Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 32.djvu/776

740 740 HARVARD LAW REVIEW difference between the staid attitude of a nation old in years and the ideaUstic, adventurous spirit of a youthful America. Professor Oppenheim is a thinker of ability and a writer of note; as holder of the Whewell Chair of International Law at the University of Cambridge, the founder of which laid the injunction upon every holder of the chair that he should "make it his aim to lay down such rules and suggest such measures as may tend to diminish the evils of war and finally to extinguish war between nations," Professor Oppenheim has published three lectures, in which he seeks to outline the framework upon which the coming League of Nations should be built. It is so easy to throw bricks of destructive criticism at the edifice reared by careful constructive work that one hesitates to criticize at all. Yet many American readers cannot but feel that Professor Oppenheim's vision for a League of Nations is too narrowly confined, and his conception too constricted by the past; his suggestions lack originality, boldness, and even practicability. After showing that there already exists a substantial historical basis upon which to build the League of Nations, Professor Oppenheim in a few well- reasoned paragraphs points out why a federalized world state is not within the realms of present possibility, if indeed it can ever be attained. Thus far most serious thinkers will be inclined to agree. But when, in his second lecture, Professor Oppenheim goes on to develop his idea that the future League shall be little more than a glorified Hague Conference there comes a distinct sense of disappointment. Only establish International Courts and add to the Hague meetings, already begun, a regular periodicity, says Professor Oppenheim, and you have your "organised League of Nations"; "for by such periodically assembling Hague Peace Conferences there wotild be established an organ for the conduct of all such international matters as require international legisla- tion or other international action" (p. 34). Accordingly Professor Oppenheim lays down seven principles upon which the League of Nations should be built : "First principle: The League of Nations is composed of all civilised States which recognise one another's external and internal independence and absolute equality before International Law. "Second principle: The chief organ of the League is the Peace Conference at The Hague. The Peace Conferences meet periodically — say every two or three years — without being convened by any special Power. Their task is the gradual codification of International Law and the agreement upon such Inter- national Conventions as are from time to time necessitated by new circum- stances and conditions. "Third principle: A permanent Council of the Conference is to be created, the members of which are to be resident at The Hague and are to conduct all the current business of the League of Nations. This current business comprises : The preparation of the meetings of the Peace Conference; the conduct of com- munications with the several members of the League with regard to the prep- aration of the work of the Peace Conferences; and all other matters of inter- national interest which the Conference from time to time hands over to the Council. "Fourth principle: Every recognised sovereign State has a right to take part in the Peace Conferences. "Fifth principle: Resolutions of the Conference can come into force only in so far as they become ratified by the several States concerned. On the other hand, every State agrees once for all faithfully to carry out those resolutions which have been ratified by it. "Sixth principle: Every State that takes part in the Peace Conferences is bound only by such resolutions of the Conferences as it expressly agrees to and ratifies. Resolutions of a majority only bind the majority. On the other hand, no State has a right to demand that only such resolutions as it agrees to shall be adopted.