Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T06:50:37.558Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Problem of Revision in International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Josef L. Kunz
Josef L. Kunz*
Affiliation:
University of Toledo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Perhaps no other problem of international law plays at the present time such an important rôle as the problem of revision, or, as it is now called with a new and rather ambiguous term, “peaceful change.” This is in itself a change. For whereas advanced municipal laws naturally contain provisions for the change of the positive law by legislation or by constitutional amendments, the problem was, up to a short time ago, nearly wholly neglected in international law, both practically and theoretically. International law was primarily static, as indeed are all primitive juridical orders. Not only were the great peace treaties since 1648 meant to be perpetual, but even proposals de lege ferenda were purely static.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , January 1939 , pp. 33 - 55
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 Pound, Roscoe, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law (New Haven, 1922), pp. 12, 14Google Scholar; Brierly, J. L., The Law of Nations (2nd ed., Oxford, 1936), pp. 59, 61Google Scholar.

2 See Eméric Crucé’s Le Nouveau Cynée, Le Grand Dessein de Henri IV, and particularly Abbé de St. Pierre’s Projet de Paix Perpétuelle (1716), fundamental Articles I and IV.

3 See for details: Kunz, Josef L., “Statisches und dynamisches Völkerrecht,” in Gesellschaft, Staat und Recht, ed. by Verdross, A. (Vienna, 1931), pp. 217–257 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kunz, , “The Law of Nations, Static and Dynamic,” in this Journal, Vol. 27 (1933), pp. 630–650 Google Scholar. Cf. also, Toynbee, A. J., “The Lessons of History,” in Peaceful Change, ed. by Manning, C. A. W. (New York, 1937), pp. 27–38 Google Scholar; Flaes, R., Das Problem der Territorial Konflikte (Amsterdam, 1929 Google Scholar); Cruttwell, C. R. M. F., A History of Peaceful Change in the Modern World (London, 1937)Google Scholar; White, W. W., The Process of Change in the Ottoman Empire (Chicago, 1937)Google Scholar.

4 This theoretical conception has been put forward for a long time by this writer. Combated by Strisower and Kelsen, it is now shared by such writers as Brierly, E. D. Dickinson, in Lauterpacht, Le Fur, Scelle, and Verdross.

5 For a detailed analysis of Art. XIX, see Kunz, Josef L., Die Revision der Panser Friedensverträge (Vienna, 1932 Google Scholar, further quoted as Kunz, Revision), pp. 295-304; also, the well-known commentaries on the Covenant by Schücking-Wehberg, Hay, and Gonsiorowski; Llewellyn-Jones, F., in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 19 (London, 1934), pp. 13–31 Google Scholar; Bouffai, B., in Revue de Droit International et de Législation Comparée, 1928, pp. 882–905 Google Scholar; Stieger, H., in Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht, 1929, pp. 129–138 Google Scholar; Hu, Hoen Z., Treaty Revision under Article XIX of the Covenant (New York, 1931)Google Scholar; Makowski, J., L’article XIX du Pacte (Warsaw, 1933)Google Scholar; Boehmert, V., Der Artikel XIX der Völkerbundsatzung (Kiel, 1934)Google Scholar.

6 Alvarez, A., De la non-révision des traités de paix (Geneva, 1921)Google Scholar; Carrasco, José, La Bo livie devant la Société des Nations (Nancy, 1921)Google Scholar.

7 See L. of N. 6th Assembly, Plenary Meetings, pp. 44/45, 79, 90, 92, 102; 10th Assembly, Plenary Meetings, pp. 101, 112, 113, 177; First Commission, pp. 44-47, 54-56, 99-100; Wood, G. Z., The Sino-Japanese Treaties of May 25, 1915 (New York, 1921)Google Scholar; Hsin-Chu, Chao, La Chine réclame son autonomie douanière (1925), Revision of Unequal Treaties (2nd ed., London, 1926)Google Scholar; Tao-Chang, Chung, Les traités inégaux de la Chine et l’attitude des Puissances (Paris, 1929)Google Scholar; Keeton, G. W., in British Year Book of International Law, X, 1929, pp. 111–136 Google Scholar; Gilbert, R., in The Unequal Treaties: China and the Foreigners (London, 1929)Google Scholar; Hao-Tseng, Yu, The Termination of Unequal Treaties in International Law (Shanghai, 1931)Google Scholar; Wu, P., La Révision des traités sino-étrangers (Paris, 1932)Google Scholar.

