Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-2l2gl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T18:19:13.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International Parliamentary Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Philip C. Jessup
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 51 , Issue 2 , April 1957 , pp. 396 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1957

References

1 See Schwarzenberger, , “The Province and Standards of International Economic Law,” 2 International Law Quarterly 402 (1947)Google Scholar.

2 See Glaser, Introduction à l’Etude de Droit International Péinal (1954).

3 See 1956 Proceedings, American Society of International Law 84–115. Cf. Mateesco, Droit Aérien Aéronautique (1954).

4 See Alvarez, Le Droit International Améiricain (1909).

5 Vallindas, , “Autonomy of International Uniform Law,” 8 Revue Hellénique de Droit International 8, 9 (1955)Google Scholar.

6 Schwarzenberger, , “The Problem of an International Criminal Law,” 1950 Current Legal Problems 263 Google Scholar.

7 See New York Times, Jan. 5, 1957.

8 Gooch, , “Legal Nature of Legislative Rules of Procedure,” 12 Virginia L. Rev. 527 (1926)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 The writer is indebted to Mr. Leon Spoliansky of the Columbia Law School for a study of these cases.

10 The King and the Lord Hunsdon v. The Countess Dowager of Arundel and the Lord William Howard, Hob. 109, 80 Eng. Rep. 258 (1617).

11 Edinburgh Railway Co. v. Wanchope, [1842] 8 CL. & F. 710, 8 Eng. Rep. 279.

12 Hunt v. Wright, 70 Miss. 798, 11 So. 608 (1892); State v. Jones, 6 Wash. 452, 34 Pac. 201 (1893).

13 237 la. 912, 23 N. W. 2d 883 (1946).

14 Anderson v. Atwood, Secretary of State, 273 Mich. 316, 262 N.W. 922 (1935).

15 Crawford v. Gilchrist, 64 Fla. 41, 59 So. 963 (1912).

16 People ex rel Purdy v. Commissioner of Highways of Marlborough, 54 N.Y. 276 (1873). On the Idaho rule concerning resort to the journals, see Cohn v. Kingsley, 5 Idaho 416, 419 Pac. 985 (1897); In re Drainage District No. 1, 26 Idaho 311, 143 Pac. 299 (1914). Cf. Luce, Legislative Procedure 210 (1922).

17 Smith v. Jennings, 67 S.C. 324, 45 S.E. 821 (1903).

18 33 N.Y. 269 (1865).

19 E.g., Schweitzer v. Territory, 50 Okla. 297, 47 Pac. 1094 (1897); St. Louis & S.P. Ry. Co. v. Gill, 54 Ark. 101, 15 S.W. 18 (1891); aff’d. 156 U. S. 649 (1891).

20 Hunt v. Wright, 70 Miss. 798, 11 So. 608 (1892).

21 The writer has developed this subject more fully in a series of lectures at the Hague Academy of International Law, to be published in its 1956 Recueil des Cours under the title “Parliamentary Diplomacy.” Materials presented in those lectures have been drawn on here.

22 See also Arts. 30, 72 and 90 for similar provisions regarding the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, and the Trusteeship Council.

23 See 1 United Nations Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs 626 (1955). In general see the discussion in the Repertory under Art. 21 at 623 and following.

24 See U.N. Doc. A/520/Rev. 3, June 1, 1954.

25 For explanation of the word “decisions” see 1 U.N. Repertory vi, and United Nations, Répertoire of the Practice of the Security Council 2 (1954). See especially report of the Secretary General in U.N. Doc. A/1356, Annexes (V) 49 (1950), par. 22, See, in general, Sloan, “The Binding Force of a ‘Recommendation’ of the General Assembly of the United Nations,” 25 Brit. Year Bk. of Int. Law 1 (1948)Google Scholar.

26 See Jiménez de Aréchaga, Voting and the Handling of Disputes in the Security Council 3, 11 ff. (1950); 1 U.N. Répertoire 157.

27 59 Stat. 619; 63 Stat. 734.