15, 1942.<br />
<br />
A second draft, with an extensive comment, was considered<br />
at a third series of meetings held at Boston, January 24, 1943;<br />
at New York, February 6-7, 1943; at Philadelphia, February<br />
13-14, 1943; at Washington (two groups), February 26 and<br />
February 27-28, 1943; at Chicago, March 6-7, 1943; at Ottawa,<br />
March 27-28, 1943; at Los Angeles, April 10-11, 1943; at San<br />
Francisco, April 16-17, 1943; and at Denver, April 23-24, 1943.<br />
<br />
In the course of the preparation of a third draft, a tentative<br />
sketch was submitted for comment to the participants in the<br />
discussions, and a further meeting was held at Boston and<br />
Annisquam, July 3-5, 1943. A third draft was circulated on<br />
August 7, 1943.<br />
1. Gomberg map completed October 1941<br />
Philadelphia<br />
2. Pearl Harbor (date) <br />
3. U.S.A. enters WWII <br />
4. meeting at Washington, April 24, 1942 <br />
5. meeting at New York, May 30-31,1942 <br />
6. meeting at New York, June 27-28, 1942 <br />
7. meeting at Washington, July 26, 1942 <br />
8. meeting at Boston, August 8-9, 1942 <br />
9. draft prepared & considered at New York, September 20, 1942 <br />
10. draft prepared & considered at <br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
Table Cell Table Cell Table Cell<br />
<br />
The meetings were attended by different groups of men,<br />
but continuity was maintained by the presence of a few indi-<br />
viduals at all of the meetings. Each of the groups was com-<br />
posed of men, chiefly Americans and Canadians, who were<br />
known to have an active interest in international law. The<br />
participants in the discussions, almost two hundred in number,<br />
were invited without regard to their political affiliations or their<br />
special views. They included judges, practicing lawyers, profes-<br />
sors, government officials and men of special international<br />
experience.<br />
<br />
The statement which follows is presented as a community<br />
of views, formulated after thorough and repeated consultation.<br />
Different features of the statement are due to contributions by<br />
different men, and some of the participants who accepted the<br />
Postulates and Principles did not subscribe to all of the Proposals.<br />
The statement in its entirety reflects the views of a large number<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 4-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
280 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. xxii<br />
<br />
of the participants, but it is not to be taken either in whole or<br />
in part to represent the individual views of any particular person<br />
who participated in the discussions.<br />
<br />
The participants in the discussions included, among others,<br />
the following:<br />
<br />
W. LEWIS ABBOTT, Colorado Springs, Colorado<br />
Professor of Economics and Sociology, Colorado College<br />
<br />
RICARDO J. ALFARO, Washington, D.C.<br />
Secretary General, American Institute of International Law<br />
<br />
L. WARD BANNISTER, Denver, Colorado<br />
Member of Bannister, Bannister & Welter<br />
<br />
OLIVER BENSON, Norman, Oklahoma<br />
Associate Professor of Government, University of Oklahoma<br />
<br />
CLARENCE A. BERDAHL, Urbana, Illinois<br />
Professor of Political Science, University of Illinois<br />
<br />
O. M. BIGGAR, C.M.G., K.C., Ottawa, Ontario<br />
Chairman of the Canadian Section, Permanent Joint<br />
Board on Defence, Canada-United States<br />
<br />
JOSEPH WALTER BINGHAM, Palo Alto, California<br />
Professor of Law, Stanford University<br />
<br />
GEORGE H. BLAKESLEE, Worcester, Massachusetts<br />
Professor of History and International Relations, Clark University<br />
<br />
PERCY BORDWELL, Iowa City, Iowa<br />
Professor of Law, State University of Iowa<br />
<br />
HERBERT W. BRIGGS, Ithaca, NewYork<br />
Professor of Government, Cornell University<br />
<br />
PHILIP MARSHALL BROWN, Washington, D.C.<br />
President, American Peace Society<br />
<br />
ROY E. BROWN, Denver, Colorado<br />
Director of the Department of Government Management,<br />
University of Denver<br />
<br />
HOWARD B. CALDERWOOD, Ann Arbor, Michigan<br />
Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Michigan<br />
<br />
FARRINGTON R. CARPENTER, Hayden, Colorado<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
W. CLAYTON CARPENTER, Denver, Colorado<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
MITCHELL B. CARROLL, NewYork City<br />
Chairman of the Section of International and Comparative Law,<br />
American Bar Association<br />
<br />
BEN M. CHERRINGTON, Denver, Colorado<br />
Director of the Social Science Foundation, University of Denver<br />
<br />
BROOKE CLAYTON, K.C., Montreal, Quebec<br />
Member of Parliament, Dominion of Canada<br />
<br />
KENNETH COLEGROVE, Evanston, Illinois<br />
Professor of Political Science, Northwestern University<br />
<br />
W. HENRY COOKE, Claremont, California<br />
Professor of History, Claremont Colleges<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 5-----------------------<br />
<br />
[1944] The International Law of the Future 281<br />
<br />
<br />
P. E. CORBETT, Montreal, Quebec<br />
Professor of International Law and Jurisprudence,<br />
McGill University<br />
<br />
FREDERIC R. COUDERT, New York City<br />
President, American Society of International Law<br />
<br />
LEONARD W. CRONKHITE, Boston, Massachusetts<br />
Trustee, World Peace Foundation<br />
<br />
HOMER D. CROTTY, Los Angeles, California<br />
Member of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher<br />
<br />
GEORGE F. CURTIS, Halifax, Nova Scotia<br />
Professor of Law, Dalhousie University<br />
<br />
O. K. CUSHING, San Francisco, California<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
JOHN W. DAVIS, New York City<br />
<br />
WILLIAM DENMAN, San Francisco, California<br />
United States Circuit Judge<br />
<br />
WILLIAM CULLEN DENNIS, Richmond, Indiana<br />
President, Earlham College<br />
<br />
MONROE E. DEUTSCH, Berkeley, California<br />
Vice-President and Provost, University of California<br />
<br />
HENRY I. DOCKWEILWER, Los Angeles, California<br />
Counselor at Law; formerly Officer of the American<br />
Foreign Service<br />
<br />
JOHN FOSTER DULLES, New York City<br />
Member of Sullivan & Cromwell<br />
<br />
FREDERICK S. DUNN, New Haven, Connecticut<br />
Professor of International Relations and Director of the<br />
Institute of International Studies, Yale University<br />
<br />
CLYDE EAGLETON, New York City<br />
Professor of International Law, New York University<br />
<br />
LEON HUBBARD ELLIS, Los Angeles, California<br />
Professor and Head of the Department of International<br />
Relations, University of Southern California<br />
<br />
A. H. FELLER, Washington, D.C.<br />
General Counsel, Office of War Information<br />
<br />
CHARLES G. FENWICK, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania<br />
Member, Inter-American Juridical Commission<br />
<br />
GEORGE A. FINCH, Washington, D.C.<br />
Director of the Division of International Law,<br />
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace<br />
FREDERICK C. FISHER, San Anselmo, California<br />
Formerly Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the Philippines<br />
<br />
WALTER T. FISHER, Chicago, Illinois<br />
Member of Bell, Boyd & Marshall<br />
<br />
RUSSELL H. FITZGIBBON, Los Angeles, California<br />
Associate Professor of Political Science, University of California<br />
<br />
RICHARD W. FLOURNOY, Chevy Chase, Maryland<br />
<br />
ALEXANDER HAMILTON FREY, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania<br />
<br />
CARTER GOODRICH, New York City<br />
Professor of Economics, Columbia University; Chairman<br />
of the Governing Body, International Labor Office<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 6-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
282 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
<br />
LELAND M. GOODRICH, Providence, Rhode Island<br />
Associate Professor of Political Science, Brown University;<br />
Director, World Peace Foundation<br />
<br />
LÉON M. GOUIN, K.C., Montreal, Quebec<br />
Member of the Senate, Dominion of Canada<br />
<br />
MALBONE W. GRAHAM, Los Angeles, California<br />
Professor of Political Science, University of California<br />
<br />
J. A. C. GRANT, Los Angeles, California<br />
Professor of Political Science, University of California<br />
<br />
WILLIAM W. GRANT, JR., Denver, Colorado<br />
Member of Grant, Shafroth & Toll<br />
<br />
FARNHAM P. GRIFFITHS, San Francisco, California<br />
Member of McCutcheon, Thomas, Matthew, Griffiths & Greene<br />
<br />
LEO GROSS, Wellesley, Massachusetts<br />
Lecturer in International Law, Wellesley College<br />
<br />
CHARLES GROVE HAINES, Los Angeles, California<br />
Professor of Political Science, University of California<br />
<br />
J. EUGENE HARLEY, Los Angeles, California<br />
Professor of Political Science and International Law,<br />
University of Southern California<br />
<br />
ALBERT J. HARNO, Urbana, Illinois<br />
Dean of the College of Law and Provost, University of Illinois<br />
<br />
ARTHUR HENRY, Denver, Colorado<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
CHRISTIAN A. HERTER, Washington, D.C.<br />
Member of the House of Representatives, Congress<br />
of the United States<br />
<br />
NORMAN HILL, Lincoln, Nebraska<br />
Professor of Political Science, University of Nebraska<br />
<br />
FRANK E. HINCKLEY, San Francisco, California<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
WILBUR J. HINDMAN, Los Angeles, California<br />
Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of<br />
Southern California<br />
<br />
RUDOLF HOLSTI, Palo Alto, California<br />
Acting Professor of Political Science, Stanford University;<br />
formerly Minister of Foreign Affairs of Finland<br />
<br />
MANLEY O. HUDSON, Cambridge Massachusetts<br />
Judge of the Permanent Court of International Justice;<br />
Member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration<br />
<br />
JOHN P. HUMPHREY, Montreal, Quebec<br />
Associate Professor of Law, McGill University<br />
<br />
JOSEPH C. HUTCHESON, JR., Houston, Texas<br />
United States Circuit Judge<br />
<br />
ROBERT H. JACKSON, Washington, D.C.<br />
Justice of the United States Supreme Court<br />
<br />
C. WILFRED JENKS, Montreal, Quebec<br />
Legal Adviser, International Labor Office<br />
<br />
PHILIP C. JESSUP, NewYork City<br />
Professor of International Law, Columbia University<br />
<br />
JACOB J. KAPLAN, Boston, Massachusetts<br />
Member of Nutter, McClennen & Fish<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 7-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 283<br />
<br />
<br />
EDWIN R. KEEDY, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
Dean of the Law School, University of Pennsylvania<br />
<br />
HANS KELSEN, Berkeley, California<br />
Lecturer on Jurisprudence, University of California<br />
<br />
CHARLES E. KENWORTHEY, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
Judge of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania<br />
<br />
C. EDGAR KETTERING, Denver, Colorado<br />
Judge of the County Court<br />
<br />
WILLIAM H. KING, JR., Chicago, Illinois<br />
Member of Cassels, Potter &Bentley<br />
<br />
ARTHUR H. KUHN, NewYork City<br />
Associate of the Institut de droit international<br />
<br />
JOSEF L. KUNZ, Toledo, Ohio<br />
Professor of International Law, University o£ Toledo<br />
College of Law<br />
<br />
STÉPHEN P. LADAS, New York City<br />
Member of Langner, Parry, Card & Langner<br />
<br />
BORA LASKIN, Toronto, Ontario<br />
Assistant Professor of Law, University of Toronto<br />
<br />
WILLIAM DRAPER LEWIS, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
Director, American Law Institute<br />
<br />
IRA S. LILLICK, San Francisco, California<br />
Member of Lillick, Geary, Olson & Charles<br />
<br />
JOSEPH B. LOCKEY, Los Angeles, California -<br />
Professor of History, University of California<br />
<br />
HECTOR MACKAY, K.C., Montreal, Quebec<br />
Professor o£ Law, University of Montreal<br />
<br />
NORMAN A. M. MACKENZIE, K.C.,<br />
Fredericton, New Brunswick<br />
President and Lecturer in International and<br />
Constitutional Law, University of. New Brunswick<br />
<br />
SAYRE MACNEIL, Los Angeles, California<br />
Dean of the School of Law, Loyola University<br />
<br />
LINDER A. MANDER, Seattle, Washington<br />
Professor of Political Science, University of Washington<br />
<br />
CHARLES E. MARTIN, Seattle, Washington<br />
Professor of International Law and Political Science,<br />
University of Washington<br />
<br />
PAUL MARTIN, K.C., Windsor, Ontario<br />
Member of Parliament, Dominion o£ Canada<br />
<br />
WILLIAM E. MASTERSON, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
Professor of Law, Temple University; Chairman of the Committee on International Legal War Problems, American Bar Association<br />
<br />
HUGH MCKINNON-WOOD, Minneapolis, Minnesota<br />
Formerly Counselor in the Secretariat, League of Nations<br />
<br />
ROLLIN L. McNITT, Los Angeles, California<br />
President, Lawyers' Club of Los Angeles<br />
<br />
CHARLES P. MEGAN, Chicago, Illinois<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
HUNTER MILLER, Victoria, British Columbia<br />
<br />
PAIGE MONTEAGLE, San Francisco, California<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
EDMUND M. MORGAN, Cambridge, Massachusetts<br />
Royall Professor of Law, Harvard Law School<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 8-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
284 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
FELIX MORLEY, Haverford, Pennsylvania<br />
President, Haverford College<br />
<br />
ROLAND S. MORRIS, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
<br />
STANLEY MORRISON, Los Angeles, California<br />
Member of Miller, Chevalier, Peeler & Wilson;<br />
Professor of Law, Stanford University<br />
<br />
WILLIAM B. MUNRO, Pasadena, California<br />
Member of the Executive Council, California Institute<br />
of Technology<br />
<br />
JAMES OLIVER MURDOCK, Washington, D.C.<br />
Secretary, American Society of International Law<br />
<br />
NORMAN J. PADELFORD, Medford, Massachusetts<br />
Professor of International Law, Fletcher School of<br />
Law and Diplomacy<br />
<br />
JOHN J. PARKER, Charlotte, North Carolina<br />
United States Circuit Judge<br />
<br />
AMOS J. PEASLEE, Clarksboro, New Jersey<br />
Formerly President of the American Branch, International<br />
Law Association<br />
<br />
EMERIC PFLUEGL, Boston, Massachusetts<br />
Formerly Representative of Austria to the League of Nations<br />
<br />
JOSEPH P. POLLARD, Denver, Colorado<br />
Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of Denver<br />
<br />
PITMAN B. POTTER, Oberlin, Ohio<br />
Professor of Political Science, Oberlin College<br />
<br />
ROSCOE POUND, Cambridge, Massachusetts<br />
University Professor, Harvard University; formerly<br />
Member of the American-British Claims Tribunal<br />
<br />
MAX RADIN, Berkeley, California<br />
Professor of Law, University of California<br />
<br />
LUDWIK RAJCHMAN, Washington, D.C.<br />
Formerly Director of the Health Organization,<br />
League of Nations<br />
<br />
JACKSON H. RALSTON, Palo Alto, California<br />
Formerly Umpire, Italian-Venezuelan Claims Commission<br />
<br />
<br />
MAX RHEINSTEIN, Chicago, Illinois<br />
Max Pam Professor of Comparative Law, University of Chicago<br />
<br />
WILLIAM GORHAM RICE, JR., Madison, Wisconsin<br />
Professor of Law, University of Wisconsin<br />
<br />
CROMWELL A. RICHES, Washington, D.C.<br />
Fiscal Analyst, Bureau of the Budget<br />
<br />
L. S. ROWE, Washington, D.C.<br />
Director General, Pan American Union<br />
<br />
GEORGE RUBLES, Washington, D.C.<br />
Member of Covington, Burling, Rublee, Acheson & Shorb<br />
<br />
FRANK M. RUSSELL, Berkeley, California<br />
Professor of Political Science, University of California<br />
<br />
ALEXANDER N. SACK, New York City<br />
Counselor at Law; formerly Professor of Law, New York University<br />
<br />
EDWARD McCHESNEY SAIT,* Claremont, California<br />
Professor of Government, Pomona College<br />
<br />
* Deceased<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 9-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 285<br />
<br />
<br />
CHARLES CHAUNCEY SAVAGE, JR., Philadelphia,<br />
Pennsylvania<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
F. R. SCOTT, Montreal, Quebec<br />
Professor of Civil Law, McGill -University<br />
<br />
GEORGE WINFIELD SCOTT, Los Angeles, California<br />
Counselor at Law; formerly Professor of International Law<br />
and Diplomacy, University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University<br />
<br />
ARTHUR E. SIMON, Seattle, Washington<br />
Member of Wright, Innis & Simon<br />
<br />
M. C. SLOSS, San Francisco, California<br />
Formerly Justice of the Supreme Court of California<br />
<br />
LOUIS B. SOHN, Cambridge, Massachusetts<br />
<br />
CHARLES STEIN, Ottawa, Ontario<br />
Member of the Quebec Bar<br />
<br />
MARSHALL STIMSON, Los Angeles, California<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
J. E. WALLACE STIRLING, Pasadena, California<br />
Professor of History, California Institute of Technology<br />
<br />
IVAN M. STONE, Beloit, Wisconsin<br />
Professor of Government, Beloit College<br />
<br />
SILAS H. STRAWN, Chicago, Illinois<br />
Formerly President, American Bar Association<br />
<br />
GRAHAM H. STUART, Stanford University, California<br />
Professor of Political Science, Stanford University<br />
<br />
ARTHUR SWEETSER, Washington, D.C.<br />
Formerly Director in the Secretariat, League of Nations<br />
<br />
HENRY W. TOLL, Denver, Colorado<br />
Honorary President, Council of State Governments<br />
<br />
EDGAR TURLINGTON, Washington, D.C.<br />
Secretary of the Section of International and Comparative<br />
ARTHUR E. SIMON, Seattle, Washington<br />
Member of Wright, Innis & Simon<br />
<br />
M. C. SLOSS, San Francisco, California<br />
Formerly Justice of the Supreme Court of California<br />
<br />
LOUIS B. SOHN, Cambridge, Massachusetts<br />
<br />
CHARLES STEIN, Ottawa, Ontario<br />
Member of the Quebec Bar<br />
<br />
MARSHALL STIMSON, Los Angeles, California<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
J. E. WALLACE STIRLING, Pasadena, California<br />
Professor of History, California Institute of Technology<br />
<br />
IVAN M. STONE, Beloit, Wisconsin<br />
Professor of Government, Beloit College<br />
<br />
SILAS H. STRAWN, Chicago, Illinois<br />
Formerly President, American Bar Association<br />
<br />
GRAHAM H. STUART, Stanford University, California<br />
Professor of Political Science, Stanford University<br />
<br />
ARTHUR SWEETSER, Washington, D.C.<br />
Formerly Director in the Secretariat, League of Nations<br />
<br />
HENRY W. TOLL, Denver, Colorado<br />
Honorary President, Council of State Governments<br />
<br />
EDGAR TURLINGTON, Washington, D.C.<br />
Secretary of the Section of International and Comparative<br />
Law, American Bar Association<br />
<br />
ROBERT B. WALKINSHAW, Seattle, Washington<br />
Counselor at Law<br />
<br />
SARAH WAMBAUGH, Cambridge, Massachusetts<br />
Formerly Technical Adviser and Deputy Member,<br />
Saar Plebiscite Commission<br />
<br />
CHARLES WARREN, Washington, D.C.<br />
<br />
ALLEN HUNTER WHITE, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
Member of Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll<br />
<br />
THOMAS RAEBURN WHITE, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania<br />
Member of White & Staples<br />
<br />
JOHN B. WHITTON, Princeton, New Jersey<br />
Professor of International Law, Princeton University<br />
<br />
JOHN H. WIGMORE,* Chicago, Illinois<br />
Formerly Professor of Law, Northwestern University<br />
<br />
FRANCIS O. WILCOX, Louisville, Kentucky<br />
Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Louisville<br />
<br />
PAYSON S. WILD, Cambridge, Massachusetts<br />
Associate Professor of Government, Harvard University<br />
<br />
GEORGE GRAFTON WILSON, Cambridge, Massachusetts<br />
Professor of International Law, Harvard University<br />
<br />
* Deceased<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 10-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
286 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
<br />
ROBERT R. WILSON, Durham, North Carolina<br />
Professor of Political Science, Duke University<br />
<br />
ROBERT GALE WOOLBERT, Denver, Colorado<br />
Professor of History, University of Denver<br />
<br />
LESTER H. WOOLSEY, Washington, D.C.<br />
Formerly Solicitor for the Department of State<br />
<br />
QUINCY WRIGHT, Chicago, Illinois<br />
Professor of International Law, University of Chicago<br />
<br />
JAMES FULTON ZIMMERMAN, Albuquerque, New Mexico<br />
President, University of New Mexico<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 11-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944 The International Law of the Future 287<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
<br />
<br />
For the second time in a single generation; most of the peoples<br />
of the world have become engaged in a world war.<br />
<br />
The fact offers an insistent challenge to the intelligence of<br />
mankind. Unless escape can be found from the recurrence of such<br />
struggles, constructive effort will remain subject to periodical<br />
frustration, and energy which might be devoted to advancing<br />
the general welfare and to relieving peoples from want and distress,<br />
will continue to be directed into channels of destruction. The<br />
spirit of man cries out for a better way of life.<br />
<br />
In days of crisis, it is a temptation to confine discussion to<br />
immediate questions of policy and expediency. Important as<br />
such questions now are, consideration must be given at the same<br />
time to the long-term conditions upon which an enduring peace<br />
will depend.<br />
<br />
The search for means and methods of attaining security<br />
from war encounters problems of many aspects—economic,.<br />
ethical, legal, political, psychological and social. If no one<br />
profession can supply the skill and imagination required for their<br />
solution, no profession can evade responsibility for making its<br />
contribution. A special responsibility would seem to rest on the<br />
legal profession, and particularly on members of the legal profes-<br />
sion who have had experience in international law. For security<br />
depends upon the maintenance of an effective legal order.<br />
The modern system of international law represents a con-.<br />
tinuous development over a period of more than three hundred<br />
years. The last hundred years have seen a remarkable progress<br />
of the law governing the relations of States. As changes have been<br />
wrought in world society, as the population of the world has<br />
grown, and as technological advances have brought peoples closer<br />
together, international law has been greatly enlarged in its content,<br />
and greatly extended in its operation. Yet, as a system, it has<br />
hardly passed out of the stage of primitive law. As an instrument<br />
for meeting the needs of the twentieth century, it has remained<br />
lamentably weak.<br />
<br />
The development of international law has been retarded<br />
both by the lack of international organization and by the insist-<br />
ence of States upon a freedom to use force to accomplish their<br />
ends. It was only in the middle of the nineteenth century that<br />
States abandoned their prejudice against attempts to meet their<br />
common problems by general and concerted effort. A process<br />
of international legislation was begun with reference to problems<br />
which could not be solved by measures taken by individual<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 12-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
288 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
<br />
States, and the latter part of the century was marked by the<br />
formation of several successful leagues of nations for specific<br />
purposes. At the turn of the century, efforts were made to reduce<br />
armaments and to restrict the use of force, but with disappointing<br />
results.<br />
<br />
When a world war came to an end in 1918, disposition<br />
existed to push out along new lines, and remarkable progress<br />
was made over a period of years. Intelligence and zeal were<br />
devoted to current problems of international life on an unpre-<br />
cedented scale, and some advance was made toward a proscription<br />
of force. If a larger measure of success did not attend these efforts,<br />
it was due to a variety of causes-to the halting participation of<br />
some States, to the pursuit of national policies antagonistic to the<br />
general interest, and to dissatisfaction with the territorial and<br />
economic arrangements which had been established. The experi-<br />
ence demonstrated that no scheme of organization and no method<br />
of procedure can be enough in itself. Enduring progress requires<br />
a sustained willingness of peoples to pursue common effort.<br />
With the United Nations playing the dominant role at the<br />
end of a second world war, with large power concentrated in the<br />
hands of peoples who desire to seek escape from the recurrent<br />
necessity of mobilizing for destruction, a world situation may exist<br />
in which the further progress of organized effort can be assured.<br />
To this end, departures will have to be made, new methods will<br />
have to be tried, new institutions will have to be created, and<br />
sound legal foundations will have to be laid. The task must be<br />
approached not only with a knowledge of the history of the past,<br />
but also with a willingness to appreciate the lessons of that<br />
history.<br />
<br />
Lines which might be followed in shaping the international<br />
Law of the future are set forth here under three headings: Postulates,<br />
Principles, and Proposals.<br />
<br />
The Postulates are included to indicate the premises which are<br />
essential for the establishment and maintenance of an effective<br />
legal order in a world of States. They are the foundations on<br />
which the Principles and Proposals have been drafted. Derived<br />
from the experience of the past, they present also an outlook<br />
on the future.<br />
<br />
The Principles are offered as a draft of a declaration con-<br />
cerning the international law of the future which might be adopted<br />
by a competent international authority. Many precedents exist<br />
for such a declaration. Great international conferences have<br />
frequently promulgated principles of international law, and some<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 13-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944 The International Law of the Future 289<br />
<br />
of the declarations made during the past hundred years have had<br />
enduring influence. Such formulations in the past have usually<br />
emphasized the rights of States; in these Principles the emphasis<br />
is placed on the duties of States to which their rights are correlative.<br />
The Proposals are presented, not as a draft of an inter-<br />
national instrument, but as indications of measures which might<br />
be adopted to implement the Principles. They do not purport<br />
to forecast the precise political conditions which will prevail<br />
at the close of the war, nor are they intended to deal with the<br />
vexing problems which will need to be faced in the course of the<br />
transition from war to peace. They are confined to the dis-<br />
positions .which might be adopted and the institutions which<br />
might be maintained for the ordering of the future world society.<br />
They propose agencies and methods and procedures by which the<br />
solution of recurring problems can be sought, rather than the<br />
precise solutions to be given to such problems.<br />
<br />
Following the text of the Postulates, Principles and Proposals,<br />
a comment is added which reviews the history of the past and<br />
explains the needs of the future.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 14-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
290 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
<br />
Postulates for the<br />
International Law of the Future<br />
<br />
These Postulates set forth essential premises of an effective<br />
legal order for the world of States. They are intended to indicate<br />
the basic conceptions upon which the present statement proceeds,<br />
and to furnish a guide to the spirit in which the following Principles<br />
and Proposals have been drafted.<br />
<br />
POSTULATE 1<br />
<br />
The States of the world form a community, and the pro-<br />
tection and advancement of the common interests of their<br />
peoples require effective organization of the Community of States.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
It is to be assumed that the State system which has grown<br />
up over a period of several centuries will continue to exist in the<br />
future.<br />
<br />
Seventy-three States may be said to have existed in 1937,<br />
each enjoying a considerable measure of independence in its<br />
relations with the others. Most of these States will doubtless<br />
continue to exist in the future, despite changes which may be<br />
wrought during the war.<br />
<br />
The maintenance of peace and the furtherance of inter-<br />
national cooperation have to do, for the most part, with the<br />
relations of States. It is chiefly through States that peoples<br />
conduct their relations with other peoples. One may conceive<br />
of a world community which is not composed, or not exclusively<br />
composed, of States. Unofficial contacts between individuals and<br />
between groups of individuals in different countries extend into<br />
almost every field of human activity, and numerous unofficial<br />
associations are maintained to keep such contacts alive and<br />
fruitful. Yet the problems which arise in such relations have not<br />
the same urgency as those which arise in the relations of States.<br />
Most wars are waged by States, and recent changes in the char-<br />
acter of warfare have made it impossible for any but powerful<br />
States to conduct war efficiently. Moreover, the recent extension<br />
of governmental activity in many countries has narrowed the<br />
field of private enterprise, and though States and private groups<br />
are sometimes associated in international organizations, it is<br />
chiefly through inter-governmental action that the consequences<br />
of the interdependence of peoples must be faced. In our time<br />
peace and the advancement of world-wide human interests are<br />
mainly dependent, therefore, upon inter-State relations.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 15-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 291<br />
<br />
The States of the world have long been considered to form<br />
a community, and the description of this community as the<br />
Community of States has been frequently employed in the litera-<br />
ture of international law. Even before the modern improvements<br />
in the means of communication and transportation, peoples<br />
had many interests in common and not infrequently, the pro-<br />
tection of such interests was sought by the common action of a<br />
number of States. With the shrinking of the world during the<br />
past hundred years, the interests common to various peoples have<br />
multiplied many fold; a community feeling among peoples and<br />
an appreciation of their interdependence have become more<br />
firmly established; and efforts to meet their common problems by<br />
common action have been much more frequent. In consequence,<br />
no State in the world any longer desires to be considered as outside<br />
the Community of States-even Nepal has ceased to regard<br />
itself as a hermit State.<br />
<br />
The organization of the Community of States has been<br />
developing over a period of almost one hundred years. In the ,<br />
middle of the nineteenth century it began to be recognized that<br />
the protection of peoples' commoninterests called for continuous<br />
organized effort. Improvements in means of communication and<br />
transportation had given rise to problems which could not be<br />
met by one State acting alone, or even byafew States acting in<br />
concert. Unions of States-were formed for special purposes, and<br />
in time some of them came to embrace most of the States of the<br />
world. The International Telegraphic Union, founded in 1865,<br />
and reorganized as the International Telecommunication Union<br />
in 1932, includes sixty-eight States;the Universal Postal Union,<br />
organized in 1874, united various countries as "a single postal<br />
territory" and, more than seventy States are included in its<br />
membership. Official unions were created for numerous other<br />
purposes -as examples, a European union for international<br />
transport by rail, a union forstandardizingweights and measures,<br />
a union for the protection of industrial property, a copyright<br />
union, and. a union for the publication of customs tariffs, may<br />
be mentioned.In 1905, the International Institute of Agriculture<br />
was established. The International Office of Public Health has<br />
functioned since 1907.The United States of America currently<br />
participates in the work of some fifty international bodies.<br />
<br />
Nor has organized cooperation been confined to technical<br />
fields. In 1889, the republics of the western hemisphere organized<br />
the International Union 'of American Republics, which has had<br />
a fruitful history throughout the years. In 1899, a series of Peace<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 16-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
292 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
Conferences was inaugurated at The Hague, and that city has<br />
continued to serve as a center for efforts devoted to the develop-<br />
ment of international law. In 1919, the League of Nations was<br />
founded.Sixty-three States eventually became members of the<br />
League, and almost all of the States of the world have participated<br />
in some measure in its work over a period of twenty years. The<br />
efforts "to achieve international peace and security" through the<br />
League were attended with success in some notable instances,<br />
but in the general world situation which prevailed after 1931<br />
they were balked by the secession and defiance of certain large<br />
States which were seeking territorial aggrandizement. On the<br />
other hand, the efforts "to promote international cooperation"<br />
through the League achieved such remarkable results that one<br />
may say, as the Secretary of State of the United States declared<br />
in a letter to the Secretary-General on February 2, 1939, "the<br />
League has been responsible for the development of mutual<br />
exchange and discussion of ideas andmethods to a greater extent<br />
and in more fields of humanitarian and scientific endeavor than<br />
any other organization in history." The International Labor<br />
Organization, which began its work in 1919, has numbered sixty-<br />
four States in its membership, and with the cooperation of em-<br />
ployers and workers it has produced in twenty years a great<br />
volume of international legislation. The Permanent Court of<br />
International Justice, which opened its doors in 1922, has func-<br />
tioned with the support of more than fifty States, and its handling<br />
of the sixty disputes which came before it over a period of eighteen<br />