8 E.g., Pitkins, W. H., in Siam’s Case for Revision of Obsolete Treaty Obligations (1919)Google Scholar; Habid-Abi-Chahla, , L’extinction des capituhtions en Turquie et dans les régions arabes (Paris, 1924)Google Scholar.

9 E.g., the static character of the Geneva Protocol, 1924, of M. Briand’s Pan-European proposal, of the General Act of 1928, and even of the Pact of Paris, 1928.

10 This situation is by no means unusual. In 1863 Napoleon III wrote in a circular to the sovereigns of Europe regarding the settlement made by the Vienna Congress: “C’est sur (le Congrès de Vienne de 1815) que repose aujourd’hui l’édifice politique de l’Europe, et cepen dant, il s’écroule de toutes parts. Si l’on considère attentivement la situation des divers pays, il est impossible de ne pas reconnaître que, presque sur tous les points, les Traités de Vienne sont détruits, modifiés, méconnus ou menacés.” ( Bruns, , Fontes Juris Gentium, Ser. B, Sec. I, Vol. I, Pt. I, Berlin, 1932, p. 772 Google Scholar.)

11 See Kunz, Revision, where a fairly complete bibliography of the vast literature on this subject up to 1932 is given. Since 1932, see Rudinsky, J., La Révision du Traité de Trianon (Paris, 1933 Google Scholar) (anti-revisionist); Seton-Watson, R., Treaty Revision and the Hungarian Frontier (London, 1934)Google Scholar; Ullein, A., La nature des clauses territoriales du Traité de Trianon (2nd ed., Paris, 1936)Google Scholar; SirGower, Robert, Treaty Revision and the Hungarian Frontiers (London, 1936)Google Scholar; Wissmann, H., Revisionsprobleme des Diktats von Versailles (Berlin, 1936)Google Scholar.

12 Hans Grimm, Volk ohne Raum (1931).

13 Gini, Corrado, Report on Certain Aspects of the Raw Materials Problem (Boston, 1922)Google Scholar. Cf. also International Conciliation, No. 226, 1929; Wallace and Edminster, International Control of Raw Materials (Washington, 1930)Google ScholarPubMed; Gini, C., “Il problema delle materie prime,” in Rivista di politica economica, December, 1932 Google Scholar, “Il problema della distribuzione internazionale della populazione e delle materie prime,” ibid., April, 1936; Raw Materials and Colonies (London, 1936); Greaves, R. S., in Raw Materials and International Control (London, 1936)Google Scholar; de Wilde, J. C., The International Distribution of Raw Materials, Geneva Special Studies, July, 1936 Google Scholar; the same, in Foreign Policy Association Report, New York, Sept. 15, 1936; Spinedi, G., “Materie prime e colonie,” in Rivista Italiana di Scienze Economiche, February, 1936 Google Scholar; Robbing, L., in Economic Planning and International Order (London, 1937)Google Scholar; Staley, E., in Raw Materials in Peace and War (New York, 1937)Google Scholar; “Kolonien und Rohstoffe,” in Zeitschrift der deutschen Gesellschaft für Völkerbund)’ragen, Geneva, 1937, Nos. 192–206 Google Scholar; Elliott, W. Y., in International Control in the Non-Ferrous Metals (New York, 1937)Google Scholar; Plummer, A., in Raw Materials or War Materials? (London, 1937)Google Scholar; Gangeni, L., in Università di Camerino, Annali della Faculta Giuridica, XI/1, 1937 (Naples), pp. 1–137 Google Scholar; Kranold, Herm., The International Distribution of Raw Materials (London, 1938)Google Scholar.

14 See Federzoni, L., Il posto al sole (Bologna, 1936)Google Scholar; Ashton, H. S., in Clamour for Colonies (London, 1936)Google Scholar; Clark,, Grover A Place in the Sun (New York, 1936)Google Scholar; The Colonial Problem, By a Study Group of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (London, 1937)Google Scholar; Maroger, G., La question des matières premieres et les revendications coloniales (Paris, 1937)Google Scholar; Bonn, M. J., in L’Esprit International, 1937, pp. 147–164 Google Scholar; F. Berber, ibid., pp. 191-208; Kraft, H. H., in Germany’s Colonial Problem (London, 1937)Google Scholar; Schacht, Hj., “Germany’s Colonial Demands,” in Foreign Affairs (New York), January, 1937 Google Scholar. Cf. also Townsend, M. E., “The German Colonies and the Third Reich,” in Political Science Quarterly, LIII/2, 1938, pp. 186–206 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 “Elasticity where elasticity is required, is also a part of security. Yet, the world is not static, and changes will, from time to time, have to be made.” (L. of N., 16th Assembly, Official Journal, Spi. Supp. No. 138, Geneva, 1935, pp. 44, 45. Cf. also the strong words of Eamon de Valera, ibid., p. 82.)

