Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T23:12:43.682Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rule of Law and the Disintegration of the International Society

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Georg Schwarzenberger
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Professor A. L. Goodhart, of Oxford, in a paper on “The Nature of International Law” indicates a field of research which has hitherto been somewhat neglected by international lawyers. He suggests that “some of the most distinguished writers on international law have not sufficiently emphasised in their definitions of international law the essential part played by the community.” This criticism does not, in our opinion, apply only to the definition of international law. None of its main issues, such as recognition, state responsibility, protection of nationals and property abroad, extradition, neutrality, intervention, or the rules of warfare, can be seen in their proper perspective if we disregard this background and the fundamental changes now taking place in the social environment which Professor Goodhart calls the “community.”

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , January 1939 , pp. 56 - 77
Copyright
Copyright © The American Society of International Law 1939

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 22 (London, 1937), p. 41 Google Scholar.

2 For a study of the influence of essential changes in the political and social structure of a state on its international status and obligations, see the present writer’s monograph, Die Kreuger-Anleihen, ein Beitrag zur Auslegung der internationalen Anleihe- und Monopolverträge sowie zur Lehre vom Staatsbankerott (Munich and Leipzig, 1931), p. 40 et seq.; for the effect of a transformation of this kind upon the law of extradition, see an anonymous paper, “Extradition to Germany,” in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 21 (London, 1936), p. 191 et seq.; and on the rules of international state responsibility, Friedmann, W., in The British Year Book of International Law (London, 1938), p. 118 Google Scholar et seq.

3 Bibliography in Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, International Law (London, 1937), Vol. I, p. 11, note 1Google Scholar; and Möller, Axel, International Law in Peace and War (London, 1931), Vol. I, p. 15 Google Scholar. In addition we should like to mention Huber, Max, “Beiträge zur Kenntnis der soziologischen Grundlagen des Völkerrechts und der Staatengesellschaft,” in Jahrbuch des öffentlichen Rechts (Tübingen), 1910, Vol. IV Google Scholar; the two books on this subject by von Verdross, Alfred: Die Einheit des rechtlichen Weltbildes auf Grundlage der Völkerrechtsverfassung (Tübingen, 1923)Google Scholar, and Die Verfassung der Völkerrechtsgemeinschaft (Vienna and Berlin, 1926); also Smith’s, H. A. penetrating article, “The Real Weakness of the League,” in The Nineteenth Century and After (London, 1936)Google Scholar.

4 The World’s Design (London, 1938), p. 3.

5 Hull, Cordell, “The Spirit of International Law,” address before the Tennessee Bar Association, June 3, 1938 (U. S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, 1938), p. 14 Google Scholar.

6 Broadcast address by Sayre, Francis B., in Assistant Secretary of State, Washington, June 6, 1938 Google Scholar, “American Foreign Policy” (Washington, 1938), p. 1. See also Butler’s, Nicholas Murray address on “The Abdication of Democracy,” June 1, 1938, reported in the New York Times, June 2, 1938 Google Scholar.

7 Speech at Birmingham, Feb. 4, reported in the London Times, Feb. 5, 1938.

8 Speech at Boughton House, Kettering, July 2, reported ibid., July 4, 1938.

9 Address at the annual dinner of the Royal Society of St. George, April 26, reported ibid., April 27, 1938.

10 Speech at Lyons, June 5, reported in Le Temps, June 6, 1938. Addresses in a similar vein by the representatives of other member states of the League of Nations may be found in the Minutes of the January session of the League Reform Committee and of the 101st session of the League Council.

11 Proclamation at the opening of the 9th N.S.D.A.P. Congress, reported in the Western Mail, Sept. 8,1937. Herr Hitler expressed similar views in his speech at the state banquet in Rome, May 7, reported in the London Times, May 9, 1938.

