Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

It is shown by the foregoing that Sweden had no doubt as to her rights over the Grisbadarna and that she did not hesitate to incur the expenses incumbent on the owner and possessor of these banks even to the extent of a considerable sum of money.

[blocks in formation]

Sweden took the first steps, about thirty years before the beginning of any dispute, toward making exact, laborious, and expensive measurements of the regions of Grisbadarna, while the measurements made some years later by Norway did not even attain the limits of the Swedish measurements. And

Whereas, therefore, there is no doubt whatever that the assignment of the Grisbadarna banks to Sweden is in perfect accord with the most important circumstances of fact. And

Whereas, a demarkation assigning the Skojöttegrunde (which are the least important parts of the disputed territory) to Norway is sufficiently warranted by the serious circumstance of fact that, although one must infer from the various documents and testimony that the Swedish fishers, as was stated above, have carried on fishing in the regions in question for a longer period, to a greater extent, and in greater numbers, it is certain on the other hand that the Norwegian fishers have never been excluded from fishing there. And

Whereas, moreover, it is averred that the Norwegian fishers have almost always participated in the lobster fishing on the Skjöttegrunde in a comparatively more effective manner than at the Grisbadarna: THEREFORE

The Tribunal decides and pronounces :

That the maritime boundary between Norway and Sweden, as far as it was not determined by the royal resolution of March 15, 1904, is fixed as follows:

From point XVIII situated as indicated on the map annexed to the project of the Norwegian and Swedish Commissioners of August 18, 1897, a straight line is traced to point XIX, constituting the middle point of a straight line drawn from the northernmost reef of the Röskären to the southernmost reef of the Svartskjär, the one which is provided with a beacon;

From point XIX thus fixed, a straight line is traced to point XX. which constitutes the middle point of a straight line drawn from the northernmost reef of the group of reefs called Stora Drammen to the Hejeknub situated to the southeast of Heja Islands; from point XX a

straight line is drawn in a direction of west 19 degrees south, which line passes midway between the Grisbadarna and the Skjöttegrunde south and extends in the same direction until it reaches the high sea.

Done at The Hague, October 23, 1909, in the Palace of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

J. A. LOEFF, President,

MICHIELS VAN VERDUYNEN, Secretary General,
ROELL, Secretary.

BOOK REVIEWS1

La nationalité dans les principaux États du Globe. By Ernest Lehr. Paris: A. Pedone. 1909. pp. 227.

This modest volume by Professor Lehr gives, for forty-nine different countries alphabetically arranged, the rules of each governing the acquisition, the loss and the regaining of nationality. These rules are prefaced by a chapter of summaries. It seems a good and useful compilation. Covering so wide a field in minute detail, absolute accuracy may not have been attainable. The author dwells upon the constantly changing rules which would make certainty as to the law at any given moment perhaps impossible. Nor can the reviewer presume to a knowledge of the laws of all nations respecting citizenship. His criticism will relate to omission rather than commission, and it is not criticism so much as regret that the statement of the law could not have been brought down a little nearer to the publication date, and that so full and complete a treatise could not have been made a little more complete.

For instance, it rather is a pity not to have included the South African Republic in the list of countries discussed, in spite of its loss of sovereignty, for the sake of historical completeness, inasmuch as the question of naturalization there was one of the leading causes of the memorable war with Great Britain.

The separation of Norway from Sweden in 1905 is apparently too recent an event to be noticed even in a work published in 1909, and in consequence we are not told whether the dissolution of the union has modified the naturalization laws of either country; whether, for example, the subjects of the one resorting to the other are regarded with peculiar favor.