16 A special League of Nations Committee was set up. Committee for the Study of the Problem of Raw Materials, Interim Report (L. of N. P. 1937.II.B.1); Second Interim Report (1937.И.B.4); Report of the Committee (1937.II.B.7).

The necessity of peaceful change was also mentioned in President Roosevelt’s Chicago speech of Oct. 5, 1937; and in Mr. Cordell Hull’s statement of July 16, 1937, we read: “Upholding the principle of the sanctity of treaties, we believe in modification of provisions of treaties, when need therefor arises, by orderly process carried out in a spirit of mutual helpfulness and accommodation.” (Cf. L. of N. Official Journal, Spi. Supp. No. 179, 1937.) Various comments on that statement strongly emphasize the necessity of peaceful change. See especially the comment by the Union of South Africa (ibid., p. 6), Bulgaria (p. 9), Canada (p. 9), Hungary (p. 9), Irish Free State (p. 21), The Netherlands (p. 24), Portugal (p. 28).

17 Treaty of Alliance of Aug. 26, 1936 (Great Britain Treaty Series, No. 6,1937; this Journal, Supp., Vol. 31 (1937), pp. 77-90).

18 Jenks, C. W., “The Montreux Conference and the Law of Peaceful Change,” in New Commonwealth Quarterly (London), II/2, 1936, pp. 242–253 Google Scholar.

19 M. A. Caloyanni, “The Montreux Capitulations Conference and the Progress of Peaceful Change,” ibid., III/3, 1937, pp. 328-334; Christophe, R., L’Egypte et le régime des capitulations, fa Conférence de Montreux (Paris, 1938)Google Scholar. Cf. also most recently the Salónica Pact of July 31, 1938, by which the Balkan Entente (Greece, Rumania, Turkey, Yugoslavia) revised the corresponding clauses of the Treaty of Neuilly, by granting Bulgaria’s right to rearm; and the revision effected by the Council of the Little Entente (Czechoslovakia, Rumania, Yugoslavia) at Bled, Aug. 23, 1938, concerning the disarmament clauses of the Treaty of Trianon, granting Hungary’s right to rearm; and now the Munich Conference and the Vienna Arbitration.

The efforts for the revision of the Covenant of the League of Nations seem, on the other hand, unsuccessful. A. Møller, Révision du Pacte de L• Société des Nations (1937); Kelsen, H., in The World Crisis (London, 1937)Google Scholar, and in Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht (Vienna), 1937, pp. 401-490, 590-622; Schwarzenberger, G., in Nos. 3 and 4, 1937, and No. 1, 1938, of The New Commonwealth Quarterly (London)Google Scholar.

20 Proceedings of the American Society of International Law, 30th Annual Meeting, Washington, 1936 Google Scholar.

21 Société des Nations, “Peaceful Change” Conférence, 1937, in Coopération Intellectuelle, Nos. 73/74, pp. 5-43.

22 Collective Security, A Record of the 7th and 8th International Studies Conferences, Paris, 1934—London, 1935 (ed. by Bourquin, M., in Paris, 1936)Google Scholar. See particularly Bourquin’s General Report, p. 13, the ideas expressed by F. Coppola, pp. 149-198, the remark of the Canadian representative on p. 192, Le Fur’s and de La Pradelle’s Memorandum on the re vision of treaties, pp. 193-201, the remarks by C. A. W. Manning, p. 207, D. Mitrany’s Memorandum on peaceful change, pp. 209-215, and the~Memorandum on revision of treaties and international situations by G. Bayón y Chacón, pp. 245-251.

23 Dunn, F. S., in Peaceful Change, a Study of International Procedures (New York, 1937)Google Scholar; Stone, W. T. and Eichelberger, Clark, Peaceful Change, The Alternative to War, Foreign Policy Association, Headline Books, No. 12 (New York, 1937 Google Scholar).