12 Any investigation of such borderline problems is outside the scope of “pure” legal research, if its function is limited, as Kelsen, suggests (Reine Rechtslehre (Leipzig, 1934), pp. 9–10)Google Scholar, to an analysis of legal rules as such and their relation to each other. Legal research, we believe, has to apply the sociological method as well as the logical and dogmatic. If this is admitted, the question of whether an examination of the kind we propose belongs to the sphere of law proper or to that of the sociology of law, becomes merely a matter of finding the appropriate scope for legal research. It must, however, be emphasized that the refusal of the lawyer to investigate from his own angle the relation of the legal system to the wider issues of social life, in short, law as a historical reality, must inevitably lead to sterility of legal research, especially in a period of crisis and transition. See on this point the excellent lectures by Schindler, Dietrich: “Contribution à l’étude des facteurs sociologiques et psychologiques du droit international.” (Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de Droit International, Tome 46 (1933), p. 235 Google Scholar et seq.)

13 Here we follow in the footsteps of Max Huber, who even before the war asserted that the science of international law can maintain its leading position only as long as it is able to see beyond the present. (“Beiträge zur Kenntnis der soziologischen Grundlagen des Völkerrechts und der Staatengesellschaft,” reprinted in Berlin, 1928, pp. 6-7.) See also Lauterpacht, , The Function of Law in the International Community (London, 1933), p. 434 Google Scholar et seq.

14 A few examples may be selected at random:

(a) The term “international community” is frequently used in Oppenheim-Lauterpacht’s International Law (London, 1937), Vol. I, e.g., p. 13 Google Scholar. The same phrase is to be found in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Weiss in the case of the S.S. Lotus, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A, No. 10, p. 43, and is expanded to “the international community of modern States” in a judgment of the Commercial Tribunal of Luxemburg, 1930 (Annual Digest, 1929-1930, p. 8). To give an example from diplomatic practice, the term “community of Christian nations” is used by Don D. F. Sarmiento (Chile) in a note to Señor Ribeyro, May 1, 1864. (Digest of the Diplomatic Correspondence of the European States, 1856-1871 (Berlin, 1932), Vol. I, No. 470.)

(b) “Family of nations” as equivalent to “international society” or “international community” is used by Lauterpacht, H. in The Function of Law in the International Community (London, 1933), pp. 421–423 Google Scholar. In The Family of Nations (New York, 1938), p. 106, Nicholas Murray Butler distinguishes between a “genuine” and a “merely nominal” family of nations. The term is also contained in a judgment of the Court of Appeals of New York in 1923 (235 N. Y. 255, 139 N. E. 259). A complementary example from state correspondence may be found in the note from Manuel al Tocornal á los Ministros de Relaciones exteriores de las Potencias extranjeros, May 4, 1864. (Digest of Diplomatic Correspondence, cited above, Vol. I, No. 471.) Sarcasm is perhaps not entirely absent from the Rescript of the Emperor of Japan of March 27, 1933, in which he announces that the withdrawal of his country from the League of Nations does not mean that it “will isolate itself thereby from the fraternity of nations.” ( Keith, A. B., in Speeches and Documents on International Affairs, 1918-1937 (London, 1938), p. 268 Google Scholar.)

(c) “International Society” is used by Hyde, Charles Cheney in his article on “The Influence of Mental Reservations on the Development of International Law,” in this Journal, Vol. 24 (1930), p. 358 Google Scholar; by Beeves, J. S. in his lectures on “La communauté internationale,” in Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de Droit International, Tome 3 (1924), p. 17 Google Scholar; and by Cavaglieri, Arrigo in Lezione di Diritto Internazionale (Naples, 1925), p. 8 Google Scholar. The term is also to be found in a judgment of the U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit, 1822 (2 Mason’s Reports 409).

(d) “Community of international law” (Völkerrechtsgemeinschaft) is a term particularly favored by German authors. See von Verdross, Alfred, Die Verfassung der Völkerrechts-gemeinschaft (Vienna and Berlin, 1926)Google Scholar, and Schmid, Karl, Die Rechtsprechung der ständigen International Gerichtshofs (Stuttgart, 1932), p. 39 Google Scholar.