The important United States Citizenship Act, approved March 2, 1907, is likewise unnoticed. This Act has an interesting provision by which subjects of other states naturalized in the United States, upon resumption of residence for two years in their country of origin, or for five years in any other foreign country, are presumed to have lost their

1 The JOURNAL assumes no responsibility for the views expressed in signed Book Reviews. J. B. S.

American citizenship. Our naturalization treaty of 1868 with the North German Union furnishes a precedent for the two year presumption clause, but this has not caught the notice of the author. In fact, in section 50, he makes a statement directly at variance with the facts under that treaty. Reference is made, section 45, note, to the Bancroft treaty but its practical bearing upon German evasion of military service is not touched

upon.

In the chapter of summaries which is valuable and interesting particularly as showing some peculiar features of naturalization general in the Latin-American states, there is no tabulation of the length of residence requisite for naturalization, which is a real lack. Is the five year period, as in Cuba, really coming into general vogue, or at least is there a tendency thereto? The author should have told us. In these comparatively simple respects, a good treatment of a subject admittedly complex might have been made fuller and more recent and perhaps better. T. S. WOOLSEY.

Les Lois De La Guerre et Les Deux Conférences De La Haye (18991907). By Paul Boidin. Paris: A. Pedone. 1908. pp. 282. Lieutenant Boidin is a doctor in law and an instructor in the Military School of Rambouillet. His work is another instance of the relatively large interest taken by French military men in international law or at least that part of the subject dealing with the law of war. And this interest is one of the hopeful signs of the times. In a branch of the law where so much must be left to the judgment of those who are to observe it, as is the case with the law of war and especially that part of it dealing with war on land, knowledge of its precepts on the part of those whose actions are controlled by it is indispensable to its efficacy. It is true that the third article of the convention with regard to the laws and customs of war on land drawn up at the Second Peace Conference provides that a belligerent party which violates the provisions of the annexed regulations shall, if the case demands, be liable to pay compensation, and it would seem that this provision looks to some at least quasi-judicial enforcement of the laws of war on land, but at best it would seem to look to some international commission of inquest or arbitration, the practical working of which in cases of this kind is for the future to determine. Up to the present at least the enforcement of the laws of war on land has lain with the military authorities of the respective belligerents, subject to such control by the political authorities in notable cases as considerations

of policy and humanity, the recriminations of the adversary and public opinion have demanded. There have been no prize courts for the judiciary to keep the army within the law such as enable the judiciary to exercise a very considerable check on violations of the law at sea. It is military men above all others therefore, that should be conversant with the laws of war and the publication of a work of so high a character as this by Lieutenant Boidin, himself a doctor in law, is a matter of encouragement especially as it is not an isolated case but is rather an instance of a very general interest taken by French military men in recent years. French jurists lead the world to-day in this branch of the law. and it is but fitting that French soldiers should lead in making it a living thing to those on whom its execution primarily depends. One point that the author urges with great force is that the study of war and its laws should go hand in hand, that on the one hand the jurists who treat of the laws of war should know something of its technique and that on the other hand military schools should not leave such a large proportion of the instruction in the laws of war to the university faculties.

It is equally important, however, that with a knowledge of the law of war on the part of military men should go a sympathetic understanding of its precepts. Many of the rules drawn up at the Peace Conferences would amount to little in the hands of hostile commanders. Take Regulation XXIII(g), for instance, in which it is forbidden to destroy or seize the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the war. In the hands of a hostile commander the necessities of war might be given such a broad interpretation as to render the regulation little more than so much waste paper. In the hands of a commander imbued with loyalty to the regulations, however, such a regulation might make him think twice before adopting some measure of devastation suggested by military necessities but possibly to be avoided on second thought. Accordingly it is pleasing to those who have the future of the Hague Regulations at heart that a military man with the undoubted insight of Lieutenant Boidin should express his warm though not uncritical approval of them. It is symptomatic of the way that responsible military critics will regard them and bodes well for their future. And it seems clear that such approval is deserved, as military men had such a large part in their formulation.

The work is divided into two parts. In the first sixty-eight pages the author considers the principles underlying the law of war, the proper scope of the work of bodies like the Peace Conferences and the proper

« PreviousContinue »