24 Apart from the literature already previously cited, see: Martin, W., in Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 136 (1925), pp. 117–127 Google Scholar; Alinski, Z., Mozliwozci Rewizji traktatów wedlug Pâktu Ligi Narodów (Warsaw, 1927)Google Scholar; Goellner, A., La révision des traités sous le régime de la Société des Nations (Paris, 1925)Google Scholar; Cutzutache, C. D., Revizuirea tratalor sub regimul Societatei Natiunilor (Bucharest, 1929)Google Scholar; Revision of Treaties and Change in International Law, A Report of the International Section of the New Fabian Research Bureau under the Chairmanship of Leonard Woolf, London; Radoïkovitch, M., La révision des traités et le Pacte de la Société des Nations (Paris, 1930)Google Scholar; Reyes, Juan Rivera, La revisión de fos tratados (Paris, 1929)Google Scholar; Villani, G. E., La revisione dei trattati e i principi generali del diritto (Modena, 1930)Google Scholar; Auer, P. v., in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 18 (London, 1933), pp. 155–174 Google Scholar; C. Schmitt, Die Kernfrage des Völkerbundes (1926); Catellani, , “La revisione dei trattati,” in Atti del R. Instituto Veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti (Venice, 1931)Google Scholar; Roux, G., Réviser les traités? (Paris, 1931)Google Scholar; Williams, J. Fischer, in International Affairs (London, 1931), X/3, pp. 326–347 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, International Change and International Peace (Oxford, 1932); Brierly, J. L., “The Legislative Function in International Relations,” Problems of Peace, 5th series (London, 1931), pp. 205–229 Google Scholar; Wigniolle, A., La Société des Nations et la révision des traités (Paris, 1932)Google Scholar; Cereti, C., La revisione dei trattati (Milan, 1934)Google Scholar; Caravetta, G. A., La revisione dei trattati e il disarmo spirituale (Palermo, 1934)Google Scholar; Dickinson, E. D., in Proceedings of the Institute of World Affairs, Vol. XI (1933), pp. 173–182 Google Scholar; Zancla, P.. Contributo La studio della revisione dei trattati (Palermo, 1934)Google Scholar; F. Giustiniani, La revisione dei trattati e taluni suoi aspetti giuridici; Lauterpacht, H., in The Function of Law in the International Community (Oxford, 1933), pp. 246–347 Google Scholar; Berber, F., Sicherheit und Gerechtigkeit (Berlin, 1934)Google Scholar; Middleton, G. W. B., in Juridical Review, XLVII/2 (1935), pp. 142–156 Google Scholar; Telders, , La révision des traités de 1859 (The Hague, 1935 Google Scholar); Ch. Booth, D., in Cooperation or Chaos (New York, 1936)Google Scholar; Scelle, G., Théorie juridique de la révision des traités (Paris, 1936)Google Scholar; Angus, H. F., in The Problem of Peaceful Change in the Pacific Area (New York, 1937)Google Scholar; Toynbee, A. J., in International Affairs (London, 1936), XV/1, pp. 26–56 Google Scholar; Hedges, R. Yorke, in New Commonwealth Quarterly (London, 1936), 1/4, pp. 271–280 Google Scholar; R. B. Mowat, ibid. (1937), HI/1, pp. 5-14; S.|Wambaugh, ibid. (1938), IV/1, pp. 16-25; Fur, L. Le, in Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de Droit International, 1935, IV, pp. 214–247 Google Scholar; Gramsch, W., Grundlagen und Methoden internationaler Revision (Stuttgart, 1937)Google Scholar; Gihl, Torsten, International Legislation, An Essay on Changes in International Law and in International Legal Situations (New York, 1937)Google Scholar; idem, in Ada Scandinavica juris gentium (1937), VIII/4, pp. 67-107; Change, Peaceful, An International Problem—A Symposium (ed. by Manning, C. A. W., in New York, 1937)Google Scholar; Dunn, F. S., in Peaceful Change, A Study of International Procedures (New York, 1937)Google Scholar; Rogge, H., Das Revisionsproblem (Berlin, 1937)Google Scholar.

25 H. Rogge, op. cit.; Mandelsloh, A., Politische Pakte und Völkerrechtliche Ordnung (Berlin, 1937)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Whereas French authors mostly narrow down the problem of peaceful change to the problem of revision of treaties, English-American authors look at it from a practical political point of view, and German writers conceive it as the more ambitious problem of a new organization of the world or, at least, of Europe. Cf. H. Rogge, op. at., pp. 112-118.