(e) The interchangeability of these terms is particularly noticeable in Lauterpacht’s book (see (b) above), and in Art. 1 of the resolution on the recognition of new states and governments adopted by the Institute of International Law at Brussels, April, 1936.

15 Tönnies, Ferdinand, in Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft (Leipzig, 1935), p. 3 Google Scholar et seq.; Weber, Max, Grundriss der Sozialökonomik, III Abteilung, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft (Tübingen, 1922), p. 21 Google Scholar; de Madariaga, Salvador, Theory and Practice in International Relations (London, 1937), pp. 10–11 Google Scholar. See also SirMaine, Henry Sumner, Ancient Law, Its Connection with the Early History of Society and Its Relation to Modern Ideas (London, 1930), p. 180 Google Scholar et seq., and note 20 below.

16 Permanent Court of International Justice, Series B, No. 17 (The Greco-Bulgarian “Communities”), p. 5.

17 Ibid., p. 6.

18 “The ‘commune’ is a territorial district constituted by public municipal law as an administrative and political unit, and remaining the same, no matter who its inhabitants may be.” (Ibid., p. 29.)

19 Ibid., p. 21. The Court reaffirmed this decision in its Advisory Opinion of April 6, 1935, on the Minority Schools in Albania. (Series A/B, No. 64, p. 11.)

20 Tönnies, op. cit., p. 40; Weber, loc. cit., pp. 21-22. We would accordingly maintain that the group defined by Oppenheim-Lauterpacht (op. cit., Vol. I, p. 11) as a community is either “neutral” or a society (“the body of a number of individuals more or less bound together through such common interests as create a constant and manifold intercourse between the single individuals”), and that the “society” described by J. L. Brierly in his article on “The Rule of Law in International Society” (Acta Scandinavica Juris Gentium, 1936, p. 4) is a community. (“A society needs a spiritual as well as a material basis; it cannot exist without what Rousseau called the ‘volonté générale,’ a sentiment among its members of community and of loyalty, of shared responsibility for the conduct of a common life, and it is just here that doubts of the existence of an international society find their justification.”) It need hardly be mentioned that from the standpoint of detached sociological analysis, no preference is given to the one or to the other type of group relations. Wolgast, unlike Max Weber, whose approach to these problems is entirely unbiased, also makes this distinction between community and society; he and other recent German writers on international law, however, attempt to imply a political ideology in the distinction between the international “society” and the “community” of the German people, created in their opinion by National Socialism. See in this connection, Bristler, Eduard, Die Võíherrechtslehre des Nationalsozialismus (Zürich, 1938), p. 99 Google Scholar et seq.

21 J. L. Brierly, loc. cit., p. 3. See also Westlake, John, Chapters on the Principles of International Law (Cambridge, 1894), p. 3 Google Scholar; J. S. Reeves, toc. cit., p. 51; and SirZimmern, Alfred, “International Law and Social Consciousness,” in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 20 (London, 1935), p. 43 Google Scholar.

22 Alvarez, Alejandro, “La crise de la, vie internationale et les grands problèmes internationaux,” Revue de Droit International, 1937, p. 234 Google Scholar: “Nous sommes, comme à l’époque de la Révolution française de 1789 dans une période de transition . . . d’un Droit International ancien à un Droit International nouveau.”

23 An illuminating exposition of the driving forces behind this development may be found in Lionel Curtis’ Civitas Dei (London, 1934-1937). See also van Vollenhoven, C., The Law of Peace (London, 1936), p. 6 Google Scholar et seq.; Bonn, M., in The Crumbling of Empire (London, 1938), p. 15 Google Scholar et teq.; and Bentwich, N., in The Religious Foundations of Internationalism (London, 1933)Google Scholar.

24 Grotius, , De Jure Belli ac Pacis (Oxford, 1925)Google Scholar, Bk. í, Ch. 1, p. 34. See also James Brown Scott’s introduction to Grotius, ibid., Vol. II, p. XXX, and Coleman Phillipson’s introduction to Gentili, Alberico, De Jure Belli Libri Tres (Oxford, 1933), Vol. II, p. 12aGoogle Scholar.

