relations. This pamphlet tries to state them, as simply as possible. The World War did not cancel the existing conceptions of the rights and duties of nations; sovereign states are still legally equal, and each is still sovereign over its territory and over its citizens, and the ships of every nation still have the right to sail the seas. PART II relates to the procedure open to a sovereign state for enforcing its rights and compelling other states to perform their duties toward it. The most extreme of these measures, of course, is war. It was here that the World War wrought its confusion. It would be not merely a bold man, but a rash one, that would attempt to prophesy what the future may hold in the way of the general substitution of other methods for warfare as the means of settling international disputes. For this reason no attempt has been made in PART II to state in detail the pre-war regulations and agreements about war; the conventions and agreements which before the last war the world expected would govern in war are merely listed, with an indication of the most important questions in this field left unsettled by the war. The world hopes that wars will be limited or made impossible, and that nations will be brought to see the ultimate wisdom of adopting other methods for settling their differences. In PART III the most important instances of international co-operation are stated briefly, and the organization of the League of Nations is described. vii In PART IV the most significant tendencies of international relations are listed; one of great general interest in the United States is the movement for the codification of international law. In conclusion: THE AMERICAN FOUNDATION offers this pamphlet to the public, in the hope and the belief that it will be of service to its readers in helping them to understand what is meant by international law, and that it will lead some of them on to the more adequate treatises on separate topics. In the proportion in which it serves to awaken and to inform interest in our international relations, it will contribute toward the development of that reasoned judgment which alone can guide either an individual or a nation in the path of light. September 1, 1925. THE AMERICAN FOUNDATION. viii PART I THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF A SOVEREIGN STATE CHAPTER I INTERNATIONAL LAW: ITS SOURCES International law is the term used to denote the principles and rules that express the conception that gradually has grown up of the proper behavior of civilized nations to each other or to the members of each other. It consists of a slowly developed body of rules which civilized nations recognize as binding upon them in their intercourse with the rest of the civilized world. IN WHAT SENSE INTERNATIONAL LAW IS LAW International law is not "law" in the sense in which a statute passed by a Congress or Parliament or by a state legislature is "law," which is enacted by the persons to whom the citizens of the state have delegated the power to pass laws and which is enforced by the state officials— i. e., by the power of the state, to which the citizen owes obedience. In the case of international law, there is no Parliament of nations to which the nations have given the law-making power; there is no tribunal to which an offending nation may be summoned; and there is no power above the nation to enforce the tribunal's decree. For this reason it is sometimes said that there is no such thing as international law. INTERNATIONAL LAW RESTS ON CUSTOM AND CONSENT The foundation of law, however, is custom, or usage. Much of the English common law, on which our law, in general, rests, was never enacted by Parliament; it simply was the developed and recognized custom of the country. Murder was punished by death before a penal code was ever enacted; theft was punished before any legislature passed a law against it, simply because the community believed that no one should be allowed to steal the fruits of another's labor or skill. Similarly, much of international law arose, as did the common law, from custom, without enactment. International law does not consist of law above the nations, imposed upon them by a superior power; it consists of rules and agreements among the nations. The test of whether a law is a controlling force is not how it arose; the test is whether it is obeyed. International law, in general, is obeyed, by the nations that wish to be considered as members of the civilized world. Rules of conduct acquiesced in by all civilized nations and applied by the highest courts of the greatest nations in disputes that come before them are entitled to the term of law; for they do bind the conduct of nations, and have public opinion for their sanction. Moreover, a large part of international law, though it developed from custom, has since been specifically agreed to by most nations, and accordingly now rests, to that degree, on consent. Many of the most important rules of international law have been expressed in conventions or treaties, which have been ratified by many nations. Careful attention must always be given, however, to the fact that there is a great difference between international law as universally recognized by civilized nations-most of which is not based on written rules, but on custom-and agreements or understandings between various nations which have not yet attained that universality of acceptance that entitles them to be included in international law. In the World War it was demonstrated that several rules that had been regarded as component parts of international law had not been universally accepted, and so were not binding. Similarly, agreements accepted for a term, or with a provision that a nation may withdraw on notice, or that are not binding in a war unless all the parties to the war have ratified them, are not parts of universal international law, but merely represent aspirations toward a better order. For this reason international law today is in a curious state; much of the ground that, it was thought, |