26 Kunz, Josef L., “The Theory of International Law,” in Proceedings of the American Society of International Law, 32nd Annual Meeting, Washington, 1938, pp. 23–33 Google Scholar.

27 An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law (New Haven, 1922), p. 30. Cf. also Pound, Interpretations of Legal History, p. 1.

28 Les notions fondamentales du droit privé (Paris, 1911), Ch. II: “La sécurité,” pp. 63-87; Ch. III: “L’évolution et la sécurité,” pp. 88-110.

29 The Paradoxes of Legal Science (New York, 1928), pp. 6, 7.

30 Hence abo the antagonism between the two basic political attitudes: conservative and, on the other hand, liberal, progressive, radical. See Schuman, F. L., in International Politics (2nd ed., New York, 1937), pp. 635–640 Google Scholar.

31 “Change is a constitutional factor of law; law is not something in existence; it is a perpetual becoming.” (An Introduction into the Science of Law, Boston, 1930, p. 13.)

32 Who speaks of the “aspect essentiellement dynamique du droit.” (La Crise du Droit et de l’État, Paris, 1935, p. 386.)

33 Ladijensky, A., “La dynamique et la statique dans le droit,” in Revue Internationale de la Théorie du Droü, 1927/28, pp. 110–138 Google Scholar.

34 “At any given time the world presents a certain network of facts recognized as law. Frontiers are defined, obligations and rights laid down, zones of influence recognized, debts acknowledged, limitations of sovereignty accepted, occupations of territory admitted, in fine, a system is established which constitutes, so to say, a zero of history, a starting-point, not for history which has none, but for our thought. Then, life flows in . . . some change takes place which gradually makes the world of facts and forces move away from the world of laws. This nation grows weaker; that nation stronger; this territory once uninhabited, grows to be an important center of population; new national feelings appear, where careless and self-ignorant masses were once herded together by a foreign power; the nation yesterday subjected grows stronger than its subjector; economic and financial currents are reversed. Between the static set of laws and the dynamic set of forces there appears thus a set of conflicts. . . . This may be said to be the normal state of the world as a whole.” (Disarmament, London, 1929, pp. 43-44.)

35 Radbruch, G., Rechtsphilosophie (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1932 Google Scholar).

36 Radbruch, op. cit., says that this antinomy brings about an “inevitable conflict between security and justice.” Hauriou, for whom “le droit est mouvement,” speaks of the “conflit permanent entre la sécurité de l’ordre social et la justice.” (“L’Ordre social, la Justice et le Droit,” Revue trimestriette de Droit Civil, 1927, p. 795 et seq.) Cf. also Gurvitch, G.: “conflit inlassable entre le dynamique et le statique, conflit intrinsèque entre le progrès et l’ordre, entre le renouveau et la stabilization.” (Ľexpérience juridique et la philosophie pluraliste du droit, Paris, 1935, p. 64 Google Scholar.) “Le problème du droit naturel n’est que le reflet du caractère antinomique de la sphère juridique où se confrontent réalité et valeur, fait et idée, empirisme et apriorisme, stabilité de l’ordre établi et dynamisme du progrès moral, sécurité et justice.” (Op. cit., p. 103.)

37 Radbruch states only the fact that often in the life of the law justice is sacrificed to security. But Hauriou: “Par l’urgence de son but, l’ordre social prime la justice. L’ordre social est un élément plus primordial que la justice. L’ordre social établi est ce qui nous sépare de la catastrophe. L’ordre social représente le minimum d’existence et la justice sociale est un luxe dont, dans une certaine mesure, on peut se passer.” (Op. cit., p. 49.) Contra: Trentin, op. cit., pp. 386-387.

38 Cf. also Dewey, John, “Authority and Social Change,” in Authority and the Individual (Cambridge, Mass., 1937), pp. 170–190 Google Scholar.

39 The return of the Saar Basin to Germany certainly involved a “change”; but this return took place in consequence of the positive law of the Versailles Treaty, and according to the procedure provided by that treaty.

40 See, on this problem, Kunz, Revision, pp. 231-249, 278-281.

41 Ibid., pp. 249-270.

42 Expiration of a time limit, coming into existence of a resolutive condition, denunciation in accordance with a corresponding provision of the treaty, renunciation of a right conferred by the treaty, impossibility of fulfillment, extinction of one party as a sovereign state. Cf. also effect of declaration of war. A treaty may come to an end by the action of a third party, if so provided in the treaty itself, or by desuetude, or by the provisions of a new treaty.