25 Further details in von Verdross’ study, cited in note 14 (d), p. 39 et seq.

26 Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 438: “territory . . . inhabited by natives whose community is not to be considered as a State.”

27 Vittoria, , On the Indians (Washington, 1917), pp. 152–3 Google Scholar; Gentili, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 89 et seq.; Dickinson, Lowes, The International Anarchy, 1904-1914 (London, 1937), p. 68 Google Scholar; Max Huber, loc. cit., pp. 5 and 35; von Verdross, , Völkerrecht (Berlin and Vienna, 1937), p. 201 Google Scholar.

28 The Hurtige Hane case, High Court of Admiralty, 1801 (3 C. Rob. 324); see also the Madonna del Burso case (4 C. Rob. 169), and H. A. Smith, loc. cit., Vol. I, p. 14 et seq.

29 See Escarra, Jean, La Chine et le Droit International (Paris, 1931 Google Scholar), and Pritchard, Earl H., The Crucial Years of Early Anglo-Chinese Relations, 1750-1800 (Pullman, Wash., 1936 Google Scholar, Research Studies of the State College of Washington), particularly the pertinent observations on pp. 107 and 111.

30 Wheaton’s Elements of International Law (ed. Keith, A. B., in London, 1929), Vol. I, p. 30 Google Scholar.

31 In re Ross, U. S. Sup. Ct., 1891 (140 U. S. 453).

32 Art. 7 of the Treaty of Paris (1856).

33 Thus the judgment quoted above in note 31 rightly speaks of “the assimilation of its (the Japanese) system of judicial procedure to that of Christian countries.” See also SirHolland, Thomas, Lectures on International Law (London, 1933), p. 37 Google Scholar.

34 Lord Coleridge, C. J., in the Queen v. Keyn ([1876] 2 Exch. Div. 63, 153-154); United States v. the Schooner La Jeune Eugénie (1822, 2 Mason’s Reports 409); the Antelope (U. S. Sup. Ct., 1825, 10 Wheaton 66); the Paquete Habana, the Lola (U. S. Sup. Ct., 1900, 175 U. S. 677); Holland, op. cit., p. 41 et seq.; Smith, F. E. and Sibley, N. W., in International Law as Interpreted during the Russo-Japanese War (London, 1907), p. 9 Google Scholar; Wheaton, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 30; Möller, Axel, International Law in Peace and War (London, 1931)Google Scholar, Pt. I, p. 10; Art. 38, par. 3 of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice.

35 The Prometheus case (2 Hongkong Law Reports 207).

36 See Hyde, , International Law (Boston, 1922), Vol. I, pp. 17 and 49Google Scholar; and Kunz, , “Zum Begriff der ‘Nation Civilisée’ im Modernen Völkerrecht,” Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht, Vol. VII, p. 86 Google Scholar et seq.

37 Typical examples are the El Triunfo Co. case between the United States and San Salvador, 1902 (U. S. Foreign Relations, 1902, p. 859), and the Roberts case between the United States and Mexico: “That test is, broadly speaking, whether aliens are treated in accordance with ordinary standards of civilization.” ( Feller, A. H., in Mexican Claims Commissions 1923-1934 (New York, 1935), p. 143 Google Scholar.) See also Borchard, Edwin, The Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad (Washington, 1915), pp. 27 and 29Google Scholar; H. A. Smith, he. cit., pp. 18 and 31; the present writer’s monograph (cited in note 2), p. 34, note 1, pp. 42-43, 45; and W. Friedmann’s articles in The Contemporary Review, 1937, p. 62 et seq., and in the Fortnightly, 1937, p. 432 et seq.

38 The German Supreme Court identifies “zivilisierte” and “bürgerliche Rechtsstaaten” which form “eine in der Neuzeit immer mehr anerkannte Kultur- und Rechtsgemeinschaft.” (R.G.Z. 80, p. 264 et seq.) See on this decision the present writer’s monograph, p. 13, cited above, note 2.