years produced, in most of the cases at any rate, a very general<br />
satisfaction.<br />
<br />
This brief sketch of a hundred years of history indicates<br />
appreciation of the need for a common approach to the problems<br />
of the modern world. No people today wishes to lead its life<br />
without enjoying advantages which are possible only if contri-<br />
butions by other people can be drawn upon, without trade beyond<br />
its frontiers, without availing itself of the fruits of scientific<br />
endeavor, or without contact with other cultures. Even if it<br />
wished, no people is any longer able to supply all that is needed<br />
for its own wants. A complete autarchy is impossible for any<br />
country. The common interests of peoples, their interest in<br />
peace and in the efficacy of daily effort, oblige them to work<br />
together through established agencies, and the protection and<br />
advancement of their interests require effective organization<br />
of the Community of States.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 17-----------------------<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 293<br />
<br />
<br />
POSTULATE 2<br />
<br />
The law of the Community of States is international law.<br />
The development of an adequate system of international law<br />
depends upon continuous collaboration by States to promote<br />
the common welfare of all peoples and to maintain just and peace-<br />
ful relations between all States.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Western and even European in origin, international law was<br />
long conceived to be a law for Christian States, the law of the<br />
family of Christian nations. During the course of the nineteenth<br />
century, however, the wider intercourse of peoples led to the<br />
abandonment of that limitation, and today it is universally<br />
admitted to apply, as the Permanent Court of International<br />
Justice has said, "between all nations belonging to the community<br />
of States." It is, indeed, the law of the Community of States.<br />
International law embodies the rules and principles estab-<br />
lished by international. legislation, by international judicial<br />
decisions, and by the practice of States.<br />
<br />
International legislation, often referred to as conventional<br />
law, includes the, rules and principles contained in . multipartite<br />
treaties and conventions, the number of which has greatly<br />
increased during the past fifty years. Rules and principles of<br />
international law may even become established as a consequence<br />
of their embodiment in a great number of bipartite treaties; thus,<br />
recent American and British treaties with China refer to "the<br />
principles of international law and practice as reflected in the<br />
modern international procedure and in the modern treaties"<br />
concluded by the parties with other States. International legisla-<br />
tion may also include some of the acts promulgated by organs<br />
of the Community of States, to the extent that such organs have<br />
been empowered to make dispositions which are binding on States;<br />
thus, in the Mavrommatis Case, Judge John Bassett Moore<br />
referred to the Palestine mandate as being "in a sense a legislative<br />
act of the Council" of the League of Nations.<br />
<br />
The judicial decisions of international tribunals may also,<br />
in some cases, establish rules and principles of international law.<br />
All international tribunals are not on the same plane in this<br />
regard, however, the decisions of mixed bipartite commissions<br />
being obviously of less weight than those of tribunals of a more<br />
general character. In the past, few tribunals have had the support<br />
of a large number of States, and few have been permitted to<br />
function sufficiently continuously to develop a system of case-law;<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 18-----------------------<br />
<br />
294 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
a great advance came with the establishment of the Permanent<br />
Court of International Justice. The decisions of national courts<br />
have had influence on the development of international law, but<br />
as such courts function subject to national authority their decisions<br />
play a secondary role and cannot be said to establish rules and<br />
principles of law binding upon all States.<br />
<br />
The practice of States, evidenced by the pronouncements of<br />
executive, diplomatic, and at times judicial agencies, is the basis<br />
of the customary international law. Before it can be said to<br />
establish a rule or principle of international law, a practice<br />
must be concordant and general, and it must be to some extent<br />
continuous. The practice of one State or the practice of several<br />
States, even though continuous, may not result in establishing<br />
rules and principles of international law.<br />
<br />
The sources to be drawn upon in finding international law<br />
have been stated in the Statute of the Permanent Court of Inter-<br />
national Justice in the direction to the Court to apply (1) inter<br />
national conventions, whether general or particular, establishing<br />
rules expressly recognized by the contesting States, (2) inter-<br />
national custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as<br />
law, (3) the general principles of law recognized by civilized<br />
nations, and (4) judicial decisions and the teachings of the most<br />
highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary<br />
means for the determination of rules of law.<br />
<br />
Law cannot exist in a vacuum. It must always be related<br />
to the society which it serves. Nor can public law be divorced<br />
from political and social movements. International law depends<br />
upon, is conditioned by, the general character of international<br />
relations. If it is to be an efficient instrument for protecting and<br />
advancing the common interests of peoples, if it is to serve ade-<br />
quately the needs of the Community of States, it cannot remain<br />
subject to being set aside by States' going to war. Nor is it<br />
possible to maintain a stable legal order if the attention of States<br />
is not being continuously given to meeting new conditions and<br />
to solving the problems to which they give rise. To be respected,<br />
to serve as an instrument of justice and peace, international law<br />
must be brought up to date and must be kept up to date in a<br />
twentieth century world. It therefore seems essential to the<br />
"revitalizing and strengthening of international law" that States<br />
collaborate continuously to promote the common welfare of all<br />
peoples and to maintain friendly relations between all States.<br />
This has been recognized in the Atlantic Charter in its<br />
emphasis on "the fullest collaboration between all nations in the<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 19-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 295<br />
<br />
economic field." The collaboration must be even wider, however.<br />
It must be so organized that it may extend into all of the fields<br />
which may be related to the maintenance of justice and peace.<br />
The development of international law must proceed hand in<br />
hand with the development of international collaboration.<br />
<br />
<br />
POSTULATE 3<br />
<br />
The conduct of each State in its relations with other States<br />
and with the Community of States is subject to international law,<br />
and the sovereignty of a. State is subject to the limitations of<br />
international law.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Generally, within the realm of its .internal affairs, each<br />
State may exercise its powers without restraint by international<br />
law. Nor can it be said that international law applies to all<br />
matters which arise in States' external affairs, that is in relations<br />
between States; just as municipal law does not cover the entire<br />
gamut of relations between individuals, so international law may<br />
not be complete enough at any given time to cover the entire range<br />
of inter-State relations.<br />
<br />
It was recognized in the Covenant of the League of Nations<br />
that some disputes between States may relate to matters which<br />
lie. "solely within the domestic jurisdiction" of a State, or as<br />
it is put in the French version, which are left by international law<br />
to the exclusive jurisdiction of a State; but in the case relating<br />
to Nationality Decrees in Tunis and Morocco, the Permanent<br />
Court of International-Justice declared that "the question whether<br />
a certain matter is or is not solely within the jurisdiction of a<br />
State is an essentially relative question," depending upon "the<br />
development of international relations."<br />
<br />
The conception ôf a Community of States involves the<br />
supremacy of international law in inter-State relations. All<br />
conduct of States in their relations with other States is subject<br />
to being regulated by international law, hence subject to the<br />
applicable law.<br />
<br />
A State may have relations with the. collectivity of the<br />
States which form the Community of States. It may owe duties<br />
to the Community, such as a duty to refrain from starting a war;<br />
and it may have rights which the Community is bound to respect,<br />
such as the right of existence. International law regulates not<br />
only relations between States, but also the relations of each State<br />
with the whole Community. To the extent that it pertains to the<br />
competence, functions and procedure of agencies of the Com-<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 20-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
296 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
munity of States, and governs the relations of such agencies with<br />
States, it maybe proper to speak of constitutional international<br />
law.<br />
<br />
In the past, emphasis has too frequently been placed on<br />
sovereignty in connection with the application of international<br />
law. States have often asserted their will without regard for any<br />
legal limitations; they have sometimes endeavored to impose their<br />
will on others, and have even denied the existence of any Com-<br />
munity interest in their relations with other States. Such action<br />
by States is a negation of the Community of States and of all<br />
international legal order. Its result has been to retard the develop-<br />
ment of international law, and to frustrate the attempted extension<br />
of organized effort. No concept of sovereignty can be acceptable<br />
which leads to such a result.<br />
<br />
States living in a Community of States are sovereign, can<br />
be guided by their own will, only within the limitations of the<br />
Community law. As it was put by Judge Anzilotti of the Per-<br />
manent Court of International Justice, in the case relating to<br />
the Austro-German Customs Regime, sovereignty can mean<br />
only "that the State has over it no other authority than that of<br />
international law." Exaggerated claims of sovereignty are so<br />
frequently made in international dealings that it seems desirable<br />
to include such a statement in the Postulate, though it may seem<br />
to be only a deduction from the subjection of inter-State relations<br />
to international law.<br />
<br />
POSTULATE 4<br />
<br />
Any failure by a State to carry out its obligations under<br />
international law is a matter of concern to the Community of<br />
States.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Since international law is the law of the Community of<br />
States, the Community has an interest in its observance and in<br />
its integrity. The rights conferred by international law, and the<br />
duties which it imposes, are not merely the concern of the two or<br />
more States directly involved in a given situation. In many<br />
situations a State may dispose of its rights, and thereby relieve<br />
another State of correlative duties, without infringing upon<br />
Community interests. Yet the Community of States must always<br />
be in a position to deal with any situation which jeopardizes good<br />
understanding between States, and any failure by a State to<br />
perform the duties imposed upon it by international law may call<br />
for such action.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 21-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 297<br />
<br />
The existence of a community interest in the observance of<br />
international obligations has frequently been recognized in the<br />
past. Certain treaties have been said, for example, to have<br />
created European or general law, and they were therefore regarded<br />
as having an interest for European States not parties. In 1872,<br />
in appealing on behalf of the Jews in Moldavia and Wallachia, the<br />
United States of America relied upon a treaty between European<br />
States to which it was not a party, because of the "cosmopolitan<br />
character" of the treaty. In 1920, the Committee of Jurists which<br />
dealt with the Aaland Islands dispute declared that provisions<br />
in the Convention of 1856 between France, Great Britain and<br />
Russia had been "laid down in European interests," and that<br />
the Convention had a "European character" and was intended<br />
to create "European law,"<br />
<br />
The International (Inter-American) Commission of Jurists,<br />
which met at Rio de Janeiro in 1927, proposed as one of the<br />
fundamental bases of international law that "States, even though<br />
not directly injured, have the right to protest against violations<br />
of international law"; and the Inter-American , Juridical Com-<br />
mittee has recently recommended a declaration that "nations<br />
have a common and joint obligation to watch over the obser-<br />
vance of the fundamental principles of international law."<br />
<br />
The Postulate is limited to an assertion of the Community<br />
Interest and of the possibility, of interposition by the Community<br />
to protect that interest. It merely lays the foundation for a<br />
protection of the Community interest in a proper case. It does<br />
not mean that agencies of the Community of States would<br />
interpose in every case in which the conduct of a State is found<br />
to be contrary to legal imperatives. Some cases might be trivial,<br />
and others might not be thought to call for any action. Each<br />
situation would have to be appreciated on its facts, and no<br />
attempt can be made to forecast what the wisdom of the time<br />
may dictate. Procedures would need to be established for deter-<br />
mining that a State has failed to carry out its obligations under<br />
international law, and that interposition by the Community of<br />
States is desirable. The Postulate does not specify the nature of<br />
the action to be taken in the course of such interposition.<br />
<br />
POSTULATE 5<br />
<br />
Any use of force or any threat to use force by a State in<br />
its relations with another State is a matter of concern to the-<br />
Community of States.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 22-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
298 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
It is only in quite recent years that international law has<br />
begun to grapple with the use of force by States. For centuries<br />
States felt themselves free to go to war when they pleased for<br />
reasons satisfactory to themselves. In doing so, they usually<br />
conceived of themselves as exercising a "right to take such action<br />
as they shall consider necessary for the maintenance of right<br />
and justice." On certain conditions, this "right" was "reserved"<br />
by Members of the League of Nations in the Covenant. The<br />
"right" was not conferred on States by international law; yet<br />
despite occasional efforts to distinguish between just and unjust<br />
wars, international law did not forbid such "action".<br />
<br />
In former times, if one State went to war against another,<br />
its action was commonly regarded as a matter of concern to<br />
the States involved and to them alone. Quite different is the<br />
attitude which has grown up in the twentieth century. The<br />
Covenant of the League of Nations declared that "any war<br />
or any threat of war, whether immediately affecting any of the<br />
Members of the League or not is a matter of concern to the<br />
whole League." This was a clear recognition of the Community<br />
interest in any war or threat of war; and though it ran counter<br />
to a general attitude which had prevailed for centuries, the<br />
recognition was accepted by the sixty-three States which joined<br />
the League of Nations, and in repeated declarations by the<br />
Secretary of State of the United States it was made a corner-<br />
stone of the policy of the United States of America which did<br />
not join the League o£ Nations. In 1937, numerous Govern-<br />
ments united with the Government of the United States of<br />
America in declaring that "any situation in which armed hostili-<br />
ties are in progress or are threatened isa situation wherein<br />
rights and interests of all nations either are or maybe seriously<br />
affected." More recently an Under-Secretary of State of the<br />
United States has urged a recognition by all States that a<br />
"threat of war anywhere throughout the globe threatens their<br />
own security."<br />
<br />
The Postulate refers to the situation created by any use of<br />
force, or any threat to use force, rather than to the situation<br />
created by "any war or threat of war." The historic conception<br />
of "war" has become bogged in a morass of distinctions which<br />
have grown out of attempted definitions of "war," and it tends<br />
to obscure the real danger which isthe use of force. Only the<br />
use or threat of force by a State in its relations with another<br />
State is covered, for an employment of force by a State to<br />
Maintain order within its own territory is outside the present purview.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 23-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 299<br />
<br />
The force envisaged is physical, armed force; other forms<br />
of pressure employed by one State against another may be<br />
disturbing to a legal order maintained by the Community of<br />
States, but they involve consideration of so many factors that<br />
they cannot be covered by a general statement.<br />
<br />
The Postulate is limited to the, assertion of a community<br />
interest in any situation in which force is used, or a threat to<br />
use force is made, by one State against another. That interest<br />
may lead to an interposition by the Community of States to<br />
protect itself. Clearly it would be necessary to maintain proper<br />
procedures by which it may be established that force has been<br />
used or its use threatened by a State, before interposition by<br />
the Community of States would be undertaken.<br />
<br />
<br />
POSTULATE 6<br />
<br />
The maintenance of just and peaceful relations between<br />
States requires orderly procedures by which international situa-<br />
tions can be readjusted as need arises.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
The history of international relations is a history of con-<br />
tinuous change and of efforts to meet new conditions.<br />
<br />
In former times, treaties between States frequently stipu-<br />
lated that their provisions should be "perpetual"; e.g.,, the<br />
treaty between the United States of America and France in<br />
1778. The earliest treaties between the United States of America<br />
and Great Britain followed a style of the day in providing for<br />
a "perpetual peace." More recent treaties are usually concluded<br />
for fixed periods of years. The conventions drawn up by the<br />
International Labor Conferences all provide for a periodical<br />
consideration of the need for their revision.<br />
<br />
Notable changes in historic treaty situations have fre-<br />
quently been made by the agreement of the interested States.<br />
A striking example was the superseding of the American-British<br />
Convention of April 19, 1850 by the Treaty of November 18,<br />
1901, with reference to the construction of a canal to connect<br />
the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Significant changes were effected<br />
in quite recent years in 1936 by the Montreux Convention<br />
on the Regime of the Straits, in 1937 by the Montreux Conven-<br />
tion on Abolition of Capitulations in Egypt and by the exchanges<br />
of notes relating to house-taxes in Japan, and in 1943 by bipar-<br />
tite treaties abrogating extraterritoriality in China.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 24-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
300 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
Stability is an important factor in international relations,<br />
yet it is attainable only if new conditions can be faced as they<br />
arise. Orderly procedures for the readjustments which may be<br />
needed seem to be essential if friendly relations are to be main-<br />
tained between all States, and such procedures cannot be left<br />
to wait upon the free concurrence of the interested States. The<br />
statement of fundamental principles of international policy<br />
which was made by the Government of the United States of<br />
America and approved by numerous other Governments in 1937,<br />
emphasized both "the sanctity of treaties" and the importance<br />
of their modification "when need therefor arises, by orderly<br />
processes carried out in a spirit of mutual helpfulness and<br />
accommodation."<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 25-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 341<br />
<br />
<br />
Principles for the<br />
International Law of the Future<br />
<br />
This statement of Principles is presented as a draft of a<br />
declaration concerning the international law of the future, which<br />
is suggested for promulgation by the statesmen who will .build<br />
the future peace.Numerous precedents for such an official<br />
declaration might be cited, but it will suffice to 'refer to a few<br />
examples.<br />
<br />
In 1815 the Congress of Vienna was not content to confine<br />
itself to current problems in the situation which followed the<br />
Napoleonic .wars. Two important declarations were annexed to<br />
the Act of the Congress, one dealing with the free navigation of<br />
rivers, and the other dealing with the rank of diplomatic agents;<br />
each of these declarations exercised a formative influence on<br />
international law for more than a century.The Congress of<br />
Vienna also assumed to act in behalf of all Governments in<br />
promulgating a declaration with reference to the universal<br />
abolition of traffic in African slaves.In 1856, the Conference of<br />
Paris which re-established peace after the close of the Crimean<br />
War promulgated a declaration on maritime law which has since<br />
come to be a generally accepted formulation.<br />
<br />
At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, a declaration of<br />
"Fundamental Principles of Justice and Rules of Law" was<br />
proposed in the American Commission to Negotiate Peace as a<br />
preamble to the treaty of peace; and it was in part due to<br />
American initiative that the Treaty of Versailles contained a<br />
significant declaration concerning "methods and principles for<br />
regulating labor conditions," to "guide the policy of the League<br />
of Nations."<br />
<br />
The 1922 Washington Conference on Naval Armaments<br />
adopted a declaration of rules concerning the use of gases in<br />
warfare to form "a part of international law binding alike the<br />
conscience and practice of nations," and forty-one States accepted<br />
the declaration as it was later embodied in a Geneva Protocol of 1925.<br />
<br />
An important. "Declaration of American Principles" was<br />
adopted by the Eighth International Conference of American<br />
States at Lima in 1938, and a declaration on "Fundamental<br />
Principles of International Law" was recommended by the<br />
Inter-American Juridical Committee in 1942. Many unofficial<br />
declarations have been formulated in the past, also, a notable<br />
example being the "Declaration of the Rights and Duties of<br />
States" proposed by the American Institute of International<br />
Law in 1916.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 26-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
302 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
The Principles are confined to the legal order of the future.<br />
They do not purport to state the preexisting law, though some<br />
of the duties stated maybe said to have existed under the inter<br />
national law of the past. The duties of States are described in<br />
each case as legal duties. The proposed declaration would invest<br />
them with the character of duties under general international<br />
law.<br />
<br />
A principle of law, promulgated and accepted as such, may<br />
serve as a useful guide for conduct, it may furnish a standard<br />
for the appraisal of conduct, even without any attempt to ordain<br />
the consequences of its non-observance. A failure by a State to<br />
perform a legal duty is a matter of concern to the Community of<br />
States, and it may call for interposition to protect the interests of<br />
the Community of States. Yet action taken on behalf of the<br />
Community of States should be taken for protective and not for<br />
punitive purposes, and it should be entrusted to bodies endowed<br />
with judgment and discretion. The later Proposals contain<br />
suggestions for implementing the Principles, covering the creation<br />
of the necessary agencies and the powers with which they should<br />
be invested.<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 1<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to carry out in full good faith<br />
its obligations under international law, and it may not invoke<br />
limitations contained in its own constitution or laws as an excuse<br />
for a failure to perform this duty.<br />
<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Underlying the modern international law is the principle<br />
that States must carry out their legal obligations in full good faith.<br />
Without it, States could not live together in a Community of<br />
States. Good faith is "the great moral ligament which binds<br />
together" the States of the world in a system of law.<br />
<br />
Each State is free to determine the nature of its own govern-<br />
ment, and it is free to develop its own institutions in conformity<br />
with the genius of its people. The international law of the future<br />
must safeguard this freedom which every State should enjoy. The<br />
Atlantic Charter therefore proclaims "the right of all peoples<br />
to choose the form of government under which they will live."<br />
Yet it is a right to be exercised with due regard for the interests<br />
of the Community of States, and each State has a duty to organize<br />
its institutions in such a way that it will be in a position to perform<br />
its obligations under international law.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 27-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 303<br />
<br />
Failure by a. State to perform its obligations can never be<br />
justified by invoking limitations which it has imposed upon itself<br />
by its own constitution or laws. Some fifty years ago, in corres-<br />
pondence with Mexico relating to the Cutting Case, the Govern-<br />
ment of the United States declared that "if a Government could<br />
set up its own municipal laws as the final test of its international<br />
rights and obligations, then the rules of international law would<br />
be but the shadow of a name and would afford no protection either<br />
to States or to individuals. It has been constantly maintained<br />
and also admitted by the Government of the United States that<br />
a government can not appeal to its municipal regulations as an<br />
answer to demands for the fulfilment of international duties."<br />
<br />
In several occasions, the Permanent Court of International<br />
Justice has declared that "a State cannot adduce as against<br />
another State its own constitution with a view to evading<br />
obligations incumbent upon it under international law or treaties<br />
in force"; indeed it has gone further and stated the principle to<br />
be "self-evident" that "a State which has contracted valid inter-<br />
national obligations is bound to make in its legislation such modi-<br />
fications as may be necessary to ensure the fulfilment of the<br />
obligations undertaken." At the Conference on Codification of<br />
International Law held at The Hague in 1930, the principle was<br />
generally accepted that "a State cannot avoid international<br />
responsibility [for an injury to an alien] by invoking its municipal<br />
law."<br />
<br />
No particular distribution of power within a State's govern-<br />
mental system is required. In a federal State, no particular division<br />
of power between the federal and local governments is prescribed,<br />
and in neither a federal nor a unitary State is interference involved<br />
with a separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers.<br />
<br />
Yet it is essential that by some arrangement of its governmental<br />
system each State, whatever the structure of its government,<br />
should maintain itself in aposition to carry out its international<br />
obligations, and a failure to place itself in that position will not<br />
excuse its non-performance of those obligations.<br />
<br />
The enunciation of the Principle would seem to be particularly<br />
important at the present time. Recent challenges to accepted<br />
philosophies of government as 'well as dislocations caused by<br />
war may lead to the revision of the constitutions of many States,<br />
and extensive shifts of governmental power, both internal and<br />
external, are to be anticipated.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 28-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
304 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol XXII<br />
<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 2<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to see that conditions prevailing<br />
within its own territory do not menace international peace and<br />
order, and to this end it must treat its own population in a way<br />
which will not violate the dictates of humanity and justice or<br />
shock the conscience of mankind.<br />
<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
International law is principally concerned with relations<br />
Between States. Generally, it does not deal with relations between<br />
a State and its own people. So important are the local considera-<br />
tions which shape those relations, so difficult is the appreciation<br />
of them by other peoples, that each State must be permitted to<br />
order them without external interference. Yet this precept of<br />
State freedom cannot be absolute.<br />
<br />
A State cannot be free to permit conditions to prevail within<br />
its own territory which menace international peace and order,<br />
and it cannot be free to treat any part of its population in such<br />
a way as to produce that menace. Living as a good neighbor<br />
in a Community of States, it may be called upon to place its own<br />
house in order. "The right of self-determination," as the President<br />
of the United States of America has declared, "does not carry<br />
with it the right of any government to commit wholesale murder<br />
or the right to make slaves of its own people."<br />
<br />
Not infrequently in the past, conditions prevailing in one<br />
part of the world have been so violative of the dictates of humanity<br />
and justice and so shocking to the conscience of mankind, that<br />
peoples generally have been unwilling to tolerate them. During<br />
the course of the nineteenth century, trade in African slaves<br />
came to be generally condemned, and Conferences of States at<br />
Berlin in 1885, at Brussels in 1890, and at St. Germain in 1919,<br />
devoted their efforts to its suppression. Slavery in any part of the<br />
world has come to be regarded as inimical to a world standard of<br />
humanity. This was evidenced by the enquiries made when<br />
Ethiopia was admitted to the League of Nations in 1923; by the<br />
Slavery Convention of 1926 in which the parties undertook "to<br />
bring about, progressively and as soon as possible, the complete<br />
abolition of slavery in all its forms"; and by the Forced Labor<br />
Convention of 1930 in which the parties undertook "to suppress<br />
the use of forced or compulsory labor in all its forms within the<br />
shortest possible period."<br />
<br />
Instances are numerous in which States have assumed<br />
international obligations with respect to the treatment of their<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 29-----------------------<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 305<br />
<br />
own nationals. Such obligations have often been included in treaties<br />
dealing with the transfer of territory. In a treaty with Spain in<br />
1898, the United States of America undertook to assure to the<br />
inhabitants of certain relinquished or ceded territories "the free<br />
exercise of their religion." The treaties made in 1919 and 1920<br />
for the protection of racial, linguistic and religious minorities in<br />
certain European States are outstanding examples; if these<br />
treaties are to be explained as consequences of the creation of new<br />
States or of accretions of territory, it is to be noted that similar<br />
obligations were also assumed by certain States upon their<br />
admission to membership in the League of Nations. The under-<br />
lying principle has been expressed in, a declaration by the Eighth<br />
International Conference of American States in 1'938 that "any<br />
persecution on account of racial or religions motives which makes<br />
it impossible for a group of human beings to live decently, is<br />
contrary to the political and, juridical systems of America."<br />
<br />
Nor is the protection of minorities an isolated example.<br />
The labor charter in the Treaty of Versailles declared that "the<br />
failure of any nation to adopt humane conditions of labor is an<br />
obstacle in the way of other nations which desire to improve the<br />
conditions in their own countries."<br />
<br />
The Principle would require of each State a minimum pro-<br />
tection of its own population, that is of all inhabitants of its<br />
territory. International law has long prescribed standards for a<br />
State's protection of aliens within its territory. Nationals too<br />
should have the benefit of the standard which the dictates of<br />
humanity and justice impose. In some instances in the past,<br />
States have withheld their nationality from groups of their<br />
population in order to justify a special treatment which fell<br />
short of a general standard; hence the Principle is not confined to<br />
the treatment of nations, but extends to the treatment of, all<br />
elements of a State's population.<br />
<br />
The standard of conduct to be required of each State can<br />
be defined only in general .terms. Modern civilization has pro-<br />
ceeded upon the possibility of laying down some criteria which are<br />
of universal acceptance. The 1907 Hague Convention on laws<br />
