Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T12:12:17.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Legal Aspects of Sovereignty over the Dodecanese

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 April 2017

Joseph S. Roucek
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Current Notes
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 38 , Issue 4 , October 1944 , pp. 701 - 706
Copyright
Copyright © by the American Society of International Law 1944

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 Declaration of the Italian Prime Minister Giolitti before the Italian Parliament: Corriere della Sera, Dec. 5, 1912.

2 Quoted in René Albrecht-Carrié, Italy at the Peace Conference, New York, 1937, pp. 334–339.

3 There is no room for doubt as to the stand taken by President Wilson on either the Dodecanese question or the issue of secret treaties. When Fiume was under discussion the position of the United States President was that “the only advantage in letting the Italians have Fiume would be that it would break the Treaty of London which he was disturbed to find allotted the Dodecanese to Italy”: David Hunter Miller, My Diary at the Paris Conference, New York, 1923, Vol. XIX, p. 576. This evoked bitter opposition from Italian quarters at the Peace Conference. Signor Sonnino declared, “ Italy had made definite agreements with the Allies. Now comes a third party who says we must give up all this and that because of new principles which Wilson believes in but I do not”: Luigi Aldrovandi Marescotti, Guerra Diplomalica, Milano, 1937, p. 250.

4 Article V (Note), Albrecht-Carrié, work cited, p. 336.

5 Minutes of the Council of Heads of Delegation July 18.

6 A. Tsacalakis, Le Dodécanèse, Alexandria, 1928, pp. 66–72.

7 Quoted in Frangulis, M. A., Dictionnaire Diplomatique, Paris, 1933, Vol. I, p. 739 Google Scholar.

8 Congressional Record, Vol. 59, Part VII, p. 7160 (May 17, 1920).

9 A similar provision was made by a special note, signed the same day, for the Island of Castellorizo: S. Zervos, La Question du Dodécanèse et ses Documents Diplomatiques, Athens, 1926, p. 119. See also N. G. Mavris, Sforza vs. Sforza, New York, 1943, p. 11.

10 Same, p. 99.

11 Mondaini, G., Manuale di Storia e Legislazione Coloniale, Rome, 1924, Part II, pp. 214–215 Google Scholar.

12 A reproduction of such a passport is to be found on page 32 of The Dodecanesians Are Not Enemy Aliens, New York, 1942 (published by the Dodecanesian League of America).

13 Toynbee, A. J., Survey of International Affairs, 1924, London, 1926, pp. 470–1 Google Scholar.

14 Temperley, H. W. V., A History of the Peace Conference of Paris, London, 1920–1924, Vol. VI, p. 37 Google Scholar.

15 Quoted in C. D. and Isabelle B. Booth, Italy’s Aegean Possessions, London, 1928, p. 310 (our italics).

16 Greek White Book, 1940, American Edition, Document No. 45, pp. 35–37.

17 Great Britain, Parliamentary Debates, N.S., House of Commons, Vol. 170, (Feb. 25, 1924) (our italics).