39 Particularly instructive in this respect are the documents contained in the Digest of the Diplomatic Correspondence of the European States, 1871-1878 (Berlin, 1937), Vol. I, Nos. 3, 11, 456, and 497; Clemenceau’s letter to Paderewski of June 24, 1919, and the views expressed by the Permanent Court of International Justice in the cases of the German Settlers in Poland (Series B. 6, p. 24), and of the Minority Schools in Albania (Series A/B, No. 64, p. 19).

40 Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 99.

41 Ibid., p. 23. See also pp. 15, 17, 27-28; Anzilotti, , Lehrbuch des Völkerrechts (Berlin and Leipzig, 1929), p. 48 Google Scholar et seq., particularly p. 53.

42 For an outspoken but justified criticism of this attitude, see von Verdross, “Les Principes généraux applicables aux rapports internationaux,” Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 1938, p. 44. See also Brierly, J. L., in The Law of Nations (London, 1936), pp. 39–45 Google Scholar, on the fiction of implied consent; and Brans, Viktor, “Völkerrecht als Rechtsordnung,” Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (Berlin), 1929, p. 12 Google Scholar.

43 Strupp, Karl, Éléments du droit international public (Paris, 1930), Vol. I, pp. 7–8 Google Scholar.

44 “Radio address on “Where the League Failed,” The Listener (London, 1938), p. 183 Google ScholarPubMed.

45 “The Decline of International Standards,” in International Affairs, Vol. 17 (1938), p. 11 Google Scholar.

46 For a more detailed account of these questions, see the present writer’s The League of Nations and World Order. A Treatise on the Principle of Universality in the Theory and Practice of the League of Nations (London, 1936), pp. 4-18.

47 The following notes illustrate the attitude of the United States to the principle of the balance of power in the middle of the nineteenth century: “The President recognises to a certain extent the European idea of the balance of power. If the principle has any foundation at all, the independence and stability of these United States just in their present form, properties and character, are essential to the preservation of the balance between the nations of the earth as it now exists. It is not easy to see how France, Great Britain, Russia, or even reviving Spain could hope to suppress wars of ambition which must inevitably break out if this continent of North America, now, after the exclusion of foreign interests for three-quarters of a century, is again to become a theatre for the ambition and cupidity of European nations.” Mr. Seward to Mr. Drayton (Paris), April 22, 1861.

“The equilibrium of nations, maintained by this republic, on the one side, against the European system on the other continent, would be lost, and the struggles of nations in that system for dominion in this hemisphere and on the high seas, which constitutes the chief portion of the world’s history in the eighteenth century, would be renewed. The progress of freedom and civilisation now so happily inaugurated would be arrested, and the hopes of humanity which this the present century has brought forth would be indefinitely postponed.” Mr. Seward to Mr. Clay (St. Petersburg), May 6, 1861. (See Digest of Diplomatic Correspondence, 1856-1871, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 66-67.)

For the working of this principle in Central Asia, see Digest of Diplomatic Correspondence, 1871-1878, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 29; and in South America (“balance of the States of the Plata”), ibid., p. 63 et seq.

48 A list of these “constitutions of Europe or even of the world” has been compiled by Wolgast, Ernst, in Völkerbund und Vöíkecht, Vol. 3 (1936), pp. 251–252 Google Scholar. See also the interesting argument contained in the opinion by the Advocate General to the Earl of Halifax, Nov. 30, 1764, in Smith, loo. cit., Vol. I, p. 3.

49 See on this question Malinowski’s, B. fascinating study, Crime and Custom in Savage Society (London, 1932)Google Scholar, particularly pp. 23, 26, 41, and 58.

50 See Vattel, , Le Droit des Gens (London, 1758)Google Scholar, Vol. II, Liv. Ill, ch. Ill, §§ 45-49.

51 A convenient collection of the real views of the representatives of the greater Powers during the Hague Peace Conferences may be found in Dickinson, Lowes, The International Anarchy (London, 1937), p. 375 Google Scholar et seq.