and customs of war on land refers to the "laws of humanity"<br />
and the "dictates of the public conscience." In 1937, the Council<br />
of the League of Nations adopted a resolution concerning con-<br />
ditions in Spain, in which it noted "that attacks have taken place<br />
in violation of the most elementary dictates of humanity under-<br />
lying the established rules of international law," and declared<br />
that such attacks were "repugnant to the conscience of the civilized<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 30-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
306 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
nations." Precedent is therefore not lacking for including in the<br />
Principle the standard of "the dictates of humanity" and "the<br />
conscience of mankind."<br />
<br />
The enunciation of this Principle seems particularly important<br />
at the present time, when shocking efforts are being made in more<br />
than one part of the world to exterminate whole groups of human<br />
beings. It is important, also, because new situations have arisen<br />
which will require attention to be given to the future welfare of<br />
certain dependent peoples, and the world must be assured that<br />
such atrocities as the decimation of the Herreros in Southwest<br />
Africa forty years ago are not to be repeated. The dictates of<br />
humanity and justice must serve as a cornerstone of any permanent<br />
world order. They should serve to indicate a general standard<br />
of conduct to which each State has a duty to conform, and from<br />
which any departure is to be judged by the whole Community<br />
of States; but they are not to be used as an excuse for intervention<br />
by any State, acting on its own authority, in the affairs of another<br />
State.<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 3<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to refrain from intervention<br />
in the internal affairs of any other State.<br />
<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
It is a corollary of the general precept that each of the States<br />
which form the Community of States must be responsible for<br />
the conduct of its own household, that in its internal affairs each<br />
State must be free from interference by other States acting on<br />
their own authority.<br />
<br />
Instances have not been rare in the past in which a powerful<br />
State has sought to impose its will on a less powerful State in<br />
the latter's disposition of its own economy, and the fear engend-<br />
ered by such action has been a disturbing factor in relations<br />
between many States. Such interference became so frequent that<br />
efforts were made to justify it by tentatives of law permitting<br />
intervention, and these tentatives even derived a semblance<br />
of authority from an award of a tribunal of the Permanent Court<br />
of Arbitration in the Venezuela Preferential Claims Case.<br />
Some of the American States which had been the victims of<br />
such interference have long urged its emphatic condemnation,<br />
and their efforts led to the inclusion in the Convention on Rights<br />
and Duties of States, adopted at Montevideo in1933, of a provision<br />
that "no State has a right to intervene in the internal or external<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 31-----------------------<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 307<br />
<br />
affairs of another State," That Convention, ratified by sixteen<br />
American States, has been supplemented by a Protocol adopted,<br />
at Buenos Aires in 1936, and by the Declaration of American<br />
Principles adopted at Lima in 1933, both of which reaffirmed the<br />
principle. To the extent that such provisions apply to inter-<br />
vention in external affairs, they are to be understood to forbid<br />
any attempt by one State, acting on its own authority, to control<br />
relations between other States. They do not seek to prevent a<br />
State's asserting an interest in a matter which other States may<br />
have under discussion. Nor do they prevent an effort by the<br />
Community of States to protect a community interest in relations<br />
between two States, such as the interest in peace which nineteen<br />
American States sought to protect by the declaration of August<br />
3, 1932, with reference to the Chaco dispute between Bolivia<br />
and Paraguay.<br />
<br />
Escape from the dangers of intervention has also been<br />
sought by States in other parts of the world. In declarations<br />
attached to the Conventions defining Aggression, of July 3 and 4, .<br />
1933, the Soviet Union and its neighbors declared that no act of.<br />
aggression as defined could be justified on the ground of "the<br />
internal condition of a State, for example, its political, economic<br />
or social structure; alleged defects in its administration; disturb-<br />
ances due to strikes, revolutions, counter-revolutions, or civil war.".<br />
In 1933 the United States of America and the Soviet Union entered<br />
into an agreement by which each undertook "to refrain from<br />
interfering in any manner in the internal affairs" of the other.<br />
The1937 Brussels Conference declared that "there exists no war-<br />
rant in law , for the use of armed force by any country for the<br />
purpose of intervening in the internal regime of another country."<br />
Quite recently, also, in the 1942 Treaty of Mutual Assistance,<br />
Great Britain and the Soviet Union pledged themselves to act<br />
in accordance with the principle of "non-interference in the<br />
internal affairs of other States." '<br />
<br />
The Principle would reaffirm a precept of the existing law.<br />
It would condemn any State's acting on its own authority to<br />
intervene in the internal affairs of another State. It would<br />
not preclude action taken on behalf of the Community of States<br />
and with the mandate of- a competent agency of the Community<br />
of States, in the event that conditions prevailing in a State's<br />
territory should be found, to menace international peace, and-<br />
order<br />
<br />
Enunciation of the Principle at the present time would not<br />
only be in accordance with the trend of world opinion. It would<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 32-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
308 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
furnish a needed guarantee to smaller States that the world of<br />
the future will be a world in which they can live according to<br />
their own aspirations and remain unmolested. It would gener-<br />
alize the declaration made by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of<br />
the American Republics, at their meeting at Rio de Janeiro in<br />
1942, that "the principle that international conduct must be<br />
inspired by the policy of the good neighbor is a norm of inter-<br />
national law of the American Continent."<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 4<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to prevent the organization<br />
within its territory of activities calculated to foment civil strife<br />
in the territory of any other State.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
<br />
If States are to live together as good neighbours in the<br />
Community of States, it is not enough that they be obligated<br />
to refrain from official intervention in the internal affairs of<br />
other States. It is necessary, also, that each State be assured<br />
of its internal security, free from subversive influence due to<br />
non-official activities in other States. Governments themselves<br />
must refrain from participation in the internal political contests<br />
to which other Governments are subjected. But they should<br />
do more. They should see that activities are not organized<br />
within their territory which are calculated to foment civil strife<br />
in the territory of other States.<br />
<br />
The foundations of this Principle may be traced to the<br />
action taken by States throughout the nineteenth century to<br />
prevent the organization in their territory of filibustering expe-<br />
ditions designed to operate inthe territory of other States.<br />
In some States national legislation was enacted to prevent<br />
armed preparations or enlistment for waging civil strife in the<br />
territory of other States; in the United States of America, for<br />
example, such legislation has existed since 1794, and it was<br />
framed to carry out what was conceived to be an obligation of<br />
international law.<br />
<br />
Recent international legislation has given precision to the<br />
obligation. An agreement concluded in 1911 between five South<br />
American States -Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and<br />
Venezuela - required the parties to "take suitable steps to<br />
prevent at all times, in the territory under their jurisdiction,<br />
the promotion of revolutions, attempts to raise levies or pre-<br />
parations for the despatch of expeditions, and the execution of<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 33-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 309<br />
<br />
Any of these acts to the prejudice" of any other party. Thirteen<br />
American States became parties to the 1928 1:Iabana Convention<br />
on Civil Strife, by which they obligated themselves "to use all<br />
means at their disposal to prevent the inhabitants of their terri-<br />
tory, nationals or aliens, from participating in, gathering elements,<br />
crossing the boundary or sailing from their territory for the<br />
purpose of starting or promoting civil strife." A similar obliga-<br />
tion was proclaimed by Central American States in treaties of<br />
1907, 1923 and 1934, by States of the Near East in the Saadabad<br />
Pact of 1937, and by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the<br />
American. Republics in the. Final Act of the Iiabana Conference<br />
in 1940.<br />
<br />
Efforts to extend the principle have been proceeding in<br />
recent years. Some of them have taken the form of bipartite<br />
agreements between States. For example, in 1933 the United<br />
States of America and the Soviet Union entered into an agree-<br />
ment by which each undertook "not to permit the formation<br />
or residence on its territory of any organization or group a . o o.<br />
which has as its aim the overthrow or the preparation for the<br />
overthrow of, or the bringing about by force of a change in the<br />
political or social order" of the other. Similar agreements were<br />
made by the Soviet Union with other States.<br />
<br />
Newer means of communication call for attention in this<br />
connection. The advent of the radio has brought in new possi-<br />
bilities of disturbances in the political life of peoples, and as<br />
recent experience has shown propaganda broadcast from the<br />
territory of one State to people living in the territory of another<br />
State may be as effective in fomenting political strife, as the<br />
despatch of armed ships and armed forces. Two significant<br />
efforts have been made to cope with this problem by inter-<br />
national legislation. The 1936 Geneva Convention on the Use<br />
of Broadcasting in the Cause of Peace, to which twenty-one<br />
States became parties, obligates these States to prohibit "the<br />
broadcasting within their respective territories of any transmis-<br />
sion which to the detriment of good international understanding<br />
is of such a character as to incite the population of any territory<br />
to acts incompatible with the internal order or the security of a<br />
territory" of another State which is also a party to the Conven-<br />
tion. In the 1937 Geneva Convention on the Prevention of<br />
Terrorism, it was reaffirmed as a principle of international law<br />
that "it, is the duty of every State to refrain from any' act<br />
designed to encourage terrorist activities directed against another,<br />
State and to prevent the acts in which such activities take shape."<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 34-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
310 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
It will be understood that the Principle is not to be applied<br />
in such a way as to obligate any State to curb the activities of<br />
individuals in the exercise of personal liberties accorded by law.<br />
Freedom of speech is one of man's most prized possessions, and<br />
it can be protected only if individuals remain free to criticize<br />
the Government of their own or of any other country. Nor<br />
should the Principle be applied in such a way as to prevent a<br />
State from giving asylum and hospitality to individual apostles<br />
of freedom who may be fleeing from tyranny in other lands.<br />
It is the organization of activities which should be prevented,<br />
and the Principle has no application unless the organized activi-<br />
ties are of such a character that they must be said to be,<br />
objectively as well as subjectively, calculated to foment civil<br />
strife in other countries.<br />
<br />
The enunciation of this Principle at this time would serve<br />
as an assurance to States of the security of their own institu-<br />
tions, social as well as political, especially to those States which<br />
by recent events have been placed in special need of that<br />
assurance. It seems significant in this connection that when it<br />
declared, on the occasion of the murder of King Alexander and<br />
M. Barthou at Marseilles in 1934, that "it is the duty of every<br />
State neither to encourage nor tolerate on its territory any<br />
terrorist activity with a political purpose," the Council of the<br />
League of Nations linked its action with the obligation of<br />
Members of the League of Nations "to respect the territorial<br />
integrity and the existing political independence of the other<br />
Members."<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to cooperate with other States<br />
in establishing and maintaining agencies of the Community of<br />
States for dealing with matters of concern to the Community,<br />
and to collaborate in the work of such agencies.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Matters which are of concern to the Community of States<br />
must be dealt with by agencies empowered to deliberate and<br />
act on behalf of the Community. As the creation and main<br />
tenance of such agencies must be effected by the States which<br />
form the Community of States, a failure of any State to cooperate<br />
in creating or maintaining them, or in collaborating in their<br />
work, would mean a crippling of the Community itself. Progress<br />
in building a world order on secure legal foundations is condi-<br />
tioned upon such cooperation and collaboration. For this reason,<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 35-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 311<br />
<br />
the Inter-American Juridical Committee has recently declared<br />
that "no nation is privileged to remain aloof from the organi-<br />
zation of the international, community"; and the Ministers of<br />
Foreign Affairs of the American Republics, meeting at Habana<br />
in 1940, pledged their Governments . to "coordinate their own<br />
interests with the duties of universal cooperation."<br />
<br />
The imposition of a legal duty on States to meet this neces-<br />
sity is more than a pious aspiration.While it is not possible to<br />
state in advance precisely the steps which any State ought to<br />
take, it can be affirmed as a principle of law that States may<br />
not ignore the agencies of the, Community of States, and that<br />
they ;have a positive legal duty to take part in the common<br />
effort which will enable the agencies to function toward .the<br />
ends for which they were created. Precedents are not lacking<br />
for a statement of a legal duty in these terms. For example,<br />
the abortive Geneva Protocol on Pacific Settlement of Inter-<br />
national Disputes of 1924 referred to the obligations of certain<br />
States as requiring them "to cooperate loyally and effectively<br />
in support of the Covenant of the League of Nations and in<br />
resistance to any act of aggression."<br />
<br />
A useful analogy may be found -=- here as so often in dealing<br />
with inter-State relations -in national efforts to regulate rela-<br />
tions between employers and workers. Certain States have not<br />
hesitated to impose on employers and workers. a duty to nego-<br />
tiate and to engage in collective bargaining; a law of the United<br />
States of America,-for example, imposesa legal.duty on various<br />
public carriers and their- employees "to exert every reasonable<br />
effort to make and maintain agreements" on certain matters.<br />
Such duties are rigorously enforced by national courts. Under<br />
such laws, the persons on whom reciprocal duties are imposed<br />
are not constrained to reach an agreement, and they are not<br />
compelled to accede to demands made; yet they cannot lawfully<br />
decline to negotiate and :their own proposals -must be in the<br />
spirit of an effort to arrive at an understanding.<br />
<br />
Similarly, a State may have a duty to take part in the<br />
common effort, to cooperate in maintaining the necessary agen-<br />
cies and to collaborate in their work. It would not be obliged<br />
to support any specific proposal which may be .advanced, nor<br />
to enter into any agreement which in its judgment fails to<br />
take account of its special interests. Yet it would not be living<br />
up to its duty if it sought 'to remain entirely aloof and to ignore<br />
the common effort.<br />
<br />
It is an. historical fact that in some fields international<br />
cooperation has been well-nigh universal. Of the seventy-three<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 36-----------------------<br />
<br />
312 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
States existing in 1937, seventy-two States have collaborated in<br />
the work of the Universal Postal Union; sixty-eight States are<br />
parties to the 1932 Telecommunication Convention, and to one<br />
or other of the various conventions dealing with the traffic in<br />
opium and drugs. Moreover, most of the States of the world<br />
Nepal and Yemen being the chief exceptions-took part in<br />
some of the activities of the League of Nations. In 1939, the<br />
Secretary of State of the United States of America stated to<br />
the Secretary-General of the League of Nations that "the United<br />
States Government looks forward to the development and<br />
expansion of the League's machinery for dealing with the<br />
problems" in the social, economic and financial fields, "and to<br />
the participation by all nations in active efforts to solve them."<br />
<br />
The Principle does not deal with the method of conducting<br />
the cooperation, nor with the specific agencies which must be<br />
established. Future developments which cannot be forecast will<br />
be controlling, but some specific suggestions are advanced in the<br />
later Proposals.<br />
<br />
Nor is it possible to enumerate the matters which may be<br />
dealt with as matters of concern to the Community of States.<br />
Some matters which fall very closely into that category are<br />
referred to in these Postulates, Principles, and Proposals. No list<br />
of them can be exhaustive. From time to time matters pre-<br />
viously left to the exclusive competence of States may, as a<br />
result of the development of inter-State relations, become matters<br />
of concern to the Community of States. In general, all matters<br />
which concern two or more States, which have to do , with<br />
inter-State relations, must be regarded as potentially matters<br />
of concern to the Community of States.<br />
<br />
The enunciation of the Principle is needed as a foundation<br />
for the better organization of the Community of States. If it<br />
involves an extension of international law, the extension is based<br />
upon historical development, and it is in line with the neces-<br />
sities of a legal order.<br />
<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 6<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to employ pacific means and<br />
none but pacific means in seeking to settle its disputes with<br />
other States, and failing settlement by other pacific means to<br />
accept the settlement of its disputes by the competent agency<br />
of the Community of States.<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 37-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 313<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
In the past, war was not forbidden as one of the possible<br />
means of seeking the settlement of a dispute. A change in the<br />
general attitude on this point began to stir in the last century,<br />
and it has been formulated andwidely accepted in this century.<br />
<br />
The principle that only pacific means may be employed<br />
for the settlement of disputes has recently been "enunciated<br />
in two great international instruments, and practically all of<br />
the States of the world have become parties to one or the other,<br />
or to both, of these instruments. By the Treaty of Paris of<br />
August 27, 1925, sixty-three States agree& "that the settle-<br />
ment or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature<br />
or of whatever origin they maybe, which may arise among them,<br />
shall never be sought except by pacific means." By the Treaty<br />
of Rio de Janeiro of October 10, 1933, twenty American, and<br />
eight ) European States agreed "that the settlement of disputes<br />
or controversies of any kind that may arise among them<br />
shall be effected only by the pacific means which have the sanc-<br />
tion of international law."<br />
<br />
The Principle requires that pacific means be employed if<br />
the settlement of a dispute is sought, but it does not require<br />
that a settlement be sought. It happens not infrequently that<br />
all of the States engaged in a dispute prefer no settlement to<br />
any which appears to be attainable. It is notorious that some<br />
international disputes-usually territorial disputes have been<br />
allowed to simmer for generations. From the point, of view of<br />
the Community of States it may be more desirable that a<br />
settlement should be effected, and this will certainly be true<br />
where the dispute is a menace to peace or to the good understand-<br />
ing between States upon which their cooperation depends. The<br />
1933 Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States,<br />
to which sixteen American States are parties, provides that<br />
"differences of any nature which arise between them should be<br />
settled by recognized pacific methods." Yet the primary duty<br />
of each State relates not to settling its disputes with other<br />
States, but to the means and methods which it may employ in<br />
seeking a settlement.<br />
<br />
The pacific means available to States for seeking the settle-<br />
ment of disputes are numerous and various. The chief means<br />
is direct diplomatic negotiation between the parties, and in-fact<br />
most disputes are settled by this means. Since 1556, a formal<br />
basis has existed for recourse by a disputant State to the good<br />
offices of a third State. The law relating to good offices and<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 38-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
314 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
mediation was codified in the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conven-<br />
tions on the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, and these conven-<br />
tions are supplemented by an Inter-American Treaty of 1936<br />
to which fifteen States are parties. Numerous States havejoined<br />
with others in formulating procedures for enquiry and investi-<br />
gation and in establishing permanent commissions of concilia-<br />
tion, and the procedure of arbitration has been elaborated in<br />
scores of recent treaties, both multipartite and bipartite.With<br />
the creation of the Permanent Court of International Justice,<br />
the adjudication of disputes by impartial judges has been placed<br />
upon a firm basis.Pacific means are not lacking, therefore, to<br />
States which are willing to employ them.<br />
<br />
The duty to seek settlement of disputes only by pacific<br />
means does not meet the need entirely, however. If one party<br />
to a dispute insists upon a settlement, ifit is to be bound to<br />
refrain from employing non-pacific means to that end, and if<br />
the other party does not agree upon a method of dealing with<br />
the dispute, an agency of the Community of States must be<br />
available to it as a forum, and such agency should be invested<br />
with the necessary competence; or if the interests of the Com-<br />
munity of States demand that the dispute be settled, an<br />
authority should be at hand and competent for that purpose.<br />
Hence, the duty to employ only pacific means in seeking settle-<br />
ment of a dispute must be complemented by a duty to accept<br />
settlement by . a competent authority of the Community of<br />
States. The Principle would establish both duties, and Proposals<br />
are later made for implementing it.<br />
<br />
The parties to a dispute would always remain free to agree<br />
upon any method of pacific settlement. It is only when they fail<br />
to agree, or when the method upon which they have agreed<br />
breaks down without a settlement, that the duty to accept a<br />
settlement by the competent authority of the Community of<br />
States would beoperative.<br />
<br />
The Principle goes beyond the obligations embodied in the<br />
Covenant of the League of Nations.Under the system of the<br />
Covenant, sixty-three States agreed that they would submit to<br />
arbitration or judicial settlement disputes which they recognized<br />
to besuitable for such submission; that if the dispute was "likely<br />
to lead to a rupture," they would "submit the matter either to<br />
arbitration or judicial settlement or to enquiry by the Council,"<br />
and that if the disputewas notsubmitted to arbitration or judicial<br />
settlement and if it was "likely to lead to a rupture," either party<br />
might submit it to the Council. If the dispute was submitted<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 39-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 315<br />
<br />
to arbitration or judicial settlement, the parties were bound to<br />
"carry out in, full good faith anyaward or,decision" rendered;<br />
if the dispute was submitted to the Council and if a report was<br />
unanimously adopted by the Council, though the parties had no.<br />
obligation to accept the recommendation of the report, all 1Vlem-<br />
hers of the League,covenanted "not to go to warwith any party"<br />
which compliedwith therecommendation.<br />
<br />
Such remarkable progress has been made during the past<br />
quarter-century, both in creating agencies for the pacific settle-<br />
ment of disputes and in building a law relating to pacific settle-<br />
ment, that the time now seems to be ripe for the enunciation of a<br />
clear principle of law that if settlement is not reached by other'<br />
pacific means, each State must accept the settlement of its dis-<br />
putes bythe competent agency of the Communityof -States.<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 7<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to refrain from any use of force<br />
and from any threat to use force in its relations with another<br />
State, except as authorized by the competent agency of the Com-<br />
munity of States; but subject to immediate reference to and<br />
approval by the competent agency of the Community of States;<br />
a State may oppose by force an unauthorized use of force made<br />
against it by another State.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
The maintenance of a peaceful legal order cannot be suffi-<br />
ciently assured by provision for the peaceful settlement of dis-<br />
putes between States.Recentexperience has shown that conflicts<br />
are possible even when situations have not been formalized as<br />
disputes. It seems essential to lay down a broad principle as<br />
to the use of force, and to move as far as possible toward the_<br />
elimination of force as a meansto beemployed for the attainment.<br />
of States objectives. Whatever the situation, no State should be<br />
permitted to resort to force to imposeits will uponanother State.<br />
It should be proclaimed as a legal duty of States-to refrain from.<br />
using force, as well asfrom threats to useit.<br />
<br />
The Principle deals with the use of force rather than with<br />
agar, because of the many artificial distinctions which have grown<br />
out of attempts to define war. The force referred to is physical<br />
force; this limitation is' necessary to the clarity and definiteiness<br />
with which the,duty niust be stated. Other forms of pressure,<br />
such as discriminations in trade relations, raise complications<br />
which cannot easily be encompassed by a simple statement of<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 40-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
316 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
legal duty, and they may require adjustments which only con-<br />
tinuing legislative processes can supply.<br />
<br />
It is the use of force by a State in its relations with other<br />
States which must be forbidden; the employment of force by a<br />
State to suppress an insurrection among its own people, or to<br />
quell a riot, or to prevent individuals from resorting to violence,<br />
does not ordinarily impinge upon interests of other States, and<br />
it does not call into play the authority of the Community of<br />
States.<br />
<br />
The general principle must be stated with the exception of any<br />
use of or threat to useforce authorized by the competent agency<br />
of the Community of States. Situations may arise in which a<br />
useofforce will be thoughtto be necessaryfor the protection of the<br />
interests of the Community of States, and in which it may be<br />
entrusted toaStateor agroup of States by amandate given by a<br />
competent agency of the Community of States. Moreover, in<br />
developing the international law which will be applicable, the<br />
Community of States may lay down conditions under which a<br />
State's useofforcewithout aspecial mandatewould be authorized.<br />
The statement of the Principle recognizes, also, the necessity<br />
of admitting the possibility of a State's using force to oppose an<br />
unauthorized useof force against it by another State. When the<br />
Treaty of Paris was being negotiated in 1928, reference was made<br />
to a "natural right of self-defense," and the renunciation of war<br />
"as an instrument of national policy" was made with the under-<br />
standing that this "right" was not to be affected. The existence<br />
of such a "right" has been proclaimed so repeatedly that in the<br />
minds of many people it has achieved the status of alegal axiom.<br />
Yet the plea of self-defense has been greatly overworked, and in<br />
many cases it has been merely specious. In modern times, the<br />
psychology of peoples has been such that every war has seemed<br />
to all the peoples engaged to be a war in self-defense. Any con-<br />
ception whichJends itself to such general misusemust be employed<br />
with sparing anddiscrimination.Ablanketexceptionof self-defense<br />
would rob aformulation of theduty to refrain from auseof force<br />
of much of its utility. What is necessary is to admit that aState<br />
may use force to oppose an unauthorized use of force by another<br />
State; but the interests of the Community of States clearly<br />
require that any such use of force should be permitted only<br />
subject to immediate reference to and approval bythe competent<br />
agency of the Community of States. If the situation in which a<br />
State finds itself called upon to oppose an unauthorized use of<br />
force is clear and unmistakable, that State can count upon such<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 41-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Lawof the Future 317<br />
<br />
approval to legitimate its action;in any other situation, it should<br />
refrain from using force, except as authorization may be or may<br />
have been given by the competent agency of the Community of<br />
States. .<br />
<br />
A precedent for this provision exists in the 1921 Convention<br />
neutralizing the Aaland Islands. This instrument provided that<br />
in the event of a sudden attack upon the Aaland Islands Finland<br />
should take the necessary measures for checking and repelling<br />
the aggressor until the other parties to the Convention could<br />
intervene; but in such,a case Finland was required to "refer<br />
the matter immediately to the Council" of the Leagueof Nations.<br />
<br />
The Principle is clearly in line with current thinking about<br />
international relations. Two generations ago; a Peace Conference<br />
at The Hague deemed it "important, in order to ensure the main<br />
tenance of pacific relations, that hostilities should not commence<br />
without previous warning," and more than forty States became<br />
parties to a convention providing that hostilities between them<br />
should not "commence without previous and explicit warning,'<br />
in the form either of a reasoned declaration of war or of an ulti-<br />
matum with conditional declaration of war."If this provision<br />
marked some advance at the time, it was not destined to serve<br />
a large role in ensuring peace even if the requirement had been<br />
complied with; and with the passing of less than two decades<br />
effort carne to be directed into a different channel. In the Coven-<br />
ant of the Leagueof Nations, "anywar or threat or war, whether<br />
any immediately affecting of the Members of the League or not,"<br />
was "declared a matter of concern to the whole League," :that is,<br />
States and the Members of the<br />
to the organized community of ;<br />
League undertook "to respect and preserve as against external<br />
aggression .the territorial integrity and existing political inde-<br />
pendence of all Membersof the League." However,the Covenant<br />
also provided that in the event that a dispute "likely to, lead to a<br />
rupture" had beensubmitted to arbitration or judicial settlement<br />
or enquiry by the Council, the Members of the League should<br />
not "resort to war until three months after the award of, the<br />
arbitrator or the judicial "decision or the report by the Council";<br />
and after a submission to the Council and its failure to arrive at a<br />
unanimous report, the Members of the League reserved to them-<br />
selves "the right to take such action as they shall consider neces-<br />
sary for the maintenance bfright andjustice ."<br />
<br />
Nor were these, "gaps in the Covenant" repaired by-'the<br />
Paris Treaty for the-Renunciation of War of 1-928, in- which most<br />
of the States of the world joined in a renunciation of war as an<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 42-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
318 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
instrument of national policy. That step was to a large extent<br />
vitiated by a qualification, which had notappeared in the Coven-<br />
ant, that each State had a "right of self-defense," andit waseven<br />
asserted in the course of the negotiations that each State remained<br />