43 For an identification of the clausula and Art. XIX of the Covenant, see Finlay, Fauchille, Gamer (Iowa Law Beview, XXIX, 1934), Goellner, Higgins, Huang, Larnaude, McNair, Radoïkovitch, Rudinsky, Wigniolle. Contra: this writer, Anzilotti, Balladore-Pallieri, Catellani (op. cit., pp. 35-40), Cereti (op. cit., pp. 35-57), Williams, Fischer, Brierly, , Fusco, G. Scalfati (La Clausola rebus sic stantibus nel diritto internazionale, Naples, 1936)Google Scholar; Genet, : “Il n’y a pas de parenté quelconque entre les opérations de la clause rebus sic stantibus et le mécanisme de l’article XIX” (Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 3e sér., IV, 1930, p. 311)Google Scholar; Lauterpacht, Scelle, Urrutia, Verdross. Cf. also, Schneider, W., Die völkerrechtliche clausula rebus sic stantibus und Artikel XIX der Völkerbundsatzung (Berlin, 1931)Google Scholar; Schuchmann, W., Die Lehre von der clausula rebus sic stantibus und ihr Verhältnis zu Artikel XIX der Völkerbundpakts (Düsseldorf, 1936)Google Scholar.

44 The clausula, to speak with Genet (op. cit.), leads “à la caducité, non pas à la révision,” just as the procedures of frustration (cf. Williams, Fischer, this Journal, Vol. 22 (1928), pp. 89–104 Google Scholar) and imprévision (cf. Bruzin, , Essai sur le notion d’imprévision et sur son rôle en matière contractuelle (Thèse, Bordeaux, 1922 Google Scholar); Louveau, , Théorie de ¡’imprevisión en droit civil et en droit administratif(Thèse, Rennes, 1920)Google Scholar, with which it has sometimes been connected. Scelle says: “La théorie de l’imprévision est assez peu utilisable pour construire celle de la révision des traités.” (Théorie juridique de la révision des traités, Paris, 1936, p. 37.)

45 “traités devenus inapplicables.”

46 German writers contrast in this sense the impossibility of fulfillment with the mere Unzumutbarkeit.

47 This theoretically untenable position is often taken. “Dans toute discussion sur le problème de la révision ... il ne faut pas oublier que l’on se trouve en présence d’une exception à un principe fondamental, le principe: pacta sunt servanda.” Wigniolle, op. cit., p. 314.

48 See Rudinsky, op. cit., pp. 43-45. But: Yorke Hedges, op. cit., p. 273; T. Young Huang, op. cit., p. VIII.

49 Cruttwell, op. cit., pp. 6-16, wrongly includes questions where sovereignty is disputed on the basis of positive law.

50 The great importance of this change of relative strength is emphasized by Toynbee, A. J. in Peaceful Change (ed. Manning, , New York, 1937), p. 35 Google Scholar.

51 So Berber, F., in L’Esprit International (Paris), XI/42, 1937, p. 201 Google Scholar; Webster, C. K., in Peaceful Change (ed. Manning, , New York, 1937), p. 3 Google Scholar; C. A. W.|Manning, ibid., p. 171. Contra: the Rumanian Antonescu, in Collective Security (ed. Bourquin, Paris, 1936), p. 237.

52 This is now also fully admitted by Lauterpacht in Peaceful Change (ed. Manning), p. 136, whereas in his work of 1933 he rather underestimated the importance of the problem of revision.

53 Die Kernfrage des Völkerbundes (1926).

54 Op. cit.

55 In the same sense Scelle, G., Théorie juridique de la révision des traités (Paris, 1936), p. 65 Google Scholar.

56 Cf. Hungary’s battle cry: “Justice for Hungary!”; F. Berber, in the very title of his book: Sicherheit und Gerechtigkeit (1934).

57 Scelle, , Théorie juridique de la révision des traités (Paris, 1936), pp. 17–18 Google Scholar; preface to Strupp, K., Legal Machinery for Peaceful Change (London, 1937), pp. XIX, XXI Google Scholar; Cruttwell, op. cit., p. 17.

58 Hundreds of years ago Erasmus of Rotterdam wrote ironically: “Cui sua causa non videtur esse justa?”

59 Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de Droit International, 1935, II, pp. 201-202.

