In No. 28 of the Bulletin of the International Association of Law Libraries (June, 1972) Dr. Gerhard J. Dahlmanns published “some reflections on the development, aims and purposes” of the I.A.L.L. This article was an excellent survey on the history, policies and problems of the Association at the time when the originally modest Bulletin, under the presidency of Dr. Hans G. Leser, became a full-fledged international periodical. The present article tries to record in greater detail the history of the inception and the first two years of the Association. I have these years in vivid memory, they were years of lively planning in which I was deeply involved.

The proceedings of the fifteenth Seminar on the Acquisition of Latin American Library Materials, held at the University of Toronto, June 23-26, 1970, include a number of papers addressing issues relevant to the acquisition of Latin American legal resources. Fourteen years later I would like to report that many of the difficulties described therein have changed sufficiently to allow for the development of orderly selection and acquisition processes. Unfortunately, this is not generally the case. In 1970, Fernando J. Figueredo quoted a Spanish proverb: “suerte te dé Dios, que el saber te vale poco”, or in English, “ask God for luck, since knowledge will be of little help to you”. I suggest that good fortune combined with language knowledge, a familiarity with the legal systems involved, a tenacity of spirit, and a sense of humour are all requisites to the successful pursuit of Latin American and Caribbean legal materials. Since SALALM XV's proceedings are published and available for consultation, I prefer not to review all of the problems outlined there. Instead, this paper will offer what will hopefully be some creative, unusual methods of identifying and locating copies of legal publications.

The Dag Hammarskjold Library, being the main library of the United Nations system in view of its location at United Nations Headquarters in New York, has the unique responsibility of keeping a complete archival collection of all publications and documents issued by the United Nations, including its main and subsidiary organs and bodies. It maintains as well, comprehensive depository collections of the documentation of each of the specialized agencies and a selection of publications of United Nations and specialized agencies affiliated bodies. The Library also has a fairly complete collection of publications and documents of the League of Nations, in addition to the Woodrow Wilson Collection of books and pamphlets about the League and its period of history.

Perhaps the single most important items of news concerning international organizations since my last column was the official notification by the U.S. Government late in December 1983 of its intention to withdraw from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) at the end of 1984. Numerous articles and editorial pieces have appeared in the press since that time. According to news accounts the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO, a nongovernmental advisory body, adopted a resolution December 16 at its annual meeting stating that continued U.S. membership in UNESCO “… is in the national interest,” but as far as the author can determine the text of the resolution, adopted by a 41 to 8 vote, has not been made public. It is my understanding that a 700-page report evaluating U.S. participation in UNESCO has been prepared and an executive summary is to be published by the State Department. From its origins UNESCO has been one of the most controversial and complex of the organizations within the United Nations system of organizations as shown in a new reference work on the Organization, Guide to UNESCO, by Peter I. Hajnal of the University of Toronto library staff. The reader's attention is directed to a review of the Guide published in this issue. Another event highlighted in the press was the failure of the December 1983 meeting of the European Council of Ministers in Athens to come to any agreement on reform of the European Community's Common Agricultural Policy and the 1984 Community budget. The meeting broke up without even agreeing on a final communique. In a statement issued December 7 the Commission of the European Community referred to the gravity of the situation but stated that “… the failure of the European Council session is not the failure of the Community, let alone the failure of a historical process that is to ensure the prosperity and strength of Europe.” (European Community News no. 23, December 9, 1983.) Another noteworthy event late in 1983 was the November 14 announcement by the Secretary-General of the Organization of American States (OAS), Alejandro Orfila, of his intention to resign. In a very outspoken speech, the OAS Secretary-General stated “… that the OAS has been detached from, or only tangentially involved in, many of the major issues that affect the present and determine the future of America.” (Washington Post, November 22, 1983.) At the United Nations discouragement also has been expressed increasingly at the inability of the Organization to do its first job of preserving peace. Upon his retirement from the UN in November 1983, Philippine Foreign Minister Carlos Romulo, head of his delegation since the founding conference in 1945, said “the world has changed [since then] but we have not changed enough. Human perspective is still transfixed on the precious but inadequate loyalties of home and country when it needs, at a time when men aim for the stars, to encompass at least the human family on a tiny planet, circling a minor sun.” (Quoted by Flora Lewis, New York Times, December 27, 1983.) In a New Year's message, the President of the 38th UN General Assembly, Jorge Illueca of Panama, called for an infusion “… of new energy into the machinery of the United Nations.” At the same time, he noted that our fate depends on “… human geography more than physical geography,” and he urged “… these human nucleii of diverse cultures” to come together so that “… we the peoples of the world, may strengthen our will to save mankind from the scourge of war.” (United Nations Weekly News Summary WS/1161, January 6, 1984.)

The terms “admiralty” and “maritime law” are virtually synonymous and are frequently used interchangeably. They refer to that body of law which relates to marine commerce and navigation, to ships and shipping, to seamen, to the transportation of persons and the carriage of property by sea, and to marine affairs in general. Admiralty or maritime law therefore does not comprise a single category of legal theory such as contracts or torts but rather incorporates a variety of traditional legal subjects including contracts and torts, procedure, and jurisdiction as well as several unique areas such as general average. Since maritime law does not focus on a single field of legal theory, it is useful to divide the subject into separate topics. Among these are: (l)Marine Insurance and General Average; (2) Carriage of Goods and Cargo Damage; (3) Charter Parties and Bills of Lading; (4) Personal Injury and Death; (5) Collision and Rules of the Road; (6) Salvage and Towage; and, (7) Maritime Liens and Ship Mortgages. These classifications should not, however, be regarded as rigid since there often is overlap between topics. Additionally, there are general treatises on the subject, case reporters, dictionaries, directories, and journals which include articles exclusively on maritime law.