the sole judge of the occasion on which the "right" should be<br />
exercised.<br />
<br />
The abortive Geneva Protocol on the Pacific Settlement<br />
of Disputes of 1924 provided for agreement by the parties not<br />
to go to war "except in case of resistance to acts of aggression<br />
or when acting in agreement with the Council or the Assembly<br />
of the League of Nations."<br />
<br />
No substantial progress was made in the Rio de Janeiro<br />
Anti-War Treaty of 1933, in which a number of States declared<br />
"that they condemn wars of aggression in their mutual relations<br />
or in those with other States." A Declaration of American<br />
Principles, adopted at Lima in 1938, confined itself to the simple<br />
formulation that "the use of force as an instrument of national<br />
or international policy is proscribed."<br />
<br />
The enunciation of this Principle at the present time would<br />
serve as a means of giving effect to thedeclaration in theAtlantic<br />
Charter that "all nations of the world, for realistic as well as<br />
spiritual reasons, must come to the abandonment of the use of<br />
force."<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 8<br />
<br />
Each State has alegal duty to take, in cooperation with other<br />
States, such measures as may be prescribed by the competent<br />
agency of the Community of States for preventing or suppressing<br />
a useofforce by anyState in its relations with another State.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
If States are to give up the freedom which they have exer-<br />
cised in the past to rely upon their ownwill in the use of force<br />
against other States, if they are to refrain from any use of force<br />
or any threat to use force in their relations with other States<br />
except as authorized by thecompetent agency of the Community<br />
of States, they will need to beassured of protection by the Com-<br />
munity.It is obviously impossible to fore see the precise situations<br />
in which that protection may be needed, and the assurance would<br />
be illusory if a competent agency of the Community of States<br />
could not seek to prevent or suppress the unauthorized use of<br />
force by aState in its relations with another State. Norwould it<br />
serve much purpose to postulate that any use of force or any threat<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 43-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
1944 The International Lawof the Future 319<br />
<br />
to use force. by a State in its relations with,another State is a<br />
matter of concern to the Communityof States, if the Community<br />
were powerless to move once the situation hadpresented itself.<br />
ThePrinciple does notindicate the nature of theaction which<br />
an agency of the Community of States might be competent'to<br />
take to that end, nor does it specify the measures which States<br />
might be asked to take. Those questions can best be decid<br />
as theoccasions arise, or perhaps in accordance with guides which<br />
might be drawn up from time to time. AState might be asked<br />
to sever diplomatic relations with a State usingor threatening to<br />
use force; or it might be asked to discontinue exchanges of<br />
goods; or it. might be asked to withhold any kind of assistance;<br />
or it might be asked to supply military forces, or to permit the<br />
passage of such forces across its territory; or it. might be asked<br />
to take other measures. Noris it to be assumed that all States<br />
would be in thesame position with respect to an actual or threat-<br />
ened use of force;measures might be prescribed for a certain<br />
State which other States would notbe in a position to take. Such<br />
matters are hotsusceptible of a uniform and universal treatment.<br />
Yet the duty would rest upon all States, and no State would be<br />
free to frustrate the efforts of the Community of States by relying<br />
upon the nineteenth-century law of neutrality.<br />
<br />
In any case in which measures are prescribed, it would<br />
seem desirable that they should be prescribed for more than one<br />
State. Action byasingle State might be tooonerous; or it might<br />
prove so tempting that it would get out of hand, with the result<br />
that the State would come to be serving its own interests. For<br />
these reasons, the Principle is limited to àState's- duty to take<br />
measures in cooperation with other States.<br />
<br />
The Principle represents a departure from the Covenant. of<br />
the League of Nations. In the event of a resort to war by any<br />
Member of the League in disregard of certain obligations, the<br />
Covenant provided that it should "ipso facto be deemed to have<br />
committed an act ofwaragainstall other Membersof the League,"<br />
and the Members undertook "immediately to subject it to the<br />
severance of all trade or financial relations, the prohibition of all<br />
intercourse between their nationals and the nationals of the covenant-<br />
breaking State, and the prevention of all financial, commercial<br />
or personal intercourse between the nationals of the covenant-<br />
breaking State and the national of any other State, whether a<br />
Member of the League or not." Moreover, the Council was<br />
empowered "in such case to recommend to the several Govern-<br />
ments concerned what effective military, naval or air force the<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 44-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
20 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
Members of the League shall severally contribute to the armed<br />
forces to be used to protect thecovenants of the League," andthe<br />
Members agreed to "take the necessary steps to afford passage<br />
through their territory to theforces of anyof the Membersof the<br />
League which are cooperating to protect the covenants of the<br />
League."These provisions were weakened by the failure of the<br />
Covenant to provide, or by its failure to provide sufficiently<br />
clearly, for a common decision that a resort of war in violation<br />
of its provisions had taken place, and an amendment formulated<br />
in 1921 for clarifying the matter did not become effective. In no<br />
case did the Council recommend a use of armedforces "to protect<br />
the covenants of the League." The "sanctions" applied against<br />
Italyin 1935 were inadequateand for the mostpartineffective.<br />
In retrospect, it may be possible to say that the provisions<br />
of the Covenant might have been more efficacious ifthey had<br />
been less sweeping. It seems preferable to leave to a competent<br />
agency of the Community of States more freedom to consider<br />
the differences in resources and geographical position of various<br />
States, and more power to determine the quantum and character<br />
of the measures to be taken by particular States in situations in<br />
which it maydetermine themto benecessary.<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 9<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to conform to the limitations<br />
prescribed by the competent agency of the Community of States<br />
and to submit to the supervision and control of such an agency,<br />
with respect to the size andtype of its armaments.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
It would be idle to attempt to eliminate the use of force<br />
by States in their relations with other States if at the same time<br />
Stateswereleft acomplete freedom to determine thesize and type<br />
of the armaments which they will maintain. Noris it possible to<br />
look forward to "a just and enduring peace ensuring order under<br />
law to all nations" if any State is to be permitted to pile up imple-<br />
ments with which it mayseek to impose its will on other States.<br />
Apart from the temptation to make an unauthorized use of such<br />
implements, the State which amasses themwould come to possess<br />
an undue amount of power, and a disturbance of the good under-<br />
standing necessary for an effective organization of the Community<br />
of States would be inevitable.<br />
<br />
Efforts to limit armaments by the agreement of the heavily<br />
armed States have been proceeding almost continuously since<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 45-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 321<br />
<br />
1899. The failure of the two Peace Conferences at The Hague<br />
to make any progress in this direction is notorious. The solemn<br />
recognition embodied in the Covenant of the League of Nations<br />
that "the maintenanceof peacerequires the reduction of national<br />
armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety<br />
and the enforcement by common action of international obliga-<br />
tions," remaineda dead letter, though it was reinforced by pro-<br />
visions for "plans" and for a permanent commission to advise<br />
upon their observance when adopted. Norhave anyof the recent<br />
conferences on limitation of armamentsachieved results of lasting<br />
significance.' Experience of the past has demonstrated that the<br />
disarmament of adefeated State, effected while the victors keep<br />
their armaments, can operate as an encouragement to clandestine .<br />
arming.<br />
<br />
A departure, must be made if any substantial progress is<br />
really desired. It cannot be merely an agreement"to scrap certain<br />
ships, or to restrict the caliber of guns, or to limit the size of an<br />
corps It must a particular<br />
army. be more thana ban upon weapon,<br />
and more than a community monopoly of a certain raw material. .<br />
The task of arriving at the limitations to which States should have<br />
a duty to conform ought to be facilitated by the recent mechaniza-<br />
tion of war and by the fact that the newer kind of warfare requires<br />
open preparations on a vast scale. It must be realized, however,<br />
that an effective limitation of armamentspresupposes an adequate<br />
system of international organization under which States can feel<br />
that their security is assured.<br />
<br />
Extensive supervision and control maybe required if limita-<br />
tions are to be established and if their observance is to be assured<br />
of course States will suspect that others are not performing their<br />
obligations. The dissemination of complete information concerning<br />
the military establishments of States will be essential. In the<br />
Covenant of the League of Nations, sixty-three States undertook<br />
"to interchange full and frank information as to the scale of their<br />
armaments, their military, naval and, air programmes, and the<br />
condition of such of their industries as are adaptable.to warlike<br />
purposes." This led to the, publication of an "armaments year-<br />
book" which appeared in fifteen volumes from 1924 to 1939, but<br />
the information contained was "drawn solely from official and<br />
public documents," andnoattemptwas'made toverify theindica-<br />
tions of such documents. The 1925 Geneva, Convention on Trade<br />
in Arms, whichfailed to enter into force though it wasratified by<br />
seventeen States, contained provisionson "supervision, and<br />
publicity," but they were limited to a system of licenses and<br />
reports.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 46-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
322 The Canadian Bar Rezdew [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
The need for supervision and control has been appreciated<br />
in a striking declaration by an Under-Secretary of State of the<br />
United States of America that "the abolition of offensive arma<br />
ments and the limitation and reduction of defensive armaments<br />
and of thetools which make the construction of such armaments<br />
possible, canonly be undertaken through some rigid form of inter-<br />
national supervision and control," and that "'without such prac-<br />
tical and essential control no real disarmament can ever be<br />
achieved."<br />
<br />
PRINCIPLE 10<br />
<br />
Each State has a legal duty to refrain from entering into<br />
any agreement with another State, the performance of which<br />
would be inconsistent with the discharge of its duties under<br />
general international law.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
States have a wide freedom to enter into agreements for<br />
meeting their common problems, and it isa freedom which<br />
must be safeguarded. Yet all agreements between States depend<br />
for their binding force on international law, and the interests<br />
of the whole Community of States require that the general<br />
international law take precedence over agreements between<br />
pairs or small groups of States. The legal duties imposed upon<br />
a State by general international law must be performed in any<br />
event, and it would seem to follow as a corollary that no State<br />
should enter into any agreement by which it would assume<br />
obligations the performance of which would be inconsistent with<br />
the general law.<br />
<br />
Aprecedent is to be found in the Covenant of the League<br />
of Nations, designed to be general law for the sixty-three States<br />
which became Members of the League. The Covenant was<br />
accepted as "abrogating all obligations or understandings"<br />
inconsistent with its terms, and the Members agreed that they<br />
would not thereafter "enter into any engagements inconsistent<br />
with the terms thereof."<br />
<br />
Enunciation of this Principle would serve not only to assure<br />
the better observance of the duties imposed by the international<br />
law of the future, but also to bolster the numerous multipartite<br />
conventions which constitute the body of the world's statute<br />
law. Too frequently in the past such conventions have been<br />
restricted in their operation by inconsistent agreements between<br />
some of the parties.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 47-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The international 'Law of the Future 323<br />
<br />
Proposals for the<br />
International Law of the Future<br />
<br />
These Proposals are offered as indications of measures<br />
which. might be adopted to make the organization of the Com-<br />
munity of States effective; and to assure the continuous colla<br />
boration of States to promote the common welfare of all peoples<br />
and to maintain friendly relations between all States.They<br />
are intended to point out ways for implementing a declaration<br />
of the preceding Principles, but they are not presented as draft<br />
provisions for inclusionin an international instrument.<br />
<br />
In line with authoritative declarations made on behalf of<br />
peoples who desire "a just and enduring world peace securing<br />
order under law to all nations," suggestions are advanded as<br />
to possible and desirable approaches to be made toward the<br />
solution of legal problems connected with the maintenance of a<br />
permanent world order. Solution of many of these problems<br />
cannot be reached once, and for all. Whatever the solution<br />
attempted, the problems will .recur. For this reason the suggese<br />
tions are confined to the agencies and methods and procedures<br />
by which such problems can be faced in any -permanent system.<br />
No attempt has been made to anticipate solutions which<br />
may. have - to be given to the immediate problems with which<br />
the world will be faced when present hostilities have been ended.<br />
The importance of those problems cannot be minimized, but<br />
solutions of them will depend upon numerous political decisions<br />
to be taken in situations which cannot be foreseen.<br />
<br />
I. Organization of the Community of States<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 1 .<br />
<br />
1) The Community of States should be organized on a<br />
universal basis. All States which exist or which may come<br />
into' existence in the future should be included. No provision<br />
should be made for the expulsion or withdrawal of any State.<br />
<br />
(2)' The organization of the Community ®f States on a<br />
universal basis should not preclude the organization of groups<br />
of States on the basis of regional propinquity, historical relation<br />
ship, or mutuality of interest, for purposes not' inconsistent<br />
with those ofthe universal organization. The activities of<br />
agencies of such groups of States should be coordinated with<br />
the activities of the agencies of the Community of States.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 48-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
324 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
If the Community of States is to protect and advance the<br />
interests of all peoples, if it is to proscribe the use of force by<br />
any State, if its agencies are to be enabled to function with a<br />
world-wide authority, it must be organized on a universal basis.<br />
All States in the Community of States, all States to which inter-<br />
national law applies, must be included in the organization.<br />
If the organization of the Community of States is to be<br />
effective, if it is to have a prospect of permanence, it must be<br />
enabled to continue on a universal basis. Hence, no provision<br />
should be made for the withdrawal of any State, and no expul-<br />
sion 'of a State should be possible.<br />
<br />
An international organization which is not universal, which<br />
though it includes many States excludes others, would not only<br />
be less effective; it would also encounter grave risks of challenge<br />
and opposition.If it includes only States of a certain political<br />
or ideological character, the formation of a rival and hostile<br />
group would be encouraged.A union of democratic States<br />
might find itself confronted by a union of non-democratic States;<br />
and recent history has shown that a union of like-minded States<br />
of a certain mind may lead to a union of like-minded States of<br />
another mind.<br />
<br />
Experience in international organization clearly points to<br />
the necessity of universality. The founders of the League of<br />
Nations seemed to have hoped for its development toward<br />
universality, but when the League was organized numerous<br />
States were not invited to accede to the Covenant-not merely<br />
Austria, Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary and Turkey, but also<br />
Afghanistan,Costa Rica, Dominican Republic,Luxemburg,<br />
Mexico, the Soviet Union and other States. The States named<br />
were subsequently admitted to membership, but certain smaller<br />
States-Liechtenstein, Monaco, and San Marino-were excluded<br />
from formal membership. The prospect of universality was<br />
further prejudiced by the Covenant's provisions for withdrawal<br />
and expulsion; the privilege of withdrawal was effectively exer-<br />
cised by sixteen States, and one State was expelled.<br />
Throughout its history, the efforts of States made through<br />
the League of Nations were hampered by the necessity of a<br />
distinction between Members and non-Members. League activi<br />
ties in many fields required that the cooperation of non-Member<br />
States be enlisted, and frequent diplomatic conferences had to<br />
be convoked to this end. . Yet progressively the distinction<br />
became of less importance, and when a new Central Committee<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 49-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Lawof the Future 325<br />
<br />
for Economic and Social Questions was projected in 1939, it<br />
was urged by the United States of America And recognized by<br />
the League Assembly that all States should be permitted to<br />
participate in the work of the Committee; The experience of<br />
the League of Nations led the Government of the Swiss Con-<br />
federation to observe, in 1936, that "a League that is not<br />
universal is not merely a weaker and less effective institution,<br />
but an institution whose character is liable to deteriorate. It<br />
may change from a world-wide association for the development<br />
and defence of international law into an association of States<br />
likely, in the nature of things, to find itself at odds with countries<br />
that do not belong to it."<br />
<br />
In other organizations, also, the tendency has been toward<br />
universality. The Universal Postal Union, for example, grew from<br />
a union of twenty States in 1874 to a union of seventy-two<br />
States in 1939.<br />
<br />
The Proposal follows thé precedent of the Unionof American<br />
Republics, from which no American Republic has been excluded,<br />
none has been expelled, and none has sought to withdraw. It, is<br />
in line with a recent declaration by the Inter-American Com-<br />
mittee of Jurists that "the international community must be<br />
organized on the basis of the cooperation of all nations," and .<br />
that "no nation is privileged to remain aloof from the, organiza-<br />
tion thus established." It would carry out the clear implications<br />
of the Atlantic Charter which emphasizes the enjoyment "by all<br />
States, great or small, victor or vanquished" of conditions neces-<br />
sary for their economic prosperity, the fullest collaboration<br />
"between all nations" in the economic field, a peace from which<br />
"all nations" may benefit, and the abandonment of the use of<br />
force by "all the nations of the world."<br />
<br />
An organization of the Community of States on a uni-<br />
versal basis would , naturally be competent to deal with any<br />
matter of concern to the Community of States. This does not<br />
mean that some problems would not have to be dealt with by<br />
agencies of special and limited scope, and of course such agencies<br />
could be. created within the framework of a universal organiza-<br />
tion. Yet if only a number of special and limited unions were<br />
formed, the world would be back in the stage of the fifty years<br />
which preceded 1919. As a permanent matter, a general organi-<br />
zation will be required for problems which are more than tem-<br />
porary, 'as well as for the coordination of special activities.<br />
<br />
The method to be adopted for realizing this Proposal of<br />
an organization of the Community of States on a universal<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 50-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
326 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
basis cannot be determined in advance.It must depend upon<br />
conditions prevailing when the organization is to be launched.<br />
It is assumed that at the conclusion of the present war the<br />
lodgement of power will be such that the States which desire<br />
an effective organization will have the dominant voice, and<br />
that other States will be willing, or will feel themselves con-<br />
strained, to follow the lead. If one or more States should hold<br />
aloof, competence might none the less be vested in the organi-<br />
zation to act on behalf of the whole Community of States.<br />
Initially, the inclusion of States should be specific, all of<br />
the entities existing as States at the time being named. There-<br />
after, the inclusion of any entity as a State in the organized<br />
Community of States should constitute its recognition by all<br />
States.<br />
<br />
If the conditions existing in certain States at the close of<br />
the war should lead to any restrictions on their active partici-<br />
pation, it should be realized that the organization would be<br />
crippled if such restrictions were more than temporary, and<br />
their earliest possible removal should be envisaged.<br />
The organization of the Community of States on a universal<br />
basis would not preclude the grouping of certain States for purposes<br />
not inconsistent with those of the universal organization. Such<br />
a grouping of States might be based upon regional propinquity,[2]<br />
upon historical relationship, or upon mutuality of interest.<br />
Numerous regional organizations have existed in recent<br />
years. The twenty-one American Republics have beenassociated<br />
since 1889 in the Union of American Republics, which operates<br />
in periodical InternationalConferencesofAmericanStatesandwhich<br />
maintains apermanent agency inthe Pan-American Union.Other<br />
regional organizations have been the Little Entente, the Balkan<br />
Entente, the Baltic Union, and the Inter-American Union of the<br />
Caribbean.Regional groupings of States, less closely organized,<br />
have been formed for cooperative purposes, also; e.g., the Scan-<br />
dinavian States, the Bolivarian States, and the States of the River<br />
Plate. Historical relationship unites the States which have<br />
emerged from the British Empire to form the British Common-<br />
wealth of Nations; and mutuality of interest has at times drawn<br />
together such groups as the Islamic States, and the Oslo States.<br />
It is desirable that the activities of such groups of States<br />
be coordinated with those of the more general organization. Not<br />
infrequently general international conventions have been dupli<br />
cated, and to that extent limited, by conventions drawn up by<br />
groups of States.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 51-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
19441 The Internatiônal Law of the Future327<br />
<br />
A useful precedent exists in the field of postal service. The<br />
Universal Postal Conventions have long provided that "countries<br />
of the Union may maintain and establish restricted unions," if<br />
the agreements creating them do not provide for services "less<br />
favorable than those laid down in the Acts of the Union"; and<br />
several subordinate postal unions-e.g., the African Postal Union<br />
and the Postal Unionof theAmericas and Spain-exist under that<br />
provision. A similar situation exists within the framework of the<br />
Telecommunication Union.<br />
In the League of Nations, also, regional conferences were held<br />
from time to time to deal with special matters; e.g., the American<br />
Conferences on double taxation, and the Par Eastern Conferences<br />
on health and other social questions. Under the auspices of the<br />
general International -Labor Organization, the American States<br />
have recently held two labor conferences and a conference on<br />
social security.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 2<br />
(1) A General Assembly, in which all States should be<br />
entitled to, representation, should be established to serve as the<br />
general representative and deliberative organ'of the Community -<br />
of States.<br />
(2) The General Assembly) meeting,as occasion mayrequire,<br />
and at least once each year, should have general power to deal<br />
with any matter of concern to the Community of States. Exçept<br />
as may be expressly provided otherwise, its decisions should<br />
require only a majority vote.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
The protection and advancement of the common interests<br />
of peoples require an organization which can preserve continuity<br />
in its efforts. -Merely spasmodic conferences would not suffice.<br />
Solutions of international problems usually require long pre-<br />
paration and repeated discussions, and even when they are<br />
arrived at they may not be in any sense final. Continuity is to be<br />
achieved only through established institutions, making possible<br />
frequent and periodical conferences functioning with the assist-<br />
ance of permanent officials.<br />
The chief of these institutions should be a general representa-<br />
tive and deliberative organ, which might be called a Generai<br />
Assembly. Meeting as occasion may require, and at least once<br />
each year, it should be empowered to deal with any matter of<br />
concern to the Community of States exceptasspecial competence<br />
mayhave been committed to another body.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 52-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
328The Canadian Bar Review[Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
In such abody,each of the Stateswhichform the Community<br />
of States should beentitled to representation. Thenumberof rep-<br />
resentatives of each State might be determined by the General<br />
Assembly itself, as aunit.<br />
Each State should be left free to determine howit will choose<br />
its representatives. As the Covenant of the League of Nations<br />
entitled each Member to have three representatives in the As<br />
sembly, some States habitually included in their delegations<br />
representatives chosen from political parties in opposition to the<br />
party in power, and the practice had an obvious advantage.Yet<br />
conditions in the different States vary so widely that no uniform<br />
prescription as to a method of choice would seem to be possible.<br />
Thematter is one of which each State maybe the bestjudge for<br />
itself.<br />
Nordoes it seem desirable to provide for the representation<br />
in a General Assembly of groups or bodies other than Govern-<br />
ments. The effectiveness of such a body would be in direct pro<br />
portion to the extent to which its decisions are acceptable to<br />
States, for in most cases the Governments of States would have<br />
the responsibility of executing them.The General Conference<br />
of the International Labor Organization is "composed of four<br />
representatives of each of the members, of whom two shall be<br />
Government delegates and the two others shall be delegates<br />
representing respectively the employers and the workpeople of<br />
each of the Members," and the non-Government delegates must<br />
be chosen in agreement with the industrial organizations which<br />
are most representative of employers or workpeople in their<br />
respective countries.Thesystem serves admirably for the General<br />
Conference of the International Labor Organization, yet it would<br />
hardly be susceptible of application in a General Assembly in<br />
which more extensive powers would be vested.<br />
In a body composed of some seventy States, it would seem<br />
to be undesirable to require unanimity before any action could<br />
be taken. For most matters, a majority vote should suffice for a<br />
;other matters, some of which are referred to in the<br />
decision for<br />
Proposals, a qualified majority, such as two-thirds, might be<br />
required. As ageneral rule the decisions of the Assembly of the<br />
League of Nations on all matters other than questions of proce-<br />
dure and the appointment of committees to investigate particular<br />
matters were required to be unanimous, but in practice certain<br />
types of resolutionswere adopted bymajority vote.<br />
If a majority vote be made sufficient, however, it may be<br />
desirable to establish from the outset a system of weighting the<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 53-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
19441 The International Law of the Future 329<br />
<br />
votes of States in a General Assembly. The principle of State<br />
equality would be recognized in provision for the representation<br />
of All States, and in the privilege extended to All States to partici-<br />
pate in the consideration of matters of common concern.Yet<br />
States- vary so widely in size and influence, the responsibilities,<br />
which they can assume are so 'disparate, that some distinctions<br />
may have to be drawn in- the voting power of the States rep-<br />
resented. Without such distinctions, it might be necessary so to<br />
restrict the powers of a General Assembly as to render it a much<br />
less significant body.The principle of State equality does not<br />
stand in the wayof a recognition ofactual differences infact.<br />
<br />
In the past, the practice has usually prevailed in inter-<br />
national organizations of giving, to each State one vote. - Thatrule<br />
has obtained intheAssembly of the League,of Nations, and in the<br />
International ConferencesofAmerican States. Yettherehavebeen<br />
notable exceptions to the general rule. In the Congresses of the<br />
Universal Postal - Union, votes have long been assigned to the<br />
dependencies of certain States, so that in fact some States have<br />
a number of votes. In some organizations, voting power has<br />
been made to depend upon a classification of States. In the 1905<br />
Convention on the International Institute of Agriculture and<br />
in the 1907, Arrangement on the International Office of Public<br />
Health, a classification was adopted both for voting power, and<br />
for contributions to the budget.<br />
<br />
Any classification of States mustrest ona somewhat arbitrary<br />
basis. No objective criteria seem to be available which would<br />
not lead to artificial results. The factor of population would<br />
probably present least difficulty, yet some limitations would be<br />
necessary if populationwere made the sole criterion, or even if,<br />
the classificationwere not basedon population alone. The amount<br />
of a State's contribution to the budget might serve as one of the<br />
criteria of its voting power; but too much emphasis on financial<br />
capacity would be invidious, and the problem would stillremain<br />
of finding a barometer for determining that amount. If any<br />
classification,is to be made, a variety of factors may have, to be<br />
considered together. - Size of population, amount of contribution<br />
to the budget, extent of trade and production, and perhaps other<br />
factors might be taken into account.<br />
<br />
Nor is it necessary that a single system ofweightingvotes be<br />
adopted.It is possible to assign to the vote of a State a value<br />
according to- one system of weighting and simultaneously a cumu<br />
lative value according to another system. In 1919, the Swiss<br />
Confederation proposed that certain decisions of the Assembly<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 54-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
330 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
of the League of Nations should require a double majority of<br />
votes, a majority on the basis of one vote to each State and a<br />
majority weighted in accordance with the size of States' popula-<br />
tions. Similarly, the Interstate Compactto Conserve Oil and Gas<br />
concluded in 1935byseveral states of the United States ofAmerica,<br />
provides for votes by a double majority of the representatives<br />
in the Interstate Oil Compact Commission, prescribing both<br />
"the affirmative votes of the majority of thewhole number of the<br />
compacting states represented," and a "concurring vote of a<br />
majority in interest" of such states, the interest to be determined<br />
byaratio of daily average production ofoil.<br />
The representation in the General Assembly of diminutive<br />
States, for instance of States having a population of less than<br />
100,000, might be thought to raise a special problem in this<br />
connection. The effective rôle of such States might be limited<br />
to their participation in deliberations; votes of their representa-<br />
tives _might be cast but, at any rate for some purposes, not<br />
counted.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 3<br />
(1) An Executive Council, in which States<br />
should be entitled to representation, should be established to<br />
serve as thegeneral executive organ of the Community of States.<br />
(2) The Executive Council, meeting as occasion may require<br />
and at least four times each year, should have general power to<br />
deal with any matter of concern to the Community of States.<br />