60 H. Rogge, op. cit., pp. 47-49, says that the need of a nation for revision is always in conformity with its power or with its rôle on the chessboard of high international politics. There is no policy of revision, he continues, which would achieve its aim merely by legal or moral arguments. For “after all, peaceful change is meant as a principle of war prevention.”Cf. also the words of C. A. W. Maiming: “For unredressed grievances to imperil stability they must be not only deep or even legitimate; more depends on the strategic position and numerical importance of the persons aggrieved. So too a small country may have indefinitely to put up with conditions for which there is no moral justification whatever. In the interests, then, of peace, though not, of course, of righteousness, attention may be fixed on the grievances of those States which, because of the present or potential strength of themselves or their friends, are so situated as to be possessed of a ‘nuisance-value.’ By the same token it is not necessary that grievances be particularly well founded, if only they be keenly enough felt. Again, in the treatment of such cases, abstract justice may be an imperfect guide to the change that will exorcise the danger of war.” (Collective Security (ed. Bourquin, Paris, 1936), p. 237.)

61 Manning, C. A. W. distinguishes between “peaceful change in the interests simply of peace” and “peaceful change in the interests of justice.” (Peaceful Change (New York, 1937), pp. 173, 181, 187, 190.Google Scholar) C. K. Webster, ibid., p. 5, distinguishes “between peaceful change to avoid war, peaceful change to produce justice and peaceful change to produce a world better adapted to the changing processes of today.”

62 “The history of every revolution is a story of blocked channels of change.” (Mitrany, D., in Collective Security (ed. Bourquin, , Paris, 1936), p. 209 Google Scholar.)

63 Cf. Pallieri, G. Balladore, Diritto Internazionale Pubblico (Milan, 1937), pp. 342–368 Google Scholar.

64 Some writers made such proposals only occasionally. Cf. Verdross, ’ proposal of a “Court of Revision” (Jahrbuch der Kormdarakademie, Vienna, 1935, p. 73)Google Scholar. Lauterpacht, in his work of 1933, advocated international decisions ex aequo et bono as an “extension of judicial legislation by the will of the parties.”

65 Grundlagen und Methoden der Revisionspolitik (Stuttgart, 1937)Google Scholar.

66 See Schwarzenberger, G., in William Ladd: An Examination of an American Proposal for an International Equity Tribunal (London, 1935)Google Scholar.

67 Strupp, K., Le droit du juge international de statuer selon l’équité (Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de Droit International, 1930, III, pp. 357–481)Google Scholar; M. Habicht, Le pouvoir du juge international de statuer ex aequo et bono (ibid., 1934, III, pp. 281-369). See also the report by Borei, E., La compétence du juge international en équité (Institut de Droit International, Brussels, 1934)Google Scholar. The above-cited lectures by M. Habicht were published in English by the New Commonwealth Institute.

68 Mouskhéli, , “L’équité en droit international moderne,” in Revue Générale de Droit International Public, Vol. XL, 1933, pp. 347–373 Google Scholar; Orfield, L. B., “Equity as a Concept of International Law, ” in Kentucky Law Journal, Vol. XVIII, 1929, pp. 31–57 Google Scholar; publications of the New Commonwealth Institute, London: Friedmann, W., in The Contribution of English Equity to the Idea of an International Equity Tribunal (1935)Google Scholar; G. Badbruch, in H. A. Smith, in Norman A. Bentwich, in A. S. de Bustamante, Donald A. MacLean, Justice and Equity in the International Sphere (1936).

69 Strupp, K., in Legal Machinery for Peaceful Change (London, 1937)Google Scholar.

70 Cf. Kelsen, H., in The Legal Process and International Order (London, 1935)Google Scholar.

71 Cf. W. Friedmann, op. cit., p. 21.

72 “Development of law by means of new rules or changes in old rules through the agency of the Courts, has already become an anachronism.” (A. Kocourek, op. cit., p. 173.)

73 A. Kocourek, op. cit., p. 47.

74 Raestad (Collective Security (ed. Bourquin, Paris, 1936), pp. 151-152); Bayön y Chacon (ibid., pp. 245-251); Yorke Hedges (op. cit., p. 278); Lauterpacht, Webster (Peaceful Change (ed. Manning, New York, 1937), p. 21); Dunn (op. cit., pp. 114, 122); H. A. Smith (he. cit., pp. 25-27), Scelle (preface to Strupp, op. cit.).

75 “Radical changes of the law amounting to drastic interference with existing rights have seldom, if ever, been achieved by the process of judicial legislation.” (Lauterpacht, in Peaceful Change (ed. Manning, , New York, 1937), p. 144 Google Scholar.)