52 Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 187.

53 Ibid., p. 503.

54 Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 498 et seq.

55 Digest of Diplomatie Correspondence, 1856-71, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 87.

56 See the present writer’s monograph (cited in note 46 above), p. 44.

57 Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1821), §§ 237, 238, 331, 333. See also von Verdross, Alfred, Die Einheit des rechtlichen Weltbildes (Tübingen, 1923)Google Scholar. On the influence of Hegel’s conception of the state, particularly on English idealistic philosophy (Bosanquet), see Lauterpacht, H., in Private Law Sources and Analogies of International Law (London, 1927), p. 47 Google Scholar et seq. Other causes which contributed to this development are the reaction against the ideological abuses of natural law, the identification of the natural law of the 17th and 18th centuries with the natural law, tendencies towards codification combined with conscious efforts for the reform of international law, and the influence of empirical natural science on the methods of social science.

58 See Garner, James Wilford, International Law and the World War (London, 1920)Google Scholar, particularly Vol. II, pp. 49 et seq., 317 et seq., and in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 22 (London, 1937), p. 4.

59 Third point of Wilson’s “Five Particulars,” Seymour, Charles, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House (Boston, 1926-1928), Vol. IV, pp. 70–71 Google Scholar.

60 On the first two points see the present writer’s The League of Nations and World Order, p. 19 et seq.; and on the last, see Point Three of Wilson’s Fourteen Points, and Art. 23 (e) of the Covenant.

61 Chamberlain, Neville, House of Commons, Dec. 14, 1932. (Keith, Speeches and Documents on International Affairs, 1918-1937, Vol. I, p. 235 Google Scholar.)

62 See ibid., p. 144 et seq.

63 See Lawley, F. E., in Collective Economy (London, 1938)Google Scholar; Girard, Emile, La erise de la démocratie et le renforcement, du pouvoir exécutif (Paris, 1938)Google Scholar; the articles by v. Röpke, Mises, Whitton and Heilperin, in The World Crisis (London, 1938), p. 243 Google Scholar et seq.; and Friedmann, loc. cit. (note 2 above), p. 118 et seg.

64 See the present writer’s articles on this subject in The New Commonwealth Quarterly, Vol. Ill, pp. 262 á seç., 360 et seq.; the result of the New Commonwealth Institute’s enquête on this subject (ibid., Vol. IV, p. 60 et seq.), and the article by Josef Kunz, ibid., Vol. IV, p. 131.

65 See v. Freytagh-Loringhoven, , in Völkerbund und Völkerrecht, Vol. 2 (1935), p. 519 Google Scholar et seq.; also the significant passage on the subject in his article “Politik und Recht,” in Europäische Revue, 1938, pp. 253-254; and Virginio Gayda’s article “Die Achse, Österreich und die europäische Lage,” ibid., pp. 274-275.

66 See Gooch, G. P., “The Grouping of the Powers,” in The Contemporary Review, 1938, p. 129 Google Scholar et seq.

67 U. S. Supreme Court, 1895, in Hilton v. Guyot (159 U. S. 113).

68 See the stimulating study by Karl Mannheim, Mensch und Gesellschaft in Zeitalter des Umbaus (1935).

69 Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A/B, No. 70, pp. 76-79.

70 See Finch, George A., “Secretary of State Hull’s Pillars of Enduring Peace,” this Journal, Vol. 31 (1937), p. 688 Google Scholar et seq.; Arthur K. Kuhn, “Observations upon Secretary Hull’s Principles of Enduring Peace,” ibid., Vol. 32 (1938), p. 101 et seq.; and the present writer’s analysis of the declaration and the replies received from sixty-one governments, in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 23 (London, 1938), p. 147 et seq.

71 For details, see a paper read by E. Jäckh at the New Commonwealth Conference at Pontigny, August, 1938, which will be published in the New Commonwealth Quarterly. See also the author’s monograph cited in note 2 above, p. 40 et seq.