Except as may be expressly provided otherwise, its decisions<br />
should be taken by unanimous vote, but decisions with regard to<br />
matters of procedure and appointments should require only a<br />
majority vote.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
A body so large as the proposed General Assembly would<br />
not be capable of taking the decisions of immediate application<br />
which may be required for the protection and advancement of<br />
peoples' common interests. It should be supplemented by a<br />
smaller and moreflexible body, whichcould meet more frequently<br />
andwhich could serve as thegeneral executive organ of the Com-<br />
munity of States. Such a body might be called an Executive<br />
Council.<br />
Meeting as occasion may require and at least four times<br />
each year, the Executive Council should be empowered to deal<br />
with any matter of concern to the Community of States, except<br />
as special competence mayhave been committed to another body.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 55-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
19441, The International Law of the Future 331<br />
<br />
Following any,directives laid -down by the General Assembly,<br />
it should have general power to take emergency decisions, to<br />
supervise and coordinate the, activities of -agencies of the Com-<br />
munity of States, to keep, a watchful eye, upon the develop-<br />
ment of inter-State relations, and to deal with questions of policy<br />
notreserved to the General Assembly.<br />
Thus the GeneralAssembly andthe Executive Council might<br />
both be given general power to deal with any matter of concern<br />
to the Community of States. Asharp demarcation, of the fields<br />
of action of the twobodies would be undesirable, , The experience<br />
of 'the Assembly and Council of the League of Nations, both of<br />
which were . empowered to deal "with any matter within the<br />
sphere of action of the. Leagueor affecting the peace of theworld,"<br />
hasshown that it is notnecessary to anticipate a conflict between<br />
the General Assembly. and the Executive Council as to their<br />
authority. .<br />
Adecision as to the number of representatives to compose<br />
the Executive Council will depend upon the general political<br />
situation. On the one hand, it would seem desirable that the<br />
number should not be too large for effective conference and, for<br />
the free exchange of views;on the other hand, it should, be large<br />
enough to provide for arepresentation which would assure confid-<br />
ence and prestige.Perhaps a possibility of varying the number<br />
from time to time should besafeguarded.<br />
The Covenant of the Leagueof Nations originally envisaged<br />
a Council of representatives of nine States, butit empowered the<br />
Council, with the approval of the, majority of the Assembly, to<br />
increase the number of States to be represented. Only eight<br />
States were represented in the Council in the beginning, but in<br />
1922 the number was increased to ten, in 1926 to_ fourteen, in<br />
1933 to fifteen, andin 1934 to sixteen.<br />
AstheExecutive Council here envisaged would be arelatively,<br />
.small body+, each Staterepresented should haveonevote. 'Inview ,<br />
of the nature and functions of the' body, it is proposed that, as a<br />
general rule, its.decisions should be taken byunanimity, but-this<br />
rule :should not apply to decisions with regard-to appointments or<br />
mattersof procedure, forwhich amajorityvote should suffice.The<br />
requirement of unanimity., would restrict the action which the<br />
Executive Council might take, but it seems to be necessitated by<br />
the probableinsistence ofStates playing animportant r6le in inter-<br />
national affairs.. , It would have the advantage of assuring the<br />
wider support of decisions and thus of increasing the efficacy of<br />
action taken bythe Executive Council.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 56-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
332The Canadian Bar Review[Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 4<br />
(1) In the selection ofStates for representation in the<br />
Executive Council, special consideration should be. given of the<br />
importance of their r6le in international affairs. Initially, the<br />
States entitled to representation in the Executive Council should<br />
.might be entitled<br />
be named Certain States named as to rep-<br />
resentation until the selection of their successors;other States<br />
might be named as entitled to representation for a fixed period,<br />
or for fixed periods, of years.The selection of their successors,<br />
andpossibly of other States to beentitled to representation, should<br />
be entrusted to the GeneralAssembly.<br />
(2) Any State not represented in the Executive Council<br />
should be entitled to participate, without avote, in the considera-<br />
tion by the Executive Council of any matter specially affecting<br />
its interests.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
TheExecutive Council is proposed as a body to have a great<br />
authority, to be invested with large powers, and to be capable<br />
of taking effective action. Such a body would require the rep<br />
resentation of those States which may be at the time in a position<br />
to assume and to discharge responsibility for the decisions taken.<br />
The Proposal calls for giving special consideration to the<br />
importance of the r6le of States in international affairs. This<br />
standard cannot be applied as a rule of thumb. Nofixed criteria<br />
are available, and perhaps none can be devised, for a precise<br />
measuringof therelative importance of theroles played byStates.<br />
Despite its generality, the standard is susceptible of application.<br />
Indeed, it is generally applied in popular thought which dis-<br />
tinguishes between "Great States" and others. It would not be<br />
individious to make such a distinction, for States are only too<br />
aware of the differences in the responsibilities which they are able<br />
and willing to assume.<br />
An analogy is to be found in the Constitution of the Inter-<br />
national Labor Organization, in the provision that each of the<br />
eight Members "of chief industrial importance" is entitled to<br />
appoint a representative in the Governing Body.This formula<br />
has been applied without producing any considerable dissatisfac-<br />
tion. In 1926, the Austrian Government drew upon the analogy<br />
for aproposal that the Council of the League of Nationsshould be<br />
composed of representatives of the States which, considering<br />
"international political power, extent of territory, and degree of<br />
influence abroad," could be said to be of "chief universal<br />
importance."<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 57-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1.9441 The International Law of the Future 333<br />
<br />
The standard proposed would exclude certain States from<br />
eligibility for representation in the Executive Council. It would<br />
not exclude consideration of geographical position, however, for"<br />
that is 'a necessary element of importance in international affairs.<br />
Yetescape mustbefoundfromanypracticeof automatic rotation;<br />
the danger of which was demonstrated by the experience in the<br />
Leagueof Nations.<br />
A fixed geographical allocation ofseats in the Council<br />
of the League of Nations wasdecided upon in 1920,andit was not<br />
displaced by a later determination that regard should be paid to.<br />
"the maingeographical divisions of the world, the great ethnical<br />
groups, the different religious traditions, the various types of<br />
civilization, and thechief sources of wealth."In practice, a group<br />
system was followed in the allocation of "seats" on the Council,<br />
three seats being allocated to Latin-American States, two to<br />
Asiatic States, one to "Nordic."States, one to' Little Entente<br />
States, one to British Dominions, and one or two to other States,<br />
with Polandand Spain occupying a special position as to re-eligi-<br />
bility, Asystem of rotation adopted by States in certain groups<br />
led, in the later years, to the selection for representation in the<br />
Council of States which were so incapable of assuming responsi-<br />
bilities as to robthe Councilof muchof its powerandprestige.<br />
In the beginning, theselection of the States to be represented<br />
in the Executive Council should be made by those who.initiate<br />
the organization.Some of the_ States thus selected might be<br />
entitled to representation until the selection of their successors,<br />
othersfor afixed period, orfixed periods, of years.It should beleft<br />
to the General Assembly to select the successors to such States.<br />
Nosuccessors might be selected for some of the States originally<br />
named, or under a system to be adopted some States might be<br />
selected to succeed themselves.The GeneralAssembly mightalso<br />
be given power to select additional States. Terms could be later<br />
fixed during which the representation would continue, and the<br />
same termswould not be necessary in all cases.<br />
The Proposal would make a significant departure from the<br />
Covenant of the League of Nations. Though it named the States<br />
to be represented in the Council in the beginning, the Covenant<br />
provided that certain States, described as "the Principal Allied<br />
and Associated Powers" (anamendment proposed in 1938 would<br />
have eliminated thisdescription), were to have permanent<br />
representationintheLeagueCouncil; andwiththeapproval of the<br />
Assembly, the Council was empowered to name additional States<br />
for permanent representation. Only the selection of States for<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 58-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
334 The Canadian Bar Rerie2U [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
non-permanent representation was entrusted to the Assembly.<br />
The distinction between permanent and non-permanent rep-<br />
resentation was resented by some States as invidious, and upon<br />
the admission of Germany in 1926, the difficulties encountered in<br />
increasing the numberof States entitled to permanent representa-<br />
tion led to the withdrawal of Brazil. Moreover, embarrassment.<br />
ensued from the conduct of some of the States entitled to per-<br />
manent representation-in two instances, such States were found<br />
to haveviolated their covenants.<br />
More satisfactory results maybe anticipated if the power of<br />
selection entrusted to theAssembly beenlarged, andif theinvidious<br />
distinction between permanentand non-permanent representation<br />
be abolished. This course would better provide for the changes<br />
which will inevitably occur. It should not be inacceptable to the<br />
States which are accustomed to discharging the larger respon-<br />
sibilities in world affairs. So long as they continue to play such<br />
roles, the necessity of their being represented in the Council will<br />
be generally appreciated. Such States would also have great<br />
influence in the General Assembly, and representatives in the<br />
latter body, genuinely interested in maintaining the Executive<br />
Council, would hardly fail to agree that these States should be<br />
entitled to continued representation. Sabotage is notto be antici-<br />
pated, though it mightremain possible within any formal scheme<br />
to be devised.<br />
In this connection, the experience in the elections of judges<br />
of the Permanent Court of International Justice is illuminating.<br />
Thepretension of the so-called "Great States" to representation<br />
wasquite aseffective in delaying the establishment of a permanent<br />
court as was the insistence of other States upon recognition of<br />
equality. It was one of the reasons, also, for entrusting the elec-<br />
tion of judges of the Courtestablished in 1920 to both theAssem-<br />
bly and the Council of the League of Nations;when that step<br />
taken, it wasanticipated that five of the nine seats in the Council<br />
would be held by the "Great States," yet even after the composi-<br />
tion of the Council had been changed, after control of the elections<br />
had passed out of the hands of States permanently represented,<br />
nationals of the "Great States" continued to be elected as judges<br />
of the Court, almost as a matter of course.<br />
It maybe notedthat therulesadopted by theAssembly of the<br />
Leagueof Nationsin 1926 provided that atanytime the Assembly<br />
might "by a two-thirds majority, decide to proceed . . . to a<br />
newelection of all the non-permanent Membersof the Council."<br />
In application of this rule it was possible for the mandate of a<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 59-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944]The International Law of the Future 335<br />
<br />
State to be revoked during the term for which it had beenelected<br />
for representation.<br />
The national experience of certain federal States is also sug-<br />
gestive in this connection. Nô one of the twenty-two cantons<br />
of the Swiss Confederation is entitled to representation in the<br />
Swiss Federal. Council, yet since 1848 two of the seven members<br />
of that body have regularly been selected from the two largest<br />
cantons, Bern and Zurich. -No state of the United States of<br />
America is entitled to representation either in the Supreme Court_<br />
or in the President's Cabinet, yet for more than a hundredyears<br />
the membership of both of these bodies has with rare and brief<br />
'exceptions included citizens of the State of NewYork.<br />
The Proposal also provides that even though it is not one.<br />
of the States represented in the Executive Council, aState should<br />
be entitled to participate in consideration of any matter<br />
.the<br />
specially affecting its interests. In line with other Proposals, it is<br />
suggested that in such 4 case the State should not have a vote.<br />
On this point, also, the Proposalwould depart from the precedent<br />
in the Covenant of the League of Nations, under which such a<br />
State ordinarily had the privilegeof voting.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 5<br />
<br />
(1) Except as may be expressly provided otherwise, the<br />
General Assembly and the Executive Council should have power<br />
to~ establish their ownrules of procedure.<br />
<br />
(2) Subject, to such exceptions as may be provided in the .<br />
rules of procedure, meetings of the General Assembly and the<br />
Executive Council. should beheld in public and the minutes of all<br />
meetings should be published promptly.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
It is obviously impossible to determine in advance all of the<br />
rules of procedure to be followed.by such bodies as the proposed<br />
General Assembly and Executive Council. Except on points<br />
covered by specific provisions, each , of these bodies should be<br />
empowered. to draw up its ow. rules of procedure, and to modify<br />
such rules in thelight ofexperience.<br />
<br />
A large body such as the General Assembly would of neces-<br />
sity meet in public.The Proposal would establish this general<br />
rule for the Executive Council, also, .for it seems important that -<br />
States not represented .inthat body should be. currently apprised<br />
of its activities.. Yet in some cases, .which would be covered by<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 60-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
336 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
special exceptions in the rules of procedure, the way should be<br />
left open for variations from the general rule. Theprompt publi-<br />
cation of minutes of both bodies would extend the knowledge<br />
of their functioning to ageneral public.<br />
Experience in the League of Nations serves to emphasize<br />
the importance of the second part of this Proposal.Meetings<br />
of the Assembly of the League of Nations were invariably held<br />
in public, and minutes were promptly published; in its rules,<br />
however, the Assembly reserved power to "decide that par-<br />
ticular meetings shall be private."Some of the earlier meetings<br />
of the Council of the League of Nations were not held in public,<br />
and the minutes were not published at the time; but after<br />
some agitation this rule was soon reversed, and the minutes<br />
of the earlier meetings were opened to public circulation. The<br />
rules of the Council continued to reserve the possibility of both<br />
private and secret meetings, and they required some decisions,<br />
particularly decisions concerning persons, to be taken at private<br />
meetings.<br />
The minutes of the International Labour Conferences were<br />
regularly and promptly published from the beginning, but the<br />
minutes of the Governing Body of the International Labour<br />
Office were not made available to the public until 1932.<br />
The practice of the Union of American Republics leaves<br />
much to be desired in this connection. The preparation and<br />
publication of records of the International Conferences of Ameri<br />
can States have been entrusted to the Governments which were<br />
hosts to the Conferences, and the results have been far from<br />
satisfactory. In 1933, the Seventh Conference called for publi-<br />
cation of the minutes within a year from the day of adjourn-<br />
ment, in a uniform type and according to a systematic plan.<br />
The Governing Board of the Pan-American Union publishes<br />
no records of its proceedings.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 6<br />
The General Assembly should have power to deal with<br />
all questions relating to the general budget, to decide upon<br />
the methods of providing funds for meeting expenses, and to<br />
fix the proportions in which States should contribute to such<br />
funds.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Any effective international organization must be assured of<br />
an adequate budget.Activities can be undertaken only if funds<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 61-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Lawof the Future 337<br />
<br />
are available for meeting expenses. Various methods might be<br />
adopted for raising such funds.<br />
-In any case, it would probably be necessary to rely upon<br />
contributions from all. the participating States. Hence, ageneral<br />
responsibility for questions relating to the budget should be<br />
entrusted to the most representative body in an organization,<br />
The Proposal would invest the General Assembly with general<br />
powers in connection with the budget and its alimentation.<br />
Experience in the League of Nations would seem to support<br />
the Proposal. The original Covenant provided that the expenses<br />
should be borne by' the Members of the League "in accordance<br />
with the apportionment of the expenses of the International<br />
Bureau of the Universal Postal Union";in that apportionment,<br />
States were ranked in several classes; and the classes paid vary-<br />
ing numbers of units. Though this system had worked satis-<br />
factorily for the small expenses of the International Bureau of<br />
the Universal Postal Union (then about '125,000 Swiss francs,<br />
or $25,000), it soon became apparent that it would not serve<br />
for the larger expenses of the League.In 1924, the Covenant<br />
was amended -the amendment had been proposed in 1921 -to<br />
provide that the expenses should be borne by the Members<br />
"in the proportion decided by theAssembly."Gradually, control<br />
over finances 'shifted to the Assembly, to the exclusion of the<br />
Council. The Assembly's Allocation Committee found it impos-,<br />
sible to arrive at any "purely scientific scale of allocation";<br />
adopting "capacity to pay" as a guide, it took into account<br />
data relating to"population, production, trade and banks,<br />
transport, and budgets" of the various States.By'the, scale of<br />
1937; which provided for the 1938 budget of the Secretariat,<br />
the InternationalLabour Organization and the Permanent<br />
Court of International Justice, amounting to 32,273,251 Swiss<br />
francs (roughly $8,000,000), 932 units were allocated, 108 units<br />
(11.5 per cent) being allocated to the 'largest contributor (the<br />
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).<br />
For the budget of the Pan-American Union (in 1943,<br />
$419,647), a quota is fixed for each State at the rate of $1.50<br />
. per 1000 of population.Under this system, the largest contri-<br />
butor (the United States of America) is called upon to pay,<br />
54 per cent of the expenses, and` the second largest contributor<br />
(Brazil) 16 per cent; so that 70 per cent of the budget is contri-<br />
.biited by two of twenty-one States. Though'the scheme has<br />
the advantage' of a scale definitely fixed in advance, it would<br />
hardly serve for a much larger budget., In some smaller iinter-<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 62-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
338 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
national organizations, States pay equal contributions; in others,<br />
quotas are based on such factors as commerce, tonnage, exports<br />
and imports, or production, or on some combination of them.<br />
Perhaps no satisfactory method of alimenting a relatively<br />
large budget can befixed in advance. The Proposal would leave<br />
the financial problem to a body which could be guided by its<br />
own experience. If votes in the General Assembly were weighted<br />
in accordance with contributions, however, the problem would<br />
cease to be merely financial, and would take on a political aspect<br />
of first importance.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 7<br />
The General Assembly should have power, by two-thirds<br />
vote and with the concurrence of the Executive Council, to modify<br />
general rules of international law and toenact new general<br />
rules of international law.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
In the past, a change in the general rules of international<br />
law has been possible only with the consent of States. No<br />
method was prescribed for the giving of consent, nor was any<br />
particular procedure required for ascertaining that it had been<br />
given. Some formulations of new law came to be admitted to<br />
have a general validity even by States which had not given<br />
their formal consent. Indeed it may be said that it was never<br />
thought to be necessary to get the consent of all of the existing<br />
States for the extension of international law.<br />
During the past hundred years, legislation with respect to<br />
problems of international law, effective for the participating<br />
States only, has become very common. In isolated instances,<br />
it has resulted from proposals made by a single State and<br />
approved by other States -for example, a proposal made by<br />
Great Britain in 1862 was approved by other maritime States<br />
and became the first International Rules of the Road at Sea.<br />
Legislation has usually resulted from the deliberations of inter-<br />
national conferences, however, and it has taken the form of<br />
instruments opened to signature and ratification, or to accession;<br />
exceptionally, the formality of signature has been omitted as to<br />
some instruments, for example, the international labour con-<br />
ventions and the 1928 Geneva Act on Pacific Settlement of<br />
Disputes. The signatories of instruments were usually free to<br />
give or withhold their ratifications, and constitutional procedures<br />
in many States calling for the participation of legislative bodies<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 63-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] -The International Law of the Future 339<br />
<br />
have tended to preserve the necessity of ratification following<br />
signature or accession.Rarely have conferences .promulgated<br />
measures to be immediately binding and effective..<br />
It has proved difficult to achieve general uniformity by<br />
this system.In many cases States have failed to deposit ratifi-<br />
cations of or, accessions to conventions to which they have no<br />
grave objections,and long delays have frequently resulted.<br />
,Thus, to cite a few examples, the United States of America<br />
acceded to the 1864 Geneva Red Cross Convention in 1882;<br />
Turliy acceded to the 1881 Convention on Phylloxera in 1935;<br />
Chile acceded to the 1906 Convention on Use of White Phos-<br />
phorus in the Manufacture of Matches in 1936; and Paraguay<br />
ratified the 1912 Opium Convention in 1943.<br />
In some cases, the entry into force of conventions, even<br />
for States which have ratified them, has been long delayed by-<br />
the failure of other States to ratify. Even- in ordinary cases,<br />
where no great controversy raged and no strong objection was<br />
voiced, the, process of securing the ratification ofan inter-<br />
national instrument by a considerable number of States has<br />
frequently occasioned a delay of several years. Thus the 1929<br />
Protocol amending the Statute of the Permanent Court of<br />
International; the<br />
Justice did not enter into force until 1936 and<br />
last of the ten ratifications required to bring the 1930 Protocol<br />
on Military. Service of Persons. having Double Nationality into<br />
force was not deposited until 1937.<br />
<br />
Clearly, a more efficient and a more expeditious method<br />
should be available for effecting needed changes. in the general<br />
rules of international law.The method which has prevailed in<br />
the past can be continued, and in some cases it may suffice<br />
for the-desirable legislation. Yet it should be supplemented-by<br />
a less cumbrous method which could.be employed if desired by<br />
à large preponderance' of the States.<br />
<br />
The proposalwould vest a power of international legislation<br />
in the General' Assembly, limited to the amendment and 'enact-<br />
ment of- general rules of international law. It would in no way<br />
encroach upon the legislative powers exercised by any national<br />
congress or parliament: National legislatures have never been<br />
competent to effect changes in international law.Determination<br />
of- the manner in which a. State is to perform its international<br />
obligations and of the manner in which the rules of international<br />
law are to- be incorporated into the national law of a State,<br />
however, - would still remain within' the competence of that<br />
State's own legislature.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 64-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
340 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
Any exercise of the power to modify existing general rules<br />
and to enact new general rules ofinternational law would<br />
require both a two-thirds vote in the General Assembly and a<br />
unanimous vote in the Executive Council.It would of course<br />
be preceded by the necessary investigations and deliberations,<br />
which would entail the collaboration of experts.Hasty action<br />
is not to be feared in such a process, nor would Governments<br />
be confronted with any necessity of decisions as to which they<br />
would not have had plenty of advance notice.<br />
<br />
The Proposal is not altogether an innovation. Though the<br />
Universal Postal Conventions are formally subject to ratifica-<br />
tion, they are habitually brought into force on definite dates,<br />
even for States which have not then and do not later ratify.<br />
These Conventions have long provided that proposals made in<br />
the interval between conferences with the support of three<br />
postal administrations shall be voted upon by all the adminis-<br />
trations in the Union; in some cases a unanimous vote, in other<br />
cases a two-thirds vote, is required for the adoption of such<br />
proposals, and if only the interpretation of an existing text is<br />
involved a majority vote isenough. The 1919 Convention on<br />
Air Navigation empowered the International Commission on Air<br />
Navigation to amend certain annexes to the Convention by<br />
"three-fourths of the total possible votes which would be cast<br />
if all the States were represented." The Covenant of the League<br />
of Nations provided that amendments of its text would take<br />
effect when ratified by the Members represented in the Council<br />
and by a majority of the Members represented in theAssembly;<br />
but any Member was permitted to signify itsdissent, and<br />
thereby to effect its withdrawal from the League.<br />
<br />
The practice of the Assembly of the League of Nations<br />
may also be mentioned in this connection. In 'no case did the<br />
Assembly assume to promulgate legislative acts binding on<br />
States, though this might have been within its powers exercis-<br />
able by unanimous vote. Only exceptionally did itopen to<br />
signature and ratification or to accession instruments of its<br />
own formulation; e.g., the 1920 Protocol of Signature and<br />
Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, and<br />
the 1928 General Act on the Pacific Settlement of Disputes.<br />
The Assembly's "decisions" usually took the form of recom-<br />
mendations addressed to Governments, or of resolutions in the<br />
nature of recommendations. When it desired that more imme-<br />
diate effect be given to its "decisions," it habitually referred<br />
them to the Council with suggestions as to the action to be<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 65-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Lawof the Future341<br />
<br />
taken; 'but in some cases diplomatic conferences were convoked<br />
for the purpose.<br />
The Proposal would open the way for conscious effort to<br />
modernize some of the principles of international law, and to<br />
keep its content up to date.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 8<br />
(1) Acting upon its own initiative or at the request of any<br />
State, the Executive Council should have power to take cogni-<br />
zance of any alleged failure by â State to carry, out its obliga<br />
tions under international law, amd if the failure is established<br />
to take such action as it may deem to be necessary for the<br />
protection of the interests of the Community of States.<br />
(2) If the State which is alleged to have failed to carry out<br />
its obligations is represented in the Executive Council, it should<br />
not be entitled to, vote when the matter is under consideration.<br />
<br />
C®PIIIVIENT<br />
<br />
If the organization of the Community of States is to have<br />
firm legal foundations, if a legal order is to be -maintained in<br />
the relations of States, it seems essential that a responsible<br />
body should be competent to deal with violations of inter-<br />
national law.States would be reluctant to-abandon the use of<br />
force for self-help, they would be unwilling to observe legal<br />
limitations 'in their own conduct, if they felt-that other States<br />
could repudiate their obligations with impunity. Nor would the<br />
general interest in the "supremacy of law be protected if no<br />
means were available for its vindication. ° ,<br />
The Proposal would empower the Executive Council, acting<br />
upon its own initiative or at the request of any State, to take<br />
cognizance of any alleged failure by a State to carry out its<br />
legal obligations. It would leave the Executive Council free to<br />
appreciate any situation which might arise. Some cases might<br />
be so trifling that the Executive Council would decide not to<br />
'interpose; other cases might be of such gravity as to require<br />
action for the protection of the interests of the Community of<br />
States, and the powers, of the Executive Council should be<br />
sufficient to enable it to take such action. In à proper case,<br />
such action might extend to assuring the indemnification of a<br />
State which has been injured by the failure.,<br />
In any case, it would be necessary to establish very clearly<br />
both the obligation of the State and its failure to perform that<br />
obligation, - At times, the obligation might be indisputable and<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 66-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
342 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
the fact of failure might be notoriously patent; for example,<br />
a judicial pronouncement might already have been made.<br />
Otherwise, the Executive Council would be under the necessity<br />
of conducting the investigation required. In a proper case, it<br />
might request an advisory opinion of the Permanent Court of<br />
International Justice on a doubtful question of law or fact,<br />
or it might institute a special procedure.The Council of the<br />
League of Nations frequently set up special commissions to<br />
conduct investigations, as well as commissions of jurists to advise<br />
on legal questions before it.<br />
The Proposal is in line with historic precedents. Repeatedly<br />
in the past, the failure of a State to live up to its legal com-<br />
mitments has led to a conference of "the Powers." Many<br />
examples might be cited;among others, the London Conference<br />
of 1871, and the action taken by various States in the Far East<br />
in 1890 and 1901.A more recent precedent is the Stresa Con-<br />
ference of 1935 on the occasion of Germany's announcement of<br />
a policy of rearmament, and the ensuing resolution adopted by<br />
the Council of the League of Nations declaring that "Germany<br />
has failed in the duty which lies upon all the members of the<br />
international community to respect the undertakingswhich<br />
they have contracted," and condemning the "unilateral repudia-<br />
tion of international obligations."<br />
It may also be noted that the Minorities Treaties of 1919<br />
and 1920 provided that any member of the Council should<br />
"have the right to bring to the attention of the Council any<br />
infraction, or any danger of infraction, of any of these obliga-<br />
tions, and that the Council may thereupon take such action and<br />
give such direction as it may deem proper and effective in the<br />
circumstances."Numerous cases arose under these provisions,<br />
and a special procedure was adopted for dealing with them.<br />
In 1942, the Ministers of Foreign Affaires of the American<br />
Republics declared that if any agreement between American<br />
Republics should be violated, or ifthere should be "reason to<br />
believe that aviolation which might disturb the peace or soli-<br />
darity of the Americas is being contemplated," a procedure of<br />
consultation might be initiated "with the object of agreeing<br />
upon the measures to be taken."<br />
This is clearly one of the cases in which the State whose<br />
conduct is under consideration should not be able to negate<br />
action by its own vote if it is represented in the Executive<br />
Council. This could be prevented by a provision that it is not<br />
then to be entitled to a vote. In this respect, the Proposal is<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 67-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 343<br />
<br />
in line with a provision in'. the 1921 Aaland Islands Convention<br />
which empowered the Council of the League of Nations "to<br />
decide upon the measures to be taken either to assure the<br />
observance of the provisions of this Convention or to put a stop<br />