76 Cf. Bolivian-Paraguayan Peace Treaty, Buenos Aires, July 21, 1938, Art. II: “The dividing line in the Chaco will be that determined by the Presidents of the Republics of Argentina, Chile, United States, Brazil, Peru and Uruguay in their capacity as arbitrators in equity, who acting ex aequo et bono . . .” (New York Times, July 22, 1938, p. 6.)

77 “Revisionisme est de la compétence d’un législateur, et non d’un juge.” (Le Fur, op. cit., p. 246.) “Tout système de révision est un système de législation.” (Scelle, in the preface to Strupp, op. cit., p. XXII.)

78 Bayón y Chacón, Brierly, Dunn, Lauterpacht, Le Fur, Scelle, Smith, Toynbee, Webster, Yorke Hedges.

79 Toynbee, A. J., in Peaceful Change (ed. Manning, , New York, 1937), p. 36 Google Scholar. And he adds: “I am afraid one sees no precedents for this in the history of the past.”

80 See Le Fur, op. cit., p. 260; Scelle, G., Théorie juridique de la révision des traités (Paris, 1936), pp. 90, 95Google Scholar; Lauterpacht: “Peaceful change as an effective institution of international law is the acceptance by States of a legal duty to acquiesce in changes in the law decreed by a competent international organ. It is the existence of a legislature imposing, if necessary, its fiat upon the dissenting State.” (Peaceful Change (ed. Manning, , New York, 1937), p. 141)Google Scholar; Eagleton, Clyde: “The question is rather: How can you get change without the consent of the signatories, or without the consent of those who have a legal right which works unjustly?” (Proceedings of the American Society of International Law, 1936, p. 177 Google Scholar.)

81 Scelle (Preface to Strupp, op. cit., p. XX) speaks of the need for an international legislative organ “susceptible de dégager objectivement l’intérêt de la communauté internationale toute entière.” Cf. also Radbruch, op. cit., pp. 7,13; Zancla, P., “Sulla revisione dei trattati mediante dichiarazione degli interessi collettivi,” in Revue de Droit International (Sottile), XIII, 1935, pp. 13–25 Google Scholar.

82 “States as a whole are bound to further the common international good,” said Cardinal- Secretary of State Pacelli in an address, 1933 (quoted in D. A. MacLean, loc. cit., p. 58). Speaking against racism and super-nationalism, the Pope strongly emphasized in July, 1938, that “Catholic means universal.”

83 Cf. Renard, “Les bases philosophiques du droit international et la doctrine du ‘Bien Commun’,” in Archives de Philosophie de Droit, 1931, p. 465 et seq.; Gilson, The Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas; J. Delos, Commentaire au traité de St. Thomas sur la justice; Yves de la Brière, “Les principes chrétiens de Droit International, “ in Revue de Philosophie, May-June, 1926; S. Michel, La notion thomiste du Bien Commun.

84 E.g., in treaties of alliance (Austro-Hungarian-German alliance, 1879, Art. Ill), in treaties instituting international administrative unions.

85 See Kunz, Revision (1932), pp. 112-114.

86 See Wilson, R. R., “Revision Clauses in Treaties since the World War,” in American Political Science Review, Vol. XXVIII, 1934, pp. 901–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

87 Cf. the “escalator clause” in the London Naval Treaty of 1930; for an elaborate revision clause, the British-Egyptian Treaty of Alliance of Aug. 26, 1936, Art. XVI; a unilateral revision clause, Art. 46 of the Sino-Belgian Treaty of 1865 cf. Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A, No. 8, p. 14).

88 Dunn, op. cit., p. 102.

89 So the “European Concert” in the XIXth century. Italy’s and Germany’s policies are directed toward the revival of the “European Concert” without the U.S.S.R. Cf. Mussolini’s Four Power Pact; also Rogge, op. cit., p. 106.

90 Cruttwell, op. cit., pp. 1-6; Dunn, op. cit., p. 84.

91 Booth, op. cit., p. 20; Dunn, op. cit., p. 12; Mowat, R. B., in New Commonwealth Quarterly (London, 1937), III/1, pp. 5–14 Google Scholar.

92 Against the inclusion: Toynbee, Mowat; pro: Rogge. Cruttwell (op. cit., p. 3) even states: “Experience has shown that it is always wisest to face Europe with a fait accompli.”