Page:EB1922 - Volume 31.djvu/575

Rh

munities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized, subject to the render- ing of administrative advice and assistance by a mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. " The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the mandatory." Other peoples, especially those of Central Africa, are at such a stage that the mandatory must be responsible for the administration of the territory under con- ditions which will guarantee freedom of conscience or religion, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, the prohibition of abuses such as the slave trade, the arms traffic and the liquor traffic, and " the prevention of the establishment of fortifications or military and naval bases and military train- ing of the natives for other than police purposes and the defence of territory," and will also secure equal opportunities for the trade and commerce of other members of the League.

There are territories, says the article, such as S.W. Africa and certain of the S. Pacific Is., which, owing to the sparseness of their population, or their small size, or their remoteness from the centre of civilization, or their geographical contiguity to the territory of the mandatory, and other circumstances, can be best administered under the laws of the mandatory as integral portions of its territory, subject to the safeguards above men- tioned in the interests of the indigenous population :

" In every case of mandate, the mandatory shall render to the Council an annual report in reference to the territory committed to its charge." " The degree of authority, control, or administration to be exercised by the mandatory shall, if not previously agreed upon by the members of the League, be explicitly defined in each case by the council."

Lastly, a permanent commission was to be constituted to receive and examine the annual reports of the mandatories and to advise the council as to the observance of the mandates.

The preparatory provisions of this article had been largely carried out by 1921. It is seen that there are three kinds of mandates which have to be dealt with (^4, B and C).

The mandate territories consist of: In Africa: German East Africa, German S.W. Africa, Cameroon, Togoland. In Asia Minor: Armenia, Mesopotamia, Palestine, Syria. In Austral- asia: German Samoa and the ex-German islands in the Pacific.

These mandates have been divided up as follows:

(A) Mandates: the non-Turkish portions of the former Otto- man Empire (Armenia, Arabia, etc.).

(J5)Mandates: German E. Africa, Togoland, Cameroon.

(C)Mandates: German S.W. Africa, Nauru, German Samoa, and other ex- German Pacific possessions.

(^l)Mandates, it has been seen, apply to communities which, although recognized as independent, are under " the adminis- trative advice and assistance of the League." The covenant itself provides that such mandates are to be conferred on certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire, but it seems to be held in official quarters that (^mandates may be conferred on communities outside the former Turkish Empire, and the situation in 1921 with regard to Armenia and Albania was not greatly different from that with regard to Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Syria.

(5)Mandates, applicable solely to Central Africa, do not contemplate the ultimate establishment of an independent gov- ernment, as in the case of (^4) mandates; but it follows from the distinction between them and the (C)mandates that annex- ation is excluded. The mandatory's powers and privileges will therefore have to be very clearly defined to insure that the mandatory State will respect all local religious institutions, refrain from raising armed forces except for purposes of police and local defence, and will apply the " open door " to subjects or citizens of the members of the League of Nations.

(C)Mandates apply to those territories "which, owing to the sparseness of their population, or their small size, or their remoteness from the centres of civilization or their geographical contiguity to the territory of the mandatory, and other cir- cumstances, can be best administered under the laws of the

andatory as integral portions of its territory."

Although such territories are placed under " full power of administration and legislation " of the mandatory Power or Dominion "as integral portions" of it, even they are not to be fully annexed to it, the mandate being conferred by the prin- cipal Allied and Associated Powers upon a Power or Dominion chosen by them jointly and such Power or Dominion being expressly bound, by the terms of its acceptance, to carry out the mandate on behalf of the League of Nations. Moreover, the mandatory is under the obligation to make an annual report to the council, containing full information concerning the measures taken to apply the provisions of his mandate; while " the degree of authority, control, or administration to be exer- cised by the mandatory shall, if not previously agreed upon by the members of the League, be explicitly denned in such case by the Council." A mandate is thus different from both an annexation and protectorate. In the case of annexation, the annexed territory is merged altogether in the territory of the annexing State, and becomes an integral part of the latter's dominions. As regards protectorates it is inconsistent with the notion of the sovereignty of the protecting State to require it to render an account of its internal administration to a group of Powers. And, in fact, hitherto, States had been reluctant to accept any responsibility for internal government in other States. Even in the case of Turkey, Article 9 of the Treaty of Paris (March 30 1856) specifically stated that in respect of the reforms proposed by Turkey, the Powers should not have the right to interfere either collectively or separately in the internal admin- istration of the Ottoman Empire. The Treaty of Berlin (July 13 1878) did contain a clause (Article 61) in reference to Armenia which provided that the Porte should periodically inform " the Powers " of the measures taken by it to secure the Armenians against the Circassians and Kurds and the Powers undertook to surveiller I' application of these measures. But nothing is known to have been done to give effect to the article. We are therefore in the presence of a new departure in the law of nations, in practice if not entirely in theory.

Mandated territories, even in the case of (C) mandates, only form part of the sovereign domain of the mandatory Power or Dominion to the extent to which it fulfils certain conditions. If it fails to carry out the requirements imposed on it, it may be deprived of its mandate, which can then be conferred by the League of Nations on another Power or Dominion; and if any dispute regarding mandated territory arises, Articles 12 to 16 of the Covenant provide for arbitration or an inquiry by the Council of the League.

One of the chief objects of the mandate, it has been seen, is to prevent a mandated territory from becoming an annexed territory, or protectorate, or even a sphere of influence, seeing that it is subject to the maintenance of the " open door."

Drafts of mandates had by 1921 been submitted by Great Britain and France. The U.S. Government, however, inter- vened to prevent final settlement of their terms without its assent, on the ground that, though the United States did not form part of the League of Nations, " the colonies and terri- tories concerned having been ceded by the Peace Treaty to all the Allied and Associated Powers, no distribution of mandates for such colonies and territories can be valid without the formal approval of the United States " (June 1921).

14. Conclusion. The old rules as to contraband and blockade, in so far as regarded as a protection to neutral right, return after the war to their full effect, and England as a neutral will be entitled to regard them as the law provided to safeguard her position as a trading community against undue interference by belligerents. She may suspect danger in the equipping of mer- chantmen as auxiliary cruisers. She may not be favourable to unmilitarized ships carrying artillery ready for use. She may think that what under a responsible and carefully controlled system may be allowed cannot without jeopardizing the safety of the ocean be accorded to States less sensitive to the public opinion of the world. In short, the practically universal strain- ing of the law in the World War may be found to have left behind it little change in the law itself, and the consequences of the