to any violation thereof," and stipulated that "the vote of the<br />
representative of the Power accused of having violated the<br />
provisions of this Convention shall not be necessary to consti-<br />
tute the unanimity required for the Council's decision.",<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 9<br />
(1) The Executive Council should have power, with the<br />
concurrence of the General Assembly, to adopt general pro-<br />
visions for preventing or suppressing the use of force by States<br />
in their relations with other States.<br />
(2) Acting upon its own initiative or at the request of<br />
any State, the Executive Council should have power to take<br />
cognizance of any use of force or threat to use force by a State<br />
in its relations with any other State, to take such action as it<br />
may deem to be necessary for the protection of the interests<br />
of the Community of States, and* to prescribe the specific mea-<br />
sures to be taken by States for preventing or suppressing the<br />
use of force.<br />
(3) 1f the State which has used force or threatened to<br />
use force is represented in the Executive Council, it should<br />
not be entitled to vote when the matter is under consideration.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
If the peoples of the world desire to proscribe the use of<br />
force in international relations, if they wish to pursue the recent<br />
tentatives in that direction, itmust be .realized that a mere<br />
pronouncement is not enough. The weakness of the Covenant<br />
of the League of. Nations was that it did not go far enough in<br />
proscribing the use of force; the vice of the Paris Treaty for<br />
the Renunciation of War of 1928, as of the Rio de Janeiro<br />
.Anti-War Treaty of .stopped short with a<br />
1933, was that it<br />
mere dictum. If substantial 'progress is desired, the proscription<br />
must be implemented by giving powers to a life-and-blood<br />
institution, so organized that it can pursue continuing and<br />
unremitting effort and that it can employ the sagacity available<br />
at the time in dealing with situations as they arise. No cut--<br />
and-dried solution will suffice.No schematic plan will be proof<br />
against vicissitude. What can be done with some hope of<br />
success is to announce a clear goal, to create an institution<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 68-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
344 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
capable of mobilizing both will and wisdom for attaining it,<br />
and to leave the precise procedure to be worked out in the light<br />
of unfolding events.<br />
The Proposal would implement the Postulate that any use<br />
of force or any threat to use force by a State in its relations<br />
with another State is a matter of concern to the Community<br />
of States. First of all, it would confer on the Executive Council<br />
and the General Assembly power to take general dispositions<br />
to prevent or suppress the use of force by States in their rela-<br />
tions with other States.No attempt is here made to indicate<br />
the nature of such dispositions. They would derive their char-<br />
acter from current thought, and they would doubtless be<br />
changed from time to time. No generation can devise a strait-<br />
jacket for future generations.<br />
In the exercise of this general power, the Executive Council<br />
and the General Assembly might lay down procedures to be<br />
followed. Such action was taken by the Assembly and Council<br />
of the League of Nations in 1927, in a resolution which codified<br />
the practice under the Covenant and which was intended to<br />
serve as a guide in times of emergency. Both the 1930 Geneva<br />
Convention on Financial Assistance and the 1931 Geneva Con-<br />
vention to Improve the Means of Preventing War contain<br />
suggestive indications as to procedures which might be adopted.<br />
In exercise of this general power, also, the Executive<br />
Council might find it practicable to organize naval, military,<br />
or air forces, which could be used to prevent or suppress<br />
aggression. Suggestions of a need for an international force<br />
have been voiced recurrently in recent years.Detailed plans<br />
for creating an "international police force" were placed before<br />
the Disarmament Conference in 1932 by one Government, and<br />
were approved by nine other Governments. The Executive<br />
Council might find it desirable to depend, at least in part,<br />
upon the use of national forces in any case of need, and its<br />
dispositions might determine in advance when such forces would<br />
be called upon and howthey would be used.<br />
Secondly, the Proposal would confer on the Executive<br />
Council power to take cognizance of any use of force or of<br />
any threat to use force by a State in its relations with any<br />
other State. Each State would have a duty, under a Principle<br />
previously formulated, to refrain from any use of force and<br />
from any threat to use force in its relations with another State,<br />
except as authorized by the competent agency of the Com-<br />
munity of States;but, as the corresponding Principle stated,<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 69-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944]The International Law of the Future 345<br />
<br />
a State should be able, subject to reference to and approval<br />
by the competent agency of the Community -of . States, to<br />
oppose by force an unauthorized use of force or threat to use<br />
force made against it by another State.The Executive Council<br />
should be the competent agency of the Community of, States<br />
, for this purpose. It should, be left free to appreciate any.<br />
situation which might arise, and to shape its action to meet the<br />
needs of that situation. It must have a plenary power to take<br />
the action which is, necessary for the protection of. the interests<br />
of the Community of States.<br />
To this end, the power of the Executive Council should<br />
extend to prescribing the specific measures to be taken by<br />
States for preventing or suppressing the use of force. Noattempt<br />
is here made to indicate the nature of such measures. It would<br />
depend upon the Executive Council's appreciation of the situa-<br />
tion, and of the possible ways of meeting it.The situations<br />
which would arise might present very different kinds of pro-<br />
blems, and 'the measures to be taken by one State in any<br />
situation might be very different from those to be takenbyother<br />
States in that situation, and different from those to be taken by<br />
that State in other situations. ®f course the resources and<br />
geographical position of each State would be taken into con-<br />
sideration. . The Executive Council might prescribe measures of<br />
a military character, or measures of an economic nature, or<br />
both. Its action would be possible without the.vote of the State<br />
whose use of force is in question, if that State is represented in<br />
the Executive Council,<br />
Important precedents for the Proposal are to be found in<br />
recent history. The Covenant of the Leagueof Nations provided<br />
that "the League shall take any action that may be deemed wise<br />
and effectual to safeguard the peace of nations"; the Members<br />
undertook to subject a Member which had resorted to war 'in<br />
disregard of certain covenants, "td the severance of all trade or<br />
financial relations, the prohibition of all intercourse between their<br />
nationals and the nationals of the covenant-breaking State, and<br />
the prevention of all financial, commercial or personal intercourse<br />
between the nationals of the covenant-breaking State and. the<br />
nationals of any other State"; the Council was to "recommend<br />
to the several Governments concerned,what effective military,<br />
naval or air force the Members of the League shall, severally<br />
contribute to the armed forces to be used to protect the covenants<br />
;<br />
of the League" and the Members agreed to "mutually support<br />
one another in the financial and economic measures which are,<br />
taken," and "to afford passage through theirterritory to the forces<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 70-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
346 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
of any Membersof the League which are cooperating to protect<br />
the covenants of the League." An amendment to the Covenant,<br />
proposed in 1921 but not brought into force, would have em-<br />
powered the League Council "to give an opinion whether or not<br />
a- breach of the Covenant has taken place," and "in deliberations<br />
on this question in the Council thevotes of Membersof the League<br />
alleged to have resorted to war and of Membersagainst whom<br />
such action wasdirected" would not havebeen counted.<br />
These obligations were reenforced by provisions in certain<br />
particular treaties. Under the Aaland Islands Convention of<br />
1921, ratified by ten European States, any party might apply<br />
to the League Council "to decide upon the measures to be taken<br />
to assure the observance of the provisions of this Convention<br />
or to put a stop to anyviolation thereof"; the parties undertook<br />
"toassist in the measureswhich the Council might decide upon,"<br />
and if unanimity could not be obtained, each partywas "entitled<br />
to take measures which the Council by a two-thirds majority<br />
recommends";in either case the vote of the State "accused of<br />
having violated the provisions" was notto be counted.<br />
The abortive Geneva Protocol on the Pacific Settlement<br />
of International Disputes of 1924 would have empowered the<br />
Council of the League of Nations in certain cases of actual or<br />
threatened aggression to "decide upon the measures to be taken<br />
with aview to end as soon as possible a situation of a nature to<br />
threaten the peace of the world", and to take such decisions by<br />
two-thirds vote; and under certain conditions States would have<br />
been obligated to apply the sanctions of the Covenant and "to<br />
cooperate loyally andeffectively in support of the Covenant of the<br />
League of Nations, and in resistance to any act of aggression,<br />
in the degree which its geographical position and its particular<br />
situation as regards armaments allow." The 1924 Protocol also<br />
envisaged that States might give to the Council advance under-<br />
takings as to "the military, navaland air force which they would<br />
be able to bring into action immediately to ensure the fulfilment<br />
of theobligations in regard to sanctions."<br />
In the 1925 Locarno Treaty of Mutual Guarantee, Belgium,<br />
France, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy, agreed that in case<br />
the Council of the League of Nations should find that aflagrant<br />
violation of certain obligations of Belgium, France or Germany<br />
not to resort to war had been committed, they would "act in<br />
accordance with the recommendations of the Council, provided<br />
that they are concurred in by all the members other than" the<br />
States engaged in hostilities.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 71-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Lawof theYnuure 347<br />
<br />
The precedents are few for the actual employment of the.<br />
armed forces of various States under general international auth-<br />
ority. The joint employment of the forces of eight States in<br />
China in 1900, at the time of the Boxer difficulties, was under-<br />
takenwithout any mandate from other States. Mention may be<br />
made, however, of the action of the Council of the League of<br />
Nations in 1934, extending to the,British, Italian, Netherlands;<br />
and Swedish Governments an invitation "to take part in the<br />
establishment of an international force to becharged . .. . . . . with<br />
the maintenance of order ... . . . before, during and- after th;e<br />
plebiscite" in the Saar Territory. This invitation was accpeted<br />
.<br />
by the four Governments, each of which provided a contingent<br />
of the international force of 3,300 men placed by the Council<br />
"at the disposal of the international Governing Commission of the<br />
Saar Territory," other States giving facilities for the transit of<br />
these contingents through their territories; and during'a period<br />
of two months the force discharged its mission without serious<br />
incident.<br />
<br />
P®SAL 10<br />
<br />
(1)Acting upon its own initiative or at the request of any<br />
State, the Executive Council should have power to take cogni-<br />
zance of the prevalence within the territory ofany State of<br />
conditions which menace international peace end order, and to<br />
take such action as it may deem to be necessary for the pro-<br />
tection of the interests of the Community of States. '.<br />
<br />
(2)If the State within whose territory the conditions<br />
prevail is represented in the Executive Council, it should not<br />
be entitled to vote when the matter is under consideration.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
.<br />
Instances have not been rare in the past in which States<br />
have permitted conditions to prevail within their territories<br />
which menaced international peace and order, and in which<br />
other States acted to remedy the situation. At times, such<br />
action was taken by' a number of States in concert, but not<br />
infrequently .it was taken by one State acting upon its own<br />
authority.<br />
<br />
The international law of the future should make it a legal<br />
duty of each State to see that the conditions prevailing. within<br />
its territory do not menace -international peace -and order. At<br />
the same time, it should enunciate s; duty to- each State to<br />
refrain from intervention in the internal affairs of any other<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 72-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
348 The Canadian Bar Review[Vol XXII<br />
<br />
State. Nor should it be left possible for a few States, acting<br />
on their own authority and according to no established pro-<br />
cedure, to organize such an intervention. If these steps are<br />
taken, a power should be conferred on the Executive Council,<br />
acting as an organ of the Community of States and subject to<br />
the limitations of its procedure, to seek the removal of condi-<br />
tions in the territory of any State which menace international<br />
peace and order.<br />
The Proposal is in line with a provision in the Covenant<br />
of the League of Nations declaring it to be "the friendly right<br />
of each member of the League to bring to the attention of the<br />
Assembly or of the Council any circumstance whatever affecting<br />
international relations which threatens to disturb international<br />
peace or the good understanding between nations upon which<br />
peace depends." Under this provision, the Council adopted a<br />
resolution in 1934 declaring that "it is incumbent on the<br />
Hungarian Government, conscious of its international responsi-<br />
bilities, to take at once appropriate punitive action in the case<br />
of any of its authorities whose culpability may be established"<br />
in connection with the preparation of the crime of Marseilles.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 11<br />
(1) The Executive Council should have power, with the<br />
concurrence of the General Assembly, to create and maintain<br />
such special agencies as may be neededfor dealing with matters<br />
of concern to the Community of States.<br />
(2) Special agencies should be envisaged with respect to<br />
such matters as<br />
(a) The size and type of armaments, and the manu-<br />
facture of arms and ammunition.<br />
(b) International trade.<br />
(c) Production and distribution of food and raw mate-<br />
rials.<br />
(d) International finance and investments.<br />
(e) Internationaltransport,and particularly aerial<br />
transport.<br />
(f) International communications.<br />
(g) Welfare of dependent peoples.<br />
(h) Public health.<br />
(i) International trafficin narcotics and dangerous<br />
drugs.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 73-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
19441 The International Law of the Future 349 '<br />
<br />
(j) Population problems, including international migra-<br />
tion..<br />
(k) Cultural and scientific interchange.,',<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Ageneral organization of the' Community of States should<br />
give continuous attention to the protection and advancement<br />
of peoples' common interests. Some of the problems which<br />
will arise may be "political," in the sense in, which that term<br />
is commonly used; others which are primarily economic or<br />
social or cultural may at any time be invested with political<br />
significance.<br />
For the most part, ultimate responsibility must rest with<br />
the General Assembly and the Executive Council, which should<br />
have general competence, but these bodies must have the assist<br />
ance of , special agencies working in particular fields. Many<br />
questions will need to be explored by personnel having,the capa-<br />
city of specialists. Such explorations would involve an expen-<br />
diture of an amount of time which first-rank political men could<br />
not spare, and they should be made by men who can capitalize<br />
on accumulated experience.<br />
It is not possible to enumerate all of the fields in which<br />
special agencies may be needed, and the determination of them<br />
must be left to unfolding experience.The list contained in the<br />
Proposal emphasizes the importance of agencies in certain fields,<br />
but it does not exclude, others. As to most of the fields listed,<br />
there is a rich history of cooperative international effort;as to<br />
some of them, agencies already exist which could be continued.<br />
Numerous multipartite international conventions are in force,<br />
and if the precedent of 1919 is followed some of them will be<br />
recognized to continue in force after the present war.<br />
(a) If the Principle is to be implemented that each State<br />
has a legal duty to conform to limitations prescribed with<br />
respect to the size and type of its armaments, a special agency<br />
is clearly needed in this field.The problems will require con-<br />
tinuous attention, and solutions will be found for them only if<br />
determined efforts are made over the years. The failure of the<br />
provisions in the Covenant of the League of Nations to'produce<br />
the desired result has revealed some of the difficulties which<br />
may be encountered; and it has shown that no simple method<br />
of approach to them will suffice.<br />
The Covenant laid, down a' general principle that arma-<br />
ments should be reduced "to the lowest point consistent with<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 74-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
350 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
national safety and the enforcement by common action of inter-<br />
national obligations"; it provided that "the Council, taking<br />
account of the geographical situation and circumstances of each<br />
State, shall formulate plans for such reduction for the con-<br />
sideration and action of the several Governments"; and it<br />
envisaged a permanent Commission "to advise the Council."<br />
The Council created a permanent commission in 1920, but it<br />
was gradually superseded by a Temporary Mixed Commission,<br />
created in 1921, a Coordination Commission, created in 1924,<br />
and a Preparatory Commission, created in 1925. No permanent<br />
results were achieved by the Disarmament Conference which<br />
convened in 1932.Nor was great progress made by other con-<br />
ferences on armaments, held in later years.<br />
The manufacture of arms and ammunition presents pro-<br />
blems germane to those relating to armaments. In the Covenant<br />
of the League of Nations, States agreed "that the manufacture<br />
by private enterprise of munitions and implements of war is<br />
open to grave objections," and the Council was to "advise how<br />
the evil effects attendant upon such manufacture can be pre-<br />
vented." Little progress was made in dealing with this subject.<br />
AConvention on International Trade in Arms andAmmunition,<br />
opened to signature on June 17, 1925, was ratified by seventeen<br />
States; but as the conditions set in some of the ratifications<br />
were never met, the Convention did not enter into force.<br />
(b) Problems related to international trade cover a wide<br />
range. During the decade before 1939, it became clear that<br />
national recovery programs, if not correlated, operated to extend<br />
the area and to intensify the effects of economic depressions.<br />
Through the Economic and Financial Organization of the League<br />
of Nations, significant progress has been made in recent years<br />
with reference to problems of economic and financial policy,<br />
including problems relating to currency, economic depressions,<br />
financial reconstruction, nutrition, population movements, raw<br />
materials andtaxation. The Organization continues to maintain<br />
an Economic Committee, a Financial Committee, a Fiscal Com-<br />
mittee and a Delegation on Economic Depressions, all of which<br />
have met and issued reports in 1942-1943.Its efforts have<br />
inspired extensive legislation; to prevent double taxation, for<br />
example, more than one hundred bipartite agreements have been<br />
concluded on the basis of its models.<br />
Directives of more recent formulation are also at hand,<br />
emphasizing the interdependence of peoples in the economic<br />
field. The Atlantic Charter calls for "the fullest collaboration<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 75-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
19441 The International Law,of the Future3571<br />
<br />
between all nations in the economic - field," and it sets as a<br />
goal of effort "the enjoyment by all States, great or small, victoi°<br />
or vanquished, of access, on equal terms to the, trade and- t6<br />
the raw materials of the world which are needed' for. their econo-<br />
mic prosperity."This was supplemented in the various mutual<br />
aid agreements of 1942 and 1943, by provision for "the. better-<br />
ment of world-Wide economic relations" by action "directed to<br />
the expansion, by appropriate international and domestic mea-<br />
sures, of production, employment, and the- exchange and con-<br />
sumption of goods which are the material.foundations of the<br />
liberty and welfare of all peoples."<br />
<br />
(c) The production and distribution of food . and raw<br />
materials has led to many problems which have been dealt<br />
with in recent years by international convention's. Efforts have<br />
been made to coordinate the production and export of coffee,<br />
rubber, silver, sugar, tin, and other commodities. The Inter-<br />
national Institute of Agriculture, established at Rome in 1905;<br />
has served as a central statistical organization and as a forum<br />
for the discussions of agricultural questions; its efforts have led<br />
to international conventions on various subjects, such as. the<br />
marling of eggs in international commerce (1931), analysis of<br />
cheeses (1934), methods of analysis of wines (1935), methods 6f<br />
keeping herdbooks (1936). The Wheat Agreements of 1933 and<br />
1942 projected far-reaching international controls. The United<br />
Nations Conference, on - Food and Agriculture, held at poi<br />
Springs in 1943, recommended the establishment of "a permanent<br />
organization in the field of food and agriculture"<br />
<br />
(d) In the field of international finance; various monetary<br />
unions have existed in the past, the most important being the<br />
Latin Monetary Union created in 1865., A Bank of International<br />
Settlements has existed since 1930, and the creation of an Inter-'<br />
American Bank is envisaged in a pending convention. ,<br />
<br />
(e) The revolutionary development of transport in modern<br />
times has led to the creation of numerous international _agencies.'<br />
Railway transport on the continent of Europe, has been co®rdi<br />
nated by the Union for Transport by Rail, functioning since<br />
1893. International conferences on questions relating to mari-<br />
time transport have been frequent since the Washington 'Con-'<br />
ference of 1889. The international circulation of automobiles<br />
has been regulated since 1909. The Communications and Transit<br />
Organization of the League of Nations, created in 1920 and<br />
now existing under a Statute revised in 1938, has served to<br />
coordinate efforts in this field; in addition to its handling of<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 76-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
352 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
numerous disputes, its activities have led to conclusion of some<br />
twenty international conventions, dealing with such subjects as<br />
freedom of transit, navigable waterways, regime of railways,<br />
regime of maritime ports, maritime signals, uniform buoys, unifi-<br />
cation of road signals, and taxation of motor vehicles.<br />
Under the Paris Convention on Air Navigation of 1919,<br />
to which thirty-three States became parties, a permanent Inter-<br />
national Commission for Air Navigation has been maintained<br />
since 1922. Some of the provisions of the Paris Convention<br />
were duplicated inthe Inter-American Commercial Aviation<br />
Convention of 1928, to which eleven States are parties.<br />
Conventions on private aerial law were drawn up at Warsaw<br />
in 1929 and at Rome in 1933 and a Sanitary Convention for<br />
Aerial Navigation was opened to signature at the Hague in<br />
1933. Aerial transport has also been regulated by more than a<br />
hundred bipartite treaties.With the rapid developments of<br />
recent years, and particularly during the present war, the time<br />
has arrived for a revision and coordination of these various<br />
instruments, and the prospect of future developments may<br />
necessitate an elaboration of the permanent machinery now<br />
existing. Aguide for the future has been set by the Canadian<br />
Government in a recent declaration of its willingness to shape<br />
its policy of "international collaboration and cooperation" with<br />
regard to air transport "to serve notonly the immediate national<br />
interests of Canada but also our overriding interests in the<br />
establishment of an international order which will prevent the<br />
outbreak of another world war."<br />
(f) Since the middle of the nineteenth century efforts have<br />
been proceeding to deal with the problems presented by the<br />
development of international communications. The International<br />
Telegraphic Union was organized in 1865, and the Universal<br />
Postal Union in 1874. A Convention on Submarine Cables of<br />
1884 enlisted the support of some thirty-five States. Since 1906,<br />
radio-communication has been the subject of frequent confer-<br />
ences; multipartite conventions were concluded in 1912 and<br />
1927, and a large volume of general and regional legislation<br />
now exists on the subject.The International Telecommuni-<br />
cation Union,organizedin1932,is thesubjectof aseparate Proposal.<br />
(g) The problems of peoples now in a state of dependence<br />
are among the most baffling in the whole field of international<br />
relations. Whatever changes may result from the war, these<br />
problems will continue to face the next generation, and perhaps<br />
they will be more aggravated than heretofore.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 77-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
19441 The International Lawof the Future 353<br />
<br />
The subjection of the continent of_ Africa led to inter-<br />
national conferences at Berlin in 1885, at Brussels in 1890, at<br />
Algeciras and Brussels in 1906, and at St. Germain in 1919,<br />
and many African problems were dealt with constructively in<br />
the numerous treaties which resulted.The League of Nations<br />
system of mandates applied only to certain disannexed terri-<br />
tories, for which the Covenant laid down the principle that<br />
"the well-being and development" of their peoples "form- a<br />
sacred trust of civilization." The work of the Permanent Man-<br />
dates Commission, in its thirty-seven sessions, has established<br />
many useful precedents. Further directives are contained in the<br />
Inter-American Convention on the Provisional Administration<br />
of European Colonies and Possessions in, the Americas, con-<br />
eluded at Habana in 1940, to which seventeen American States<br />
are parties. The Convention vests responsibilitiesin "the<br />
American Republics as an international community."<br />
These historical developments furnish a basis for the recog-<br />
nition of an interest of the Community of States in the welfare,<br />
of dependent peoples, and States entrusted with the adminis<br />
tration of the affairs of such peoples have a clear responsibility<br />
to the Community of States.It is not,merely, a question of-<br />
assuring equality of opportunity in dependent areas for outside<br />
States; it is a question also of protecting, dependent peoples<br />
against serfdom and exploitation, and of assuring to them an<br />
opportunity, of developing their indigenous cultures and their<br />
self-respect. The post-war political situation will determine the<br />
extent of the Communityinterposition andhowtheCommunity's<br />
interest will be asserted.<br />
(h) In the field of public health, common action has been<br />
taken by States since the middle of the nineteenth century.The<br />
need for control of epidemics led to international conferences as<br />
early as 1851 and 1859, and conferences have been frequent in<br />
the subsequent years. Important Sanitary Conventions were<br />
concluded at Habana in 1924, and at Paris in 1926, and a<br />
Convention on Contagious Diseases of Animals. was concluded at<br />
Geneva in 1935.<br />
Permanent agencies have long existed in this field. The<br />
Pan American Sanitary Bureau was created in 1902, and the<br />
International Office of Public Health was established at Paris<br />
in 1907. Conventions on the unification of pharmacopoeia)<br />
formulas were promulgated in 1906 and 1929.<br />
The activities of the Health Organization of the League of<br />
Nations, which have been continued during the present war,<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 78-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
354 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
have extended international effort into many newfields, includ-<br />
ing the organization of epidemiological intelligence, the stan-<br />
dardization of sera and vitamins, the nomenclature of diseases<br />
and causes of death, and the coordination of the training of<br />
public health personnel. The Health Organization has organ-<br />
ized numerous conferences, both general and regional. It has<br />
directly assisted many countries in the establishment of public<br />
health services and in combating endemic and epidemic diseases.<br />
By organizing world-wide research on cancer, cholera, diphtheria,<br />
leprosy, malaria, rabies, sleeping sickness, syphilis, and tuber-<br />
culosis, it has made a notable contribution to the advancement<br />
of public health in all countries.<br />
(i) In no field has international cooperation been pushed<br />
further than in the field of control of opium and other narcotic<br />
drugs The International Opium Convention of 1912<br />
.came into<br />
general application in 1920, as a result of a provision in the<br />
Treaty of Versailles that ratification of the latter was to be<br />
deemed to be ratification of the former instrument.Under the<br />
auspices of the League of Nations additional drug conventions<br />
were concluded at Geneva in 1925, 1931, and 1936, and agree-<br />
ments concerning the suppression of opium-smoking in the Far<br />
East were signed at Geneva in 1925 and at Bangkok in 1931.<br />
Sixty-seven States are parties to one or more of these drug<br />
conventions. Preparatory work was under way in 1939 for an<br />
additional convention to limit the production of opium.<br />
An elaborate international administration has been built up,<br />
consisting of (1) the Advisory Committee of the League of<br />
Nations, (2) the Permanent Central Opium Board created under<br />
the 1925 Convention, and (3) the Supervisory Body established<br />
under the 1931 Convention. The Conventions also entrust<br />
certain duties to the Health Committee and the Secretary-<br />
General of the League of Nations, and to the International Office<br />
of Public Health.<br />
This administration deals with avariety of problems affecting<br />
agriculture, commerce, health, industry and police. A system<br />
of estimates of national requirements of specified drugs is adminis<br />
tered by the Supervisory Body.Each Government has a duty<br />
to submit advanceestimates for each year for examination bythe<br />
Supervisory Body, and the latter establishes estimates for those<br />
countries whichfail to submitthem. Thesystem is nowapplicable<br />
to 177 "countries or territories"; the estimates submitted for<br />
1942 were in respect of 117 "countries or territories." States have<br />
agreed, in the 1931 Convention, to restrict the manufacture of<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 79-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
19441 The International Lawof the Future 355<br />
<br />
drugs to these estimates, and a report on their statistics as to<br />
consumption, manufacture, and export and import, is made by<br />
the Permanent Central Opium Board.<br />
(J) Thepopulation of theworld doubled in the two centuries<br />
which preceded 1850, and it has again doubled since that year.<br />
The distribution of the world's population at any particular<br />
time can never be considered as final. At no time in modern<br />
history have peoples kept themselves within the confines of<br />
continents or countries. So long as a world economy calls for the<br />
building upof undeveloped areas, so long as unequal opportunities<br />
exist in different parts of the world, so long as menseek to give<br />
vent to their disposition to roam and'to create new lives for them-<br />
selves, some avenues must be open for the movement of peoples.<br />
The demographic problem does not promise to be less acute<br />
during the generation,to come.<br />
Most States have shown afirm determination to safeguard<br />
the integrity of their population and economy by determining for<br />
themselves the categories of persons to be admitted or excluded.<br />
No interest of the Community of States would be served by<br />
attempting to force States to receive unwanted immigrants.Yet<br />
the variant policies of emigration and immigration States are<br />
susceptible of some reconciliation, and effort to this end maybe<br />
essential. Aconference of emigration States was held at Romein<br />
1921, and a conference of immigration States was held in Paris<br />
in 1923. Bothemigration and immigrationStates wererepresented<br />
at conferences held, at Rome in 1924,and at Habana in 1928. A<br />
conference of expers on cooperation with regard to emigrationfor<br />
settlement, held at Geneva in 1938, recommended the establish-<br />
ment of a permanent international committee on that' subject.<br />
An Inter-American Demographic Conference, held at Mexico<br />
City in 1943, also envisaged the creation of a permanent com-<br />
mittee.<br />
The importance of demographic problems in the post-war<br />
world may call for a special agency which, functioning continu-<br />
ously, can be in a position to signalize any opportunity offered<br />
for relief from difficulties caused by the congestion of populations<br />
in certain. parts of theworld.<br />
(k) The importance of cultural and- scientific interchange<br />
has long been recognized by unofficial international associations.<br />
In recent years ithas led to official cooperation, also. An<br />
International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation, created .<br />
by the League of Nations in 1922, has devoted much of its<br />
activity to the International Institute of Intellectual Coopera-<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 80-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
356 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
tion centered at Paris.A Conference held in Paris in 1938, at<br />
which forty-nine States were represented, promulgated a formal<br />
Act concerning Intellectual Cooperation, designed to lay new<br />
foundations for the Institute andto assure that cooperation would<br />
be "independent of politics and based entirely on the principle<br />
of universality." Eight PanAmerican Scientific Congresses have<br />
been held since 1908. An Inter-American Convention on Cultural<br />
Relations, promulgated in 1936, is in force between fifteen Ameri-<br />
can States.<br />
The Proposal envisages the creation of agencies in these<br />
various fields without any attempt to forecast their specific<br />
powers. So far as possible, continuity with the past should be<br />
maintained. Some of the special agencies may have a character<br />
of permanence.Their powers would vary, and might have to be<br />
modified from time to time. In general, they should function<br />
under the authority of the General Assembly and the Executive<br />
Council, and they would need more or less constant supervision<br />
and coordination by the latter body.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 12<br />
The Permanent Court of International justice should be<br />
maintained as the chief judicial organ of the Community of<br />
States, and its Statute should be adapted to the organization of<br />
the Community of States.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
Fortunately, the organization of the Community of States<br />
does not have to beundertaken wholly anew. Numerous institu-<br />
tions are already in existence which can be adapted in a program<br />
of general organization.It is most desirable that continuity be<br />
preserved with the past, and this is particularly important with<br />
reference to judicial institutions.<br />
Ageneration of effort triumphed in the establishment of the<br />
Permanent Court of International Justice. Fifty-two States<br />
have given their formal support to the maintenanceof the Court,<br />
and practically all of the States of theworld-including all of the<br />
States in the Western hemisphere-have become parties to<br />
instruments which give it jurisdiction . More than 500 treaties<br />
havebeen concluded which relate to the Court, and manyof them<br />
continue in force.<br />
Over a period of eighteen years, the Court functioned with<br />
a greater success than had been anticipated for it.Sixty cases<br />
came before it. The Court's thirty-two judgments, twenty-seven<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 81-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944]The International Law of the Future357<br />
<br />
advisory opinions, acid more than 200 orders, led to the settle-<br />
mentof numerousdisputes, some of themveryvexing incharacter.<br />
Somecriticism of ajudicial institution is inevitable, but in general<br />
the legal profession throughout the world has hailed the juris-<br />
prudence of the Courtwith satisfaction. The approval of its work<br />
by Governments is indicated by the fact that forty-seven States<br />
made effective declarations accepting t_ he Court's compulsory,<br />
jurisdiction over legal disputes.<br />
<br />
The Court's Statute should be adapted to bring it into con-<br />
formity with , the post-war organization. This course is clearly<br />
to be preferred to any attempt to draft a new Statute.Such an<br />
attempt might reopen,many questions to which solutions have<br />
already been given, and it seems doubtful whether a more satis-<br />
factory instrument would result. The adaptation might lead to<br />
some changes in the present provisions for electing thejudges and<br />
for meeting the expenses, and possibly greater usefulness could<br />
befound for the chambers ofthe Court; the chamberfor summary<br />
procedure might be organized to serve the function of regional<br />
courts.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 13<br />
<br />
The Perman~nt Court of Arbitration should be maintained<br />
as an agency of the Community of States, and all States should be<br />
permitted to accede to the Hague Convention on the Pacific<br />
Settlement of International Disputes of October 18, 1907.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
The Permanent Court of Arbitration has been maintained<br />
since 1900, under the Hague Conventions on Pacific Settlement<br />
of Disputes of 1899 and 1907.It is not really a court, for the 150<br />
members appointed by Governments constitute only a panel<br />
for the manning of special tribunals to deal with particular cases. .<br />
It is permanent only in the sense that this panel is always avail-<br />
able, and in the sense that a permanent bureau is maintained<br />
under a council of administration.<br />
<br />
Since 1900 some twenty-one cases have been brought before<br />
tribunals created within this framework; all but four of the'cases<br />
were referred prior to thewar of 1914-4918.. Since 1922 the exist-<br />
ence of the Permanent Court of International Justice has tended<br />
to eclipse the Permanent Court of Arbitration, but members.of<br />
the latter have performed a useful function in nominating candi-<br />
dates in the elections of thejudges of the former.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 82-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
358 The Canadian Bar Review (Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
States may always agree to refer their disputes to special<br />
tribunals, and occasions may arise in which they will prefer to<br />
submit disputes to special tribunals which they may create out<br />
of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, rather than to submit<br />
them to the Permanent Court of International Justice with its<br />
fixed roster of judges. That possibility should be kept open, and<br />
as the maintenance of the Permanent Court of Arbitration<br />
involves but slight expense it should be continued.<br />
The 1907 Hague Convention provides that the conditions<br />
on which Powers not invited to the Second Peace Conference in<br />
1907 may accede shall be established by the later agreement of<br />
the parties, butasnogeneralagreement hasbeenmade,unanimous<br />
consent of the parties is required for any accession. If the Per-<br />
manent Court of Arbitration is to be continued, the 1907 Con-<br />
vention should be opened to accession byanyState.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 14<br />
The International Labor Organization should be maintained<br />
as an agency of the Community of States, and its Constitution<br />
should be adapted to the organization of the Community of<br />
States.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
The International Labor Organization is another of the<br />
existing institutions which should continue to be maintained.<br />
Created in 1919, itgrew out of a movementfor international labor<br />
legislation which beganin thenineteenth century. Acharacteristic<br />
feature of the Organization, which gives it a tripartite aspect, is<br />
the representation of employers and workers, as well as of Gov-<br />
ernments, both in the International Labor Conference and in the<br />
Governing Body of the International LaborOffice.<br />
Sixty-four States-including all of the States of. the Western<br />
hemisphere-have become members of the International Labor<br />
Organization. The International Labor Conference has met in<br />
twenty-six sessions. It hasadopted sixty-seven draft conventions,<br />
some of which have been ratified by alarge number of States, and<br />
sixty-six formal recommendations; a variety of subjects has been<br />
dealt with, including employment and unemployment, wages,<br />
hours of work, rest-periods and holidays with pay, health and<br />
safety and welfare in industry, social insurance, migration and<br />
statistics. Thelatest Conference, held in NewYork andWashing-<br />
ton in 1941, planned a widening of the sphere of action of the<br />
Organization andpledgedits availability in the post-war world.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 83-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944) The International Lazy of the Future359<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 15<br />
<br />
Various existing international unions should be maintained<br />
as agencies of the Community of States, including the Universal<br />
Postal Union, the International Telecommunication Union, and<br />
others of proved usefulness.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
In the past hundred years many international agencies have<br />
been created to deal with matters of concern to the Community<br />
of States. Apart from those established under the aegis of the<br />
League of Nations or the Union of American States, some<br />
twenty-five or thirty in each case, more than a hundred official<br />
agencies have come into existence. Manyof them still function,<br />
and quite clearly some of them should be continued in the<br />
future. The International Bureau of Weights and Measures<br />
(dating from 1875), the Union for the Protection of Industrial<br />
Property (dating from 1883), the Union for the Protection of<br />
Artistic and Literary Works (dating from 1886), and the Inter-<br />
national Union for the Publication of Customs Tariffs (dating<br />
from 1890)-all of which were specifically mentioned and con-<br />
tinued by the Treaty of Versailles in 1919-fall within this<br />
category, and others might be selected for inclusion. The pro-<br />
vision in the Covenant of the League of Nations that "there<br />
shall be placed under the direction of the League allinter-<br />
national bureaux already established by general treaties if the<br />
parties to such treatiesconsent" produced but little effect,<br />
and a different approach may be needed in the future.<br />
The Proposal makes specific reference to two Unions which<br />
are distinguished by their universality and, outstanding in their<br />
success, and the services of which are easily appreciated by the<br />
general public.<br />
Created in 1874, the Universal Postal Union has enlisted<br />
the day-to-day cooperation of seventy-two States, and ithas<br />
assured an effective system of international postal exchanges<br />
throughout practically the entire world.Its congresses have<br />
met, almost uninterruptedly, at five-year intervals, the latest<br />
congress having been held at Buenos Aires in 1939. It main-<br />
tains a permanent bureau at Berne.<br />
The International Telecommunication Union was formed in<br />
1932 as the successor to the International. Telegraph Union<br />
created in 1865.Sixty-eight States have cooperated in its work.<br />
Its latest conference was held at Cairo in 1938. It- also - main-<br />
tains a permanent bureau at Berne.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 84-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
360 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 16<br />
A General Secretariat, whose members should be inde-<br />
pendent of control by the States of which they are nationals,<br />
should be maintained to serve the needs of the General<br />
Assembly, the Executive Council, and the various agencies of<br />
the Community of States.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
The history of international cooperation during the past<br />
hundred years has shown the necessity of permanent officials<br />
to carry on routine administrative work and to maintain con<br />
stant contacts between Governments and international insti-<br />
tutions. An international conference always needs a large staff,<br />
also, and people need to be trained for the work. Most of the<br />
earlier unions were provided with permanent bureaus, and in<br />
many cases the organization and supervision of the bureau was<br />
entrusted to a single Government; this sytem had some advan-<br />
tages, butit hastended to besuperseded by international organiza-<br />
tion. In 1890 thefirst Conference of American States established<br />
a "Commercial Bureau ofAmerican Republics," under the<br />
supervision of the Secretary of State of the United States; this<br />
bureau was placed under the supervision of an international<br />
Governing Board in 1902, its name being changed to "Pan<br />
American Union" in 1910.<br />
<br />
From the beginning of the League of Nations, a permanent<br />
Secretariat was maintained, composed of nationals of various<br />
States. Its members were chosen to "act, during their period<br />
of office, in an international capacity," and they were to be<br />
"not in any way representatives of their own country." Hence,<br />
the memberswere forbidden to "accept any honor or decoration"<br />
during their terms of appointment.Later Staff Regulations<br />
emphasized the international character of the service, and since<br />
1932 officials have been required to make a formal declaration<br />
undertaking to regulate their conduct "with the interests of<br />
the League alone in view and not to seek or receive instructions<br />
from any Government or authority external" to the League.<br />
For more than twenty years, this Secretariat has functioned<br />
with marked success, and its experience supplies a rich store-<br />
house for the future to draw upon.<br />
The proposed General Assembly and Executive Council<br />
would need the assistance of an international civil service,<br />
which should be organized as a General Secretariat. To main<br />
tain its independence of national control, the members should<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 85-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944]The International Law of the Future 361<br />
<br />
hold themselves free from direction by the States of which they<br />
are nationals, and such States should acknowledge a duty to<br />
refrain from attempting to direct them.<br />
<br />
II. International Disputes<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 17<br />
<br />
(1) The Permanent Court of International justice should<br />
have jurisdiction over all disputes in which States are in con-<br />
flict as to their respective legal rights and which are not<br />
pending before the Executive Council, such jurisdiction to be<br />
exercised upon an application by any party to the dispute. If<br />
the parties to a dispute have agreed upon another method of<br />
pacific settlement, the application to the Court should be pos-<br />
sible only after the failure o£ the method agreed upon.<br />
(2) The Court should be competent to decide any question<br />
as to its jurisdiction . Its decision of any such question and its<br />
judgment on the merits should be binding upon the parties to<br />
the dispute. ,<br />
(3) In the event of, a failure by any .State to comply with<br />
a judgment of the Court, the Executive Council should have<br />
power to take such action as it may deem to be necessary for<br />
giving effect to the judgment. I£ the State which has failed to<br />
comply with a,judgment of the Court is represented in the<br />
Executive Council, it should not be entitled to vote when the<br />
matter is under consideration.'<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
For a half-century and more, international law has been<br />
moving toward the compulsory adjudication ofinternational<br />
disputes. Most of the earlier treaties of this period contained<br />
but the barest tentatives in this direction.In the numerous<br />
treaties concluded under the inspiration of the Hague Peace<br />
Conference of,1399, progress was stifled for a time by the<br />
addiction of States to formulas such as those safeguarding their<br />
"national honor and_ vital ;interests." Yet the treaties were<br />
numerous in which States, particularly South American States,<br />
went further in providing for the compulsory arbitration of<br />
certain categories of disputes frequently described as legal<br />
disputes,,<br />
Newlines of progress were opened up in 1920, when agree-<br />
ment was achieved upon the creation of a really permanent<br />
court.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 86-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
362 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXI1<br />
<br />
The Committee of Jurists which drafted the Statutelof<br />
the Permanent Court of International Justice proposed that it<br />
should be given an extensive compulsory jurisdiction over "cases<br />
of a legal nature," but in the Council and Assembly of the<br />
League of Nations the representatives of a number of States<br />
were not prepared to go so far. In place of this proposal, an<br />
optional provision was included in the Court's Statute.At one<br />
time or another forty-seven States exercised the option, making<br />
declarations conferring on the Court compulsory jurisdiction<br />
over certain classes of legal disputes.Some of the declarations<br />
were made for varying periods of time, and in some instances<br />
their effect was limited by reservations. During the eighteen<br />
years of its activity, the Court exercised jurisdiction thus con-<br />
ferred in eleven cases, without any untoward incident.<br />
Moreover, a large number of multipartite and bipartite<br />
treaties have been entered into, which confer compulsory juris-<br />
diction on the Court; at least sixty-five States -including all<br />
of the States of the Western hemisphere -are' parties to one<br />
or more of these treaties. Twenty-three States became parties<br />
to the 1928 General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Inter-<br />
national Disputes, which gave the Court wide jurisdiction over<br />
legal disputes.<br />
This history would seem to indicate that the time has<br />
arrived when further progress canbemade. The Proposal there-<br />
fore envisages a general jurisdiction of the Court over legal<br />
disputes.<br />
The formula of the 1925 Locarno treaties and the 1928<br />
General Act is employed to describe legal disputes as "disputes<br />
in which States are in conflictas to their respective legal<br />
rights." Its effect is quite similar to that of the formula em-<br />
ployed in many treaties of the United States of America, which<br />
provide for the arbitration of disputes "relating to international<br />
matters" in which the parties "are concerned by virtue of a<br />
claim of right made by one against the other under treaty or<br />
otherwise," and which "are justiciable in their nature by reason<br />
of being susceptible of decision by the application of the prin-<br />
ciples of law or equity." The 1929 Inter-American Arbitration<br />
Treaty, to which sixteen American States are parties, applies<br />
to "differences of an international character which have arisen<br />
or mayarise . . . by virtue of a claim of right . . . under treaty<br />
or otherwise," and "which are juridical in their nature byreason<br />
of being susceptible of decision by the application of the prin-<br />
ciples of law."<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 87-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International 'Law of the Future 363<br />
<br />
The Proposal would apply only to "disputes".In the<br />
Mavrommatis Case, the Permanent Court of International Justice<br />
said that a dispute is "a disagreement on a point of fact or<br />
law, a conflict of legal views or of interests between two<br />
persons," and that "before a dispute can be made the subject<br />
of an action at law, its subject-matter should have been clearly<br />
defined by means of diplomatic negotiations." In the Chorzow<br />
Case, however, the Court refused to require "the manifestation<br />
of the existence of the dispute in a special manner as for<br />
instance by diplomatic negotiations." In the more recent<br />
Electricity Company Case, the Courtrefused to deal with a claim<br />
as to which the applicant had not established the existence of<br />
a dispute.<br />
<br />
The Covenant of the League of Nations refers to disputes<br />
"which cannot be satisfactorily settled by diplomacy"; the<br />
Locarno treaties apply to disputes "which it maynotbe possible<br />
to settle amicably by the normal methods of diplomacy"; a<br />
series of treaties of the United States of America and 'the<br />
Inter-American Arbitration Treaty cover disputes "which it<br />
has not been possible to adjust by diplomacy," and the 1928<br />
General Act is very similar.Under such formulas a party invok-<br />
ing the jurisdiction of a tribunal may have to show both the<br />
existence of a dispute and some attempt to bring about its<br />
settlement.In the Mavrommatis Case, the Permanent Court of<br />
International Justice took jurisdiction under a provision in the<br />
alestine Mandate applying only "if the dispute cannot, be<br />
settled by negotiation," saying that negotiations .do not neces-<br />
sarily "presuppose a more or less lengthy series of notes and<br />
. despatches; it may suffice that a discussion should have been<br />
commenced and this discussionmay have been very short."<br />
In the Chorzow Case, the Court declared that it is "desirable<br />
that a State should not proceed to take as serious a step as<br />
summoning another State to appear before the Court without<br />
having previously, within reasonable limits, endeavoured to make<br />
it quite clear that a difference of views is in question which has<br />
not been capable of being otherwise overcome."<br />
<br />
States which are parties to a dispute should remain free<br />
to agree upon a special forum to which it may be submitted;<br />
if the method agreed upon does not result in a settlement, any<br />
party should be able to make application to the Court.In its<br />
declaration, accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Per-<br />
manent Court of International Justice in 1921, the Netherlands<br />
Government confined its acceptance to disputes "in regard to<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 88-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
364 The Canadian Bar Reuiew [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
which the parties have not agreed to have recourse to some<br />
other means of friendly settlement." The Belgian declaration<br />
of 1925 applied "except in cases where the parties have agreed<br />
or shall agree to have recourse to another method of pacific<br />
settlement." Similar reservations were made by other States.<br />
The Proposal would also preclude an application to the<br />
Court with reference to a dispute pending before the Executive<br />
Council. In the Canadian declaration of 1929, as in various other<br />
declarations, the right was reserved "to require that proceedings<br />
in the Court shall be suspended in respect of any dispute which<br />
has been submitted to and is under consideration bythe Council<br />
of the League of Nations, provided that notice to suspend is given<br />
after the dispute has been submitted to the Council andis given<br />
within ten days of the notification of the initiation of the proceed-<br />
ings in the Court," the suspension beingfor alimited period.<br />
<br />
By making it possible for the Court's jurisdiction to be<br />
exercised upon an application by any party to a dispute, the<br />
Proposal woulddispense with the necessity for aspecial agreement<br />
in each case. Therequirement of aspecial agreement in each case,<br />
essentialwhen aspecial tribunal hasto becreated, is not necessary<br />
when a permanent court exists; if it were insisted upon, no really<br />
compulsory jurisdiction would be possible, and any provision for<br />
jurisdiction would remain only an agreement to reach an<br />
agreement.<br />
The Proposal emphasizes the competence of the Court to<br />
decide any question as to its jurisdiction, a competence which<br />
has already been conferred on the Permanent Court of Inter-<br />
national Justice by its Statute.<br />
Of course a judgment of the Court must be binding on the<br />
States which are parties to the case in which it is rendered. It<br />
defines or creates for them obligations under international law.<br />
Yet an international court does not have, and should not have,<br />
a staff of marshals or sheriffs to levy execution on its judgments.<br />
Their enforcement goes beyond the strictly judicial function<br />
whichshould be confided to acourt.<br />
If anyenforcement ofjudgments is to beattempted, it should<br />
be entrusted to a body possessing a political responsibility.The<br />
Proposal would entrust it to the Executive Council, as a corollary<br />
of that body's general power to take cognizance of any State's<br />
failure to carry out its obligations underinternational law.<br />
Aprecedent exists in the provision in the Covenant of the<br />
League of Nations that "in theevent of anyfailure to carry out"<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 89-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Law of the Future 365<br />
<br />
an arbitral award or judicial decision "the Council shall propose<br />
what steps should be taken to give effect thereto.". As no case<br />
has arisen in which a State has declined to carry out a judgment<br />
of the Permanent Court of International Justice, the Covenant's<br />
provision was never applied in,practice.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 18<br />
<br />
(1) Acting upon its own initiative or at the request of any<br />
State, the Executive Council should have powerto take cognizance<br />
of any dispute between two or moreStates whichis not pending<br />
before the Permanent Court of Internationaljustice. ,take<br />
(2) The Executive Council should have power to such<br />
measures as it may deem to be necessary for preventing an<br />
aggravation or extension of the dispute; and, by majority vote,<br />
to request an advisory opinion of the Permanent Court of Inter-<br />
nationaljustice on any legal question connected with the dispute.<br />
(3) If its efforts to bring about a settlement of the dispute<br />
by the agreement of the parties. is not successful, the Executive<br />
Council should have power, byunanimous vote, to give a decision<br />
which will be binding on the parties; failing such a decision, it<br />
should have power, by majority vote, to adopt and publish a<br />
report containing a statement of the facts and the recommenda-<br />
tions deemedto bejust and proper in regard thereto.<br />
(4) If a party to the dispute is represented in the Council,<br />
it should not be entitled to vote when the dispute is under con-<br />
sideration.<br />
<br />
COMMF,NT<br />
<br />
Provision for the compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent<br />
Court of International Justice over legal disputes clearly needs<br />
to be supplemented by a more general provision concerning dis<br />
putes. The category of legal disputes does not include all of the<br />
differences which may arise to, trouble the relations of States.<br />
States may be in conflict as to matters other than their legal<br />
rights. Even in the event of a legal dispute, neither of the parties<br />
may make application to, the Permanent Court of International<br />
Justice, and yet the continued existence of the dispute might<br />
menace peace and order. ,<br />
Abody not subject tojudicial limitations should beempower-<br />
ed to deal in the general interest with disputes in any category.<br />
For this purpose, 'it is not necessary to distinguish between legal<br />
disputes and so-called "political disputes"-any dispute between<br />
States may become invested with political significance. Nor is it<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 90-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
366 The Canadian Bar Review .<br />
[Vol XXII<br />
<br />
necessary to follow the Covenant of the League of Nations in<br />
setting off from other disputes those which are "likely to lead<br />
to a rupture." The vice of that distinction was exposed in two<br />
cases before the Council of the League of Nationswhich revealed<br />
that the question whether a dispute was "likely to lead to a<br />
rupture" depended on the amount of hostility shown by any one<br />
of the parties.<br />
<br />
What is necessary is to appreciate that a strictly judicial<br />
body is of but limited usefulness in connection with international<br />
disputes, that anykind of adispute mayendanger the peaceof the<br />
world, that menacing situations mayarise which cannot be canal-<br />
ized as formal disputes, and that some international authority,<br />
of a political rather than ajudicial nature, should have power to<br />
resolve disputes when required.<br />
<br />
The Proposal would give the Executive Council power to<br />
take cognizance of a dispute of anykind, butthe power would not<br />
extend to disputes actually pendingbefore the Permanent Court<br />
of International Justice. TheProposal is corollary to those which<br />
would vest in the Executive Council general powers to take cog-<br />
nizanceof anyalleged failure byaState to carry out its obligations<br />
under international law, or of any use of force or threat to use<br />
force by a State in its relations with any other State; but in the<br />
exercise of these general powers, the Executive Council might<br />
take cognizance of the situation growing out of a dispute even<br />
though the dispute were pending before the Court.<br />
<br />
The Executive Council should not have to wait until one<br />
of the parties brings the dispute before it. It should be able to<br />
proceed upon its own initiative, or at therequest of anyState. It<br />
was aweakness of theprocedurefordealing with disputes outlined<br />
in Article 15 of the Covenant of the League of Nations that the .<br />
Council could proceed only upon a request by a party to the<br />
dispute. Yet Article 11 of the Covenant declared it to be the<br />
"friendly right of each Member of the League to bring to the<br />
attention of the Council any circumstance whatever affecting<br />
international relations which threatens to disturb international<br />
peace or the good understanding between nations upon which<br />
peace depends." In exercise of this "friendly right," Great Britain<br />
brought before the Council the Aaland Islands dispute between<br />
Finland and Sweden in 1920. The Washington representatives<br />
of nineteen American Republics acted upon their own initiative<br />
in 1932, in taking cognizanceof the Chacodispute between Bolivia<br />
and Paraguay.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 91-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944]The International Law of the Future 367<br />
<br />
The powers of the Executive Council should extend to taking<br />
the necessary measuresfor preventing an aggravation or extension<br />
of the dispute.' The importance of conservatory measures was<br />
demonstrated by the experience of the Council of the League of<br />
Nations, particularly in the Greco-Bulgarian dispute in 1925, and<br />
the lessons of that experience were codified in an abortive Con-<br />
vention on Meansof PreventingWarof 1931.<br />
<br />
The Executive Council should have power to request the<br />
Permanent Court of International Justice to given an advisory<br />
opinion on any legal question connected with a dispute, and a<br />
majority vote should be sufficient for making such a request.<br />
The question of the nature of the vote required for such a request<br />
by the Council of the, League of Nations was never answered<br />
authoritatively, though a League. Committee recommended in<br />
1930 that a new paragraph be added to the Covenant stating<br />
that unanimity was not necessary.<br />
<br />
The Executive Council would naturally seek to bring about a<br />
settlement of the dispute by the parties before attempting to<br />
arrive at a settlement in which the parties might not concur. If<br />
that effort is not successful, it should have power to give a<br />
decision which would be binding on~ the parties. Such a power<br />
would.be so far-reaching, however, that it ought to beexercisable<br />
only bythe unanimousvote of the Council, with the parties to the<br />
dispute not voting.If a unanimousdecision were notpossible, the<br />
Council should be empowered to adopt by majority vote a report<br />
which would state the facts and its recommendationswith regard<br />
to them.Any refusal by a party to comply with a unanimous<br />
decision could .be dealt with by the Executive Council under its<br />
general power to take cognizance of a failure by a State to carry<br />
out its obligations under international law.<br />
<br />
The Proposal is limited to avesting of powers in the Execu-<br />
tive Council, It does not assume to indicate when these powers<br />
should beexercised. Such questions must depend on the situation<br />
at the time, and the wisdom of those who must deal with them.<br />
In a given case, either because ofthe setting of a dispute or its lack<br />
of -gravity or importance, the Executive Council mightdecide not<br />
to take cognizance of a dispute;if its decision werein the opposite<br />
sense, however, the action to be taken would not need to follow<br />
any uniform pattern." .<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 92-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
368 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
III. Treaties and Peaceful Change<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL' 19<br />
Everytreaty or international engagement entered into by any<br />
State should be required to be registered with the General<br />
Secretariat upon its entry into force. The texts of all treaties<br />
or engagements registered should be published by the General<br />
Secretariat.<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Secret treaties were a great hazard to international relations<br />
in times past, and during the war of 1914-1918 they led to wide<br />
insistence on opencovenantsopenly arrived at. Itwasin consequ<br />
ence of this insistence that a provision was included in the Coven-<br />
ant of the League of Nations that "every treaty or international<br />
engagement entered into hereafter byany Member of the League<br />
shall be forthwith registered with the Secretariat and shall as<br />
soon as possible be published byit,"and that "nosuch treaty or<br />
international engagement shall be binding until so registered."<br />
The provision was generally observed by Members of the<br />
League of Nations. Even States not bound by the Covenant<br />
availed themselves of theprivilege of registration; in 1920 Germany<br />
agreed to register its treaties, and in 1934 the United States of<br />
America took similar action. In consequence, 4821 principal<br />
treaties or engagements were registered at Geneva from 1920 to<br />
1942. Under the practice adopted, the registration took place<br />
only when the instrument hadentered into force.<br />
It is notorious, however, that some treaties or engagements<br />
were not registered.The sanction of the Covenant that they<br />
should not "be binding until so registered" may have operated<br />
to encourage registration, but to a large extent it remained a<br />
dead letter.<br />
The systematic publication of the texts of treaties and<br />
engagements under international auspices had been mooted long<br />
before 1919. An international conference metat Berneto consider<br />
the matter in 1892, but it produced no result. The 202volumes<br />
of the Treaty Series published by the Secretariat of the League of<br />
Nations contain the complete texts, and where necessary English<br />
andFrench translations, of 4745 principal treaties or engagements,<br />
together with information as to action taken byStates with refer-<br />
ence to them.<br />
Aresolution adopted bythe Eighth International Conference<br />
of American States in 1938 called for the registration with the<br />
Pan American Union of treaties concluded by the American<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 93-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944] The International Lawof the Future ,369<br />
<br />
States. Such registration was inaugurated in 1939, 'and down to<br />
June 30, 1943, 217 treaties hadbeen registered byfive States, 197<br />
being registered by the United States of America. Texts of<br />
treaties registered are communicated to all theAmerican States,<br />
but they are not otherwise published; lists are issued annually in<br />
the Bulletin of the PanAmerican Union.<br />
The Proposal would preserve the very desirable innovation<br />
of the Covenant, and at thesame time it would adapttherequire-<br />
mentof theactual practice.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 20<br />
Upon application by any party to the treaty or engagement,<br />
the Permanent Court of International justice should have juris-<br />
diction 'to give a declaratory judgment that an executor; treaty<br />
or engagement has ceased, in whole or in part, to . be binding in<br />
the sense of calling for further performance, if it finds that the<br />
treaty or engagement was entered into with reference to the<br />
existence of a state of facts the continued existence o£ which was<br />
envisaged by the parties as a determining factor. moving them to<br />
undertake the obligations stipulated and that this state of facts<br />
has essentially changed.<br />
<br />
COIMIMENT<br />
<br />
Most States are parties to scores of treaties with other<br />
States, and at any given time there are several thousands of<br />
treaties in force.<br />
Atreaty mayimpose an obligation which can beperformed<br />
once and for all, and it becomes executed when that obligation is<br />
performed. Thus, if a State agrees to cede a particular territory ,<br />
to another State, theagreementwill be executed when the cession<br />
has been made. On the other hand, a treaty may,impose an<br />
obligation which calls for a future or continuing performance,<br />
and it will remain exeçutory so long as the performance is due.<br />
Thus, if aState agrees to permit another State to maintain consuls<br />
within its territory, or to permit the nationals of another State<br />
to engage in business within its territory, theagreement continues<br />
to beexecutor;until it is terminated. The same instrument may,<br />
include both executed and executor;provisions.<br />
Some executor; treaties provide for their expiration after a<br />
period of years, but in many cases no time-limitation is fixed.<br />
Some treaties provide that either party may denounce them,<br />
but in many cases no provision is made for denunciation. In a<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 94-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
37 The Canadian Bar Review .<br />
0[Vol XXII<br />
<br />
world of rapid changes, treaties are frequently revised to meet<br />
new conditions. If all the parties can agree upon the re-adapta-<br />
tion, no difficulty is presented;but if one of the parties refuses<br />
to cooperate in a re-adaptation insisted upon by another party,<br />
a troublesome situation may arise. The international law of<br />
the past has offered little assistance in dealing with such situa-<br />
tions, and it needs to be supplemented.<br />
It is a basic principle of international law, stated in the<br />
London Protocol of 1871 and reiterated in the Inter-American<br />
Convention on Treaties of 1928 and in a resolution of the<br />
Council of the League of Nations of 1935, that "no State can<br />
liberate itself from the engagements of a treaty, nor modify the<br />
stipulations thereof, except as a result of the consent of the<br />
contracting parties, by means of an amicable understanding."<br />
This principle has been generally observed. Without it, a vast<br />
structure of treaty law would tumble.<br />
Yet cases have not been rare in which States have sought<br />
to relieve themselves of treaty obligations by their own unila-<br />
teral fiat, and they have sometimes sought to justify this course<br />
by invoking a change in circumstances.This ground for the<br />
termination of a treaty has had little support in the practice of<br />
States, and the doctrine has had but doubtful standing in inter-<br />
national law.A mass of literature on the clausula rebus sic<br />
stantibus(an impliedprovisionthat a treaty is to bind<br />
the parties only so long as things stand as they are) has not<br />
led to any authoritative formulation of principle.A concept<br />
which readily lends itself to mis-statement and mis-application,<br />
which can so easily be made an excuse for a refusal to perform<br />
valid obligations, can be acceptable only within narrow and<br />
well-defined limits.Otherwise it would create rancour and con-<br />
troversy which would imperil the legal relations of States.<br />
nThe Proposal would apply only to an executory treaty, i.e.,<br />
t<br />
to one which calls for the performance of stipulated obligations<br />
to be begun or continued in the future. Adopting a careful<br />
formulation published in 1935, it would permit the application<br />
of the principle of changed circumstances only by an inde-<br />
pendent judicial body. It would set the following conditions to<br />
be judicially pronounced upon. (1) that the treaty or engage-<br />
ment had been entered into with reference to an existing state<br />
of facts; (2) that the continued existence of this state of facts<br />
had been envisaged by the parties at the time as a determining<br />
factor moving them to undertake the obligations stipulated;<br />
and (3) that this state of facts had essentially changed.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 95-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944]The International Lawof the Future371<br />
<br />
These conditions find some support in the judgment given<br />
by the Permanent Court of International Justice in .the Free<br />
Zones Case between France and Switzerland in 1932.There the<br />
Court dealt with an argument that the stipulations establishing<br />
the zones had lapsed on the ground that the zones had been<br />
"created in view of and because of the existence of a particular<br />
state of facts" which had ."disappeared"; finding that this<br />
argument had not been substantiated, that the parties did not<br />
"have.inview" the state of facts which had changed, the. Court<br />
declined to consider "the questions of principle which arise in<br />
connection with the theory of the lapse of treaties by reason<br />
of change of circumstances, such as the extent to which the<br />
theory can be~regarded as constituting a rule of international<br />
labs."° " -<br />
If it finds the conditions met, the Permanent Court of<br />
International Justice should have power to give a declaratory<br />
judgment that the treaty or any provision thereof has ceased<br />
to be binding in whole or in part. Such a judgment would<br />
effectively relieve the parties from the further performance of<br />
the obligations stipulated.<br />
<br />
The Proposal is in line with a provision in the 1923<br />
Habana Convention on Treaties, fequiritng arbitration in case<br />
any party to a treaty should seek to invoke its caducity. Its<br />
adoption would fill a gap in the existing law.It would give to<br />
a controverted principle a careful and restricted formulation;<br />
it would tend to obviate the anarchy under which States have<br />
sometimes purported to act as judges in their own interest;<br />
and it would provide a needed buttress to the .structure of<br />
treaty-law.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 21<br />
<br />
(1) Acting at the request of any party to the treaty off<br />
engagement, the Executive Council should have power, by<br />
two-thirds vote and with the concurrence of the Gener<br />
Assembly given by two-thirds vote, to advise the revision by<br />
e parties of an executor, treaty or engagement which it finds<br />
to be not adapted to existing conditions.<br />
<br />
(2) If any party fails to collaborate in full good faith in<br />
the revision advised by the Executive Council, the Permanent<br />
Court of International justice should have jurisdiction, on<br />
application by any other party, to give a declaratory judgment<br />
that the treaty or engagement has ceased, in whole or in part,<br />
to be binding in the sense of calling for further performance,<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 96-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
372 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
if it finds that under the existing conditions the treaty or engage-<br />
ment has become unduly onerous to one or more of the parties.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
The principle that treaties may be declared to have ceased<br />
to be binding because of changes in circumstances has been<br />
restrictively formulated, and cases may arise in which it would<br />
not be applicable but in which the revision of a treaty or<br />
engagement would be clearly desirable. If confusion and con-<br />
troversy are to be avoided, provision should be made for such<br />
cases. Yet it is important to avoid any undue disturbance of<br />
existing treaty relations, and States would zealously guard<br />
their freedom to make and to unmake their.own treaties. Any<br />
procedure which may be laiddown must be both rigid and<br />
restricted, and it cannot be too exacting.<br />
<br />
Provision was made in the Covenant of the League of<br />
Nations that "the Assembly may from time to time advise<br />
the reconsideration by Members of the League of treaties which<br />
have become inapplicable." It was never decided that action<br />
could be taken by the Assembly under this provision by less<br />
than â unanimous vote, or that it could be taken without the<br />
concurrence of the parties to the treaty.In practice, no advice<br />
was ever given by the Assembly.Though the provision was<br />
hardly more than a dead letter, it maybe thought to have had<br />
aharmful effect in that it was both illusory and disquieting.<br />
The Proposal would apply only to an executory treaty or<br />
engagement, i.e., to one which calls for the performance of<br />
stipulated obligations to be begun or continued in the future.<br />
It would restrict the action to be taken by requiring a two-<br />
thirds vote in both the General Assembly and the Executive<br />
Council. It would thus assure careful consideration and a very<br />
general approval.<br />
<br />
The action of the Executive Council would be limited to<br />
advising revision by the parties, and the advice could be given<br />
only after a finding that the treaty or engagement was not<br />
adapted to existing conditions. The Executive Council would<br />
not be empowered to revise a treaty; if the treaty is to be<br />
revised, the task should be left to the parties themselves. The<br />
advice would probably be very persuasive to the States parties<br />
to the treaty, but they would not be under a necessity of<br />
agreeing upon a revision. Collaboration in the revision advised<br />
should not be made positively mandatory, though the Proposal<br />
outlines a possible result of a failure to collaborate.<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 97-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944 The International Lawof the Future 373<br />
<br />
If one of the parties to the treaty-or engagement fails to<br />
collaborate in the revision in full good faith after such advice<br />
has been given, any other party might apply to the Permanent<br />
Court of International Justice. The Court's finding of a failure<br />
to collaborate would be a condition of its jurisdiction on the<br />
merits, the Court would have to find that the treaty or engage-<br />
<br />
ment had become unduly onerous to one or more of the parties<br />
before it could give a declaratory judgment that the treaty or<br />
engagement had ceased to be binding in whole or in part. Such<br />
a judgment would effectively relieve the parties from the further<br />
performance of the obligations stipulated.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 22<br />
<br />
Acting upon its own initiative or at the request of any<br />
State, the Executive Council should have power, by two-thirds<br />
vote and with the concurrence of the General Assembly. given<br />
by two-thirds vote, to advise the re-adjustment of any situation<br />
the continued existence of which would endanger good under-<br />
standing between States.<br />
<br />
Apart from the cases in which a treaty or engagement may<br />
be declared to have ceased to be binding because W. changes<br />
in circumstances, apart also from the cases in which the revision<br />
of a treaty or engagement may be advised, situations may exist<br />
which are' such that, if continued, they would endanger peace<br />
or the "good understanding between States upon which peace<br />
depends.Such situations might be territorialarrangements.<br />
They might have been produced by executed treaties, or they<br />
might have come to exist in the absence of any treaty. Their<br />
disturbing influence on international relations might be quite as<br />
menacing as that of an executor, treaty or engagement.<br />
<br />
Provision was made in the Covenant of the League of<br />
Nations that "the Assembly may from time to time advise . . .<br />
the consideration of international conditions whose continuance<br />
might endanger the peace of the world". At,no time, however,<br />
was such advice given by,the Assembly.<br />
<br />
The Proposal would restrict the action to be taken by<br />
requiring the concurrence of the General Assembly given -by<br />
two-thirds vote, as well . as a two-thirds vote in the Executive<br />
Council. It would thus assure, careful consideration and a very<br />
general approval.The action would be limited to advising the<br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 98-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
374 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
readjustment of a situation, and the advice could be given only<br />
after a finding that the continued existence of the situation<br />
would endanger good understanding between States.<br />
<br />
In most cases, such advice ought to be very persuasive to<br />
the States within whose power the readjustment would lie.<br />
If it did not lead to a readjustment, further action by the<br />
Executive Council would be possible, either in virtue of its<br />
special power to take cognizance of any dispute to which the<br />
situation might give rise, or in virtue of its more general power<br />
to deal with any matter of concern to the Community of States.<br />
<br />
PROPOSAL 23<br />
<br />
The General Assembly should have power, by two-thirds<br />
vote and with the concurrence of the Executive Council, to<br />
amend the international instrument creating the organization<br />
of the Community of States, provided that no amendment<br />
should become effective if objection is formally expressed within<br />
twelve months by as many as States.<br />
<br />
COMMENT<br />
<br />
Any international instrument creating an organization of<br />
the Community of States should be subject to amendment, and<br />
it seems desirable to find escape from the necessity of a<br />
unanimous agreement of all the parties before amendment can<br />
be effected.<br />
<br />
The Covenant of the League of Nations provided that<br />
amendments should take effect "when ratified by the Members<br />
of the League whose Representatives compose the Council and<br />
by a majority of the Members of the League whose Representa-<br />
tives compose the Assembly";it further provided that "no<br />
such amendments shall bind any Member of the League which<br />
signifies its dissent therefrom, but in that case it shall cease to<br />
be a Member of the League."Seventeen protocols of amend-<br />
ment were drawn up after votes in theAssembly;fourteen were<br />
opened to signature in 1921, one in 1924, one in 1925, and one<br />
in 1938. Twelve of the protocols did not enter into force;four<br />
protocols drawn up in 1921 entered into force in 1924, and one<br />
in 1926. It is significant that two of the protocols which did<br />
not enter into force would have effected changes in the pro-<br />
visions for amendment:one would have required a three-<br />
fourths vote in the Assembly, including the votes of all the<br />
Members of the Council represented at the meeting, and ratifi-<br />
cation by all the Members whose representatives composed the<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 99-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1944 The International Law of the Future 375<br />
<br />
Council at the time of the vote, and by a majority of the<br />
Members whose representatives form the Assembly; the other<br />
would have deprived a proposed amendment of any effect if<br />
the required number of ratifications were not obtained within<br />
twenty-two months after the vote of the Assembly.<br />
<br />
The Constitution of the International Labor, Organization<br />
provides that amendments may be "adopted by the Conference<br />
by a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast by the Delegates<br />
present," to take effect "when ratified by the States whose<br />
representatives compose the Council of the League of Nations<br />
and by three-fourths of the Members." Only one amendment<br />
was adopted by the Conference; promulgated in 1922, it did<br />
not enter into force until 1934.<br />
<br />
The Statute of the Permanent Court of international Justice<br />
failed to provide for its amendment, but amendments were<br />
adopted by a Conference of Signatories in 1929 and annexed to<br />
a protocol. Most of the States parties to the original Protocol<br />
of Signature proceeded to prompt ratification of the amending<br />
protocol. In 1935, when the ratificâtions of three States were<br />
lacking, the Assembly of the League of Nations requested the<br />
Council to put the protocol into force on February 1, 1936,<br />
"on condition that the States which have not already ratified<br />
have not in the meanwhile made objection"; as no such objec-<br />
tion was made the amendments entered into force on the date<br />
fixed.<br />
<br />
The 1928 Convention on the Pan American Union, which<br />
has been ratified by fourteen American Republics but which<br />
has not yet entered into force, provides for amendment, but<br />
requires the unanimous agreement of the twenty-one American<br />
Republics.<br />
<br />
The Minority Treaties of 1919 and 1920 provided for<br />
amendment with "the assent of a majority of the Council of<br />
the League of Nations," and certain of the parties agreed not<br />
to object' to an amendment thus assented to.<br />
<br />
The 1933 Convention on Transport of Goods by Rail pro-<br />
vides that an important annex to the Convention shall be<br />
"kept up to date" by a Committee of Experts on which all .the<br />
parties maybe represented, and that the decisions of the Com-<br />
mittee of Experts may "be deemed to have been accepted unless<br />
within two months of the date of notification at least two<br />
Governments object thereto."<br />
<br />
The Proposal would require for any amendment of the<br />
basic instrument creating the organization of the Community of<br />
<br />
----------------------- Page 100-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
376 The Canadian Bar Review [Vol. XXII<br />
<br />
States, both a two-thirds vote in the General Assembly and a<br />
unanimous vote in the Executive Council.It would dispense<br />
with the formality of signature and ratification, but it would<br />
permit later formal objection by any State. A State whose<br />
representative had voted against an amendment in the General<br />
Assembly might, on further reflection and in view of the<br />
general opinion, refrain from advancing an objection.Time<br />
should be allowed for such objections, and it is therefore pro-<br />
posed that no amendment should enter into force ifformal<br />
objection is expressed, within twelve months, by a number of<br />
States to be determined.<br />
<br />
- 30 -<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2140964615371669194.post-24541377379227943672011-09-28T16:38:00.000-07:002011-10-09T20:11:31.992-07:001941 POST-WAR NEW WORLD MAP - "NEW WORLD MORAL ORDER" by MAURICE GOMBERG, 1941-1942<h6 class="uiStreamMessage" data-ft="{"type":1}" style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span class="messageBody translationEligibleUserMessage" data-ft="{"type":3}" style="font-size: small;"><center><object height="500" id="calameo-viewer-000111790b4f6e810268e-1317252830" width="520"><param name="movie" value="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cviewer.swf?bkcode=000111790b4f6e810268e&langid=en" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cviewer.swf?bkcode=000111790b4f6e810268e&langid=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="520" height="500"></embed></object></center><br />
</span></h6><h6 class="uiStreamMessage" data-ft="{"type":1}" style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span class="messageBody translationEligibleUserMessage" data-ft="{"type":3}" style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">THE MAP (downloadable):</span></span></h6><h6 class="uiStreamMessage" data-ft="{"type":1}" style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span class="messageBody translationEligibleUserMessage" data-ft="{"type":3}" style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7" rel="nofollow nofollow" style="font-weight: normal;" target="_blank">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7</a></span></h6><h6 class="uiStreamMessage" data-ft="{"type":1}" style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span class="messageBody translationEligibleUserMessage" data-ft="{"type":3}" style="font-size: small;"></span></h6><h6 style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE MAP</span></h6><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b>Authenticity of The Map:</b></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">"The Map" was found in an online exhibition of the United States Library of Congress, in its map collection. There map is authentic, and there are authentic depository records in the name of Maurice Gomberg, himself.</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small; font-weight: normal;"> Here are the original map display pages at the Library of Congress:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small; font-weight: normal;"> </span> </div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">After all, I had to put the next display page url into "tinyurl" to shorten it, it's a mile long and was warping this Facebook page:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://tinyurl.com/25wn9bc" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/25wn9bc</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I pdf'd the map display pages at the Library of Congress as a permanent record:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90?sid=20a1df8505fb23978c58cf3d9cd748f7</a></span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span> <a href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=2140964615371669194&postID=2454137737922794367" id="avg_ls_anch" style="-moz-background-inline-policy: continuous; background: none repeat scroll 0pt 0pt transparent; display: none;"><img id="avg_ls_image" src="chrome://searchshield/content/clock12.png" style="border: medium none; display: none; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt 3px; width: 12px;" /></a> </div><table border="0" bordercolor="#e6f0f8" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="3" style="background-color: #e6f0f8; font-family: Verdana,sans-serif; width: 470px;"><tbody>
<tr> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/0001117909293532bbb11" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMVGP0IFd6N-OrpHTPuNk85_DjBTJmtHkPZUO4xY2oav0U-3g3Swz2hwiyuZQa4tdNMBOQIpXczb563yPaAf4dZNGLs1L6OG8YiuA8y8BjsWYSZzXRjh0HpKORog9jEjehI-j_prTa8Vg/s1600/1.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/0001117909293532bbb11">"NEW WORLD (MORAL) ORDER"</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b2ce60837c2f" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxZF4yje0hrwuzbsaPNXJ6r7Wk-oQ1VIHe3fTZKcW_MXx6oO7biSWjujD8oJW8v4ORV9wcTocbTkzulF3vmu13djHvwjV8ud_g2In1JuFNXprumVjLeOEJirdYDKL6T1adXdSQWoxQVpI/s1600/2.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b2ce60837c2f">"list-world" </a></span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOWkrxQehb4nFrhc15-CnSF76d0w99O_zUQM0wf1it1aCz9qMzddFUITspR4Z-NxBm0JesioK0lA0CnFv5_UJKuFbAw5gSMPjHH14_sSPFiRqwvuXKqk97to34YHgGXeDzcdBoWDHSzdk/s1600/3.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790cda8d532ed90">"1941MAPLCC"</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKNTVqJpnc8sj4xGvXsZSX0z04fTm14I9fK0mvNTyytmhQYB_hHpSDymdS70QZ9S8HviwlWxXl5TlWj0VK-v046uGkBkUUk8bwj8X8TQ7q7JH0a1Ez5g96w1FstzLzZ6YmtINN_U626YA/s1600/4.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790803c43fa5d08">"memory.loc.gov_cgi-bin"</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgI2ejhKxpoHgyLRfrp4NA78wOUmXWrhXnMKA6Mc9lkTQN0dyDWFYF98QKzNLuVe3zd1V1KH6Wa-ugVlYPRdLoOjg5oAS3KexWFA0WfL8BSdtnlia6qTwi91x4SZh3S2kmLl6kWjnU3nzA/s1600/5.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d">"MAPA GOMBERGA"</a></span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjP6TRIneYOL8TxIb1u5vh-xQuVMgI_1xKgIHcIJ-cIdJYDk7ay3td9VIBuxMI8KbqiPhmdT4nVnQPelvYxQ69o1Dd-90OJ2Ux-fJdl3P2-Ijh9YGfehFjaxfVqcOMoRJvl6rvSyJsfAg/s1600/6.png" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790b4f6e810268e">"1942 POST-WAR NEW WORLD MAP"</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center" valign="top" width="180"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="33%"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="33%"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></td> </tr>
</tbody></table><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">First and foremost, this important Map is entitled "Outline," it is not a final disposition of the shape of the future world as contemplated by its planners, who drew it up well before Pearl Harbor (i.e., the entry of the United States of America into WWII).</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">A little bit more information concerning The Map: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">1. A professor by the name of Alexander Gella wrote about Maurice Gomberg's POST-WAR NEW WORLD ORDER Map in Polish in London, England in1985 under the article title "Mapa Gomberga" in a Polish journal whose title translates to "Polish Affairs in the World Perspective". </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">There was a link to an excerpt of the article at [ <a href="http://www.wirtualnapolonia.com/teks" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.wirtualnapolonia.com/teks</a> ], but it is gone now. However, someone has posted an excerpt of the Polish article online with scans of parts of the Map, and this link is good on 23 March 2009, the date of download:</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www2.kki.pl/piojar/polemiki/novus/gomberg/gomberg.html" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://www2.kki.pl/piojar/polemiki/novus/gomberg/gomberg.html</a></span> </div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">That link has been PDF'd and that PDF is the document you are looking at right now, here on Calameo: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790f34c120e4c1d</a></span> </div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">2. What is quite exciting is that the Map pictured in this Polish article has different marks on it in the upper left-hand corner than appear on the copy deposited into the United States Library of Congress in 1942. It therefore gives us new and vital information: the copy of the Map discussed by Professor Gella in Polish in 1985 is labeled "COMPLETED - OCT 1941" in the upper left-hand corner. The Map was definitely completed before Pearl Harbor. [It should therefore probably be referred to as the "1941" Map.] The United States entered World War II on 7 December 1941. </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">3. The sub-title of the Map, "New World Moral Order," as well as certain statements made in the text of the footer, comes from a speech delivered by President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt on 6 January 1941. That speech is known as the "Four Freedoms" Address to Congress, and the text is here, along with a downloadable sound file of Roosevelt delivering the Address: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fdrthefourfreedoms.htm" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fdrthefourfreedoms.htm</a></span> </div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is interesting to evaluate these three dates: the completion date of the Map (October 1941), the date the U.S. entered WWII (7 December 1941), and the date of United States President Franklin Theodore Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" address to Congress (6 January 1941) in which he rationalized the conversion of the United States of America to a full-scale war-production economy. Two of the "Four Freedoms" bear directly on the post-war role envisaged for the USA by the Gomberg Map, thus President Roosevelt, by his unilateral pronouncement, appears to have altered the Constitution of the United States of America without any process of lawful amendment. </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">4. Someone re-posted the Polish article of Professor Gella, garbled together with broken English from a machine translation done online. I re-ran the translation through poltran.com, and have been able to glean the following in regard to Maurice Gomberg, whose name appears at the end of the MAP footer text, as if he were the author of the text, as well as appearing on the copyright notice at top left: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">MAURICE GOMBERG was likely an immigrant from Eastern Europe, originally a clockmaker or a watch maker, who sympathized with the Communist Party of America, though [apparently] he was not a member [says the article!]. He had no formal education, but was nonetheless considered extremely intelligent. This information is based on recollections of some of his contemporaries (who were apparently interviewed by professor Alexander Gella, for his article, written in Polish about Maurice Gomberg and his famous Map: Przeciw polskiej mitologii politycznej (Counter to the polish political mythology), in: Sprawy polskie w perspektywie światowej (Polish Affairs in the World Perspective), London, 1985. </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">5. The new world planned on that map is largely heading toward completion today. We have the European Union, the South American Union (UNASUR) signed on 23 May 2008, and North American Union well under way. In essence, the European Union, which sprang from the European Economic Community, which was developed out of the Coal and Steel treaty (Treaty of Paris), was the template for a world government. The purpose of the template is to merge the nations on each continent, and then merge the continents in each hemisphere, and then merge the hemispheres. </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">6. The Gomberg Map is said to have been: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">"[...] discovered by Helen Somers in a window in Philadelphia during World War II. It was completed in October 1941, before Pearl Harbor, was printed in bright colors by a cartographer named Maurice Gomberg in Philadelphia in 1942, and was displayed in his store window. Helen Somers immediately recognized the significance of the map and purchased several. At least a few original copies are still in existence, including one in the Library of Congress in Washington, DC." </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">It looks as if somebody else made a colored hand-drawing of an outline of the map for that story, which is here: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_nwo06.htm" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_nwo06.htm</a></span> </div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">OTHER LINKS SHOWING THE GOMBERG MAP: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">(These links are active on 21 September 2010)</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Can you read these? Would be great to have a translation in English or in French of the discussion on these pages: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://homepage.interaccess.com/%7Enetpol/POLISH/public/NieZaniechano.html" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://homepage.interaccess.com/~netpol/POLISH/public/NieZaniechano.html</a></span> </div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://homepage.interaccess.com/%7Enetpol/POLISH/historia/41pkt.html" rel="nofollow nofollow" target="_blank">http://homepage.interaccess.com/~netpol/POLISH/historia/41pkt.html</a></span> </div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b>TOTAL COLLECTION OF TAGS</b>: </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Philadelphia, socialism, Stalin, Roosevelt, Japan, communism, pa, churchill, U.S.A., globalism, 1941, axis, U.S.S.R., New World Order, 1942, United Kingdom, pearl harbor, new world moral order, postwar new world map, world reconstruction, maurice gomberg, world federation, world federalism, world socialism, soviet socialist republics, united states of south america, federated united states of europe, federated united states ot scandinavia, federated union of african republics, union of arabian federated republics, federated republics of india, federated united republics of china, federated republic of greece, independent republic of eire, independent republic of hebrewland, independent republic of turkey, world league of nationalities, western hemisphere, u.s.a. protectorates, population control policy, nationalization of all natural resources, nationalization of international banking, nationalization of an armaments production, world common monetary system, supreme war command of the united nations, supreme military and economic council </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">- 30 - </span></div><div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1