LA 1905 11519 World Peace Foundation Pamphlet Series THE OUTLOOK FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW WITH LETTER COMMENDING THE League to Enforce Peace BY ELIHU ROOT PUBLISHED BIMONTHLY BY THE WORLD PEACE FOUNDATION 40 MT. VERNON STREET, BOSTON June, 1916 Vol. VI. No. 3. Entered as second-class matter January 15, 1913, at the post-office at Boston, Mass., under the Act of August 24, 1912 PAMPHLET SERIES AMERICA AND THE EUROPEAN WAR. By Norman Angell AMERICAN LEADERSHIP FOR PEACE AND ARBITRATION. BY CARL SCHURZ ANGLO-AMERICAN AGREEMENT OF 1817. By CHARLES H. LEVERMORE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY: THE WILSON-BRYAN PEACE PLAN. By DENYS P. MYERS CONCERNING SEA POWER. BY DAVID Starr Jordan CONFERENCE OF NEUTRAL STATES DRAIN OF ARMAMENTS. BY ARTHUR W. ALLEN DREADNOUGHTS AND DIVIDENDS. EXPOSURE OF THE ARMAMENTS RING. By PHILIP SNOWDEN, M.P. FORCES THAT MAKE FOR PEACE. By Hon. WILLIAM J. BRYAN FORCES WARRING AGAINST WAR. BY HAVELOCK ELLIS FOUNDATIONS OF A LEAGUE OF PEACE. By G. LOWES DICKINSON INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AMERICAN DELEGATES TO THE HAGUE CONFER- MISSION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE CAUSE OF PEACE. BY DAVID J. BREWER OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS CONCERNING NEUTRAL AND BELLIGERENT RIGHTS ISSUED SINCE AUGUST 4, 1914. Separate pamphlets with individual titles as follows: NEUTRALITY PROCLAIMED AND EXPLAINED; LONDON. WAR ZONES. APPENDIX, THE DECLARATION OF WAR ZONES (CONTINUED), INTERFERENCE WITH AMERICAN TRADE WITH NEUTRALS. FOODSTUFFS CARGO OF THE "WILHELMINA" IN BRITISH PRIZE COURT, GERMAN AND AUSTRIAN ATTITUDE TOWARD AMERICAN TRADE, SINKING OF THE WILLIAM P. FRYE." SINKING OF THE "LUSITANIA," AND ATTACKS ON THE "FALABA," "GULFLIGHT," "CUSKING," AND "NEBRASKAN." ORGANIZING THE PEACE WORK. By EDWIN GINN OUTLINE OF LESSONS ON WAR AND PEACE. BY LUCIA AMES MEAD By PANAMA CANAL TOLLS, OUR DUTY CONCERNING. BY THOMAS Razburn WHITE and CHARLEMAGNE TOWER RIGHT AND WRONG OF THE MONROE DOCTRINE. BY CHARLES F. DOLE SOME SUPPOSED JUST CAUSES OF WAR. BY JACKSON H. RALSTON SUGGESTIONS FOR LECTURES ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. By CHARLES H. LEVERMORE SYNDICATES FOR WAR. London Correspondence of the New York Evening Post UNITED STATES OF EUROPE. By VICTOR HUGO WAR NOT INEVITABLE. By Hon. JOHN W. FOSTER WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON AND FRANKLIN ON WAR. BY EDWIN D. MEAD WASTE OF MILITARISM. From the report of the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost of Living, 1910 WOMAN AND WAR. By EDWIN D. MEAD WORLD PEACE FOUNDATION: WORK IN 1914 Single copies free. Price in quantities on application Volume sile-pages for binding furnished on request WORLD PEACE FOUNDATION 40 Mt. Vernon Street Boston, Mass. Ehrmann 7-27-36 My dear Mr. Lowell: 31 NASSAU STREET, February 10, 1916. I heartily agree with the purpose and general principle of the League to Enforce Peace. It seems clear to me that if we are ever to get away from the necessity for great armaments and special alliances, with continually recurring wars, growing more and more destructive, it must be by a more systematic treatment of international disputes brought about by common agreement among civilized nations. It seems to me that any such system must include the better formulation of international law, the establishment of an international court to apply the law, and a general agreement to enforce submission to the jurisdiction of the court. I also think the Court of Conciliation for dealing with questions which are not justiciable is very desirable. As to some parts of your proposals which go into details of method, however, I cannot agree. They probably are not necessary to the principle for which you are seeking public support, and for the establishment of that principle you have my sincere sympathy and good wishes. With kind regards, I am, Very sincerely yours, Dr. A. Lawrence Lowell, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. Elihu Root PROPOSALS OF THE LEAGUE TO ENFORCE PEACE We believe it to be desirable for the United States to join a league of nations binding the signatories to the following: First: All justiciable questions arising between the signatory powers, not settled by negotiation, shall, subject to the limitations of treaties, be submitted to a judicial tribunal for hearing and judgment, both upon the merits and upon any issue as to its jurisdiction of the question. Second: All other questions arising between the signatories and not settled by negotiation, shall be submitted to a council of conciliation for hearing, consideration and recommendation. Third: The signatory powers shall jointly use forthwith both their economic and military forces against any one of their number that goes to war, or commits acts of hostility, against another of the signatories before any question arising shall be submitted as provided in the foregoing. Fourth: Conferences between the signatory powers shall be held from time to time to formulate and codify rules of international law, which, unless some signatory shall signify its dissent within a stated period, shall thereafter govern in the decisions of the Judicial Tribunal mentioned in Article One. THE OUTLOOK FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW Opening Address by Elihu Root as President of the American Society of International Law at the Ninth Annual Meeting in Washington, December 28, 1915. Gentlemen of the Society: The incidents of the great war now raging affect so seriously the very foundations of international law that there is for the moment but little satisfaction to the student of that science in discussing specific rules. Whether or not Sir Edward Carson went too far in his recent assertion that the law of nations has been destroyed, it is manifest that the structure has been rudely shaken. The barriers that statesmen and jurists have been constructing laboriously for three centuries to limit and direct the conduct of nations toward each other, in conformity to the standards of modern civilization, have proved too weak to confine the tremendous forces liberated by a conflict which involves almost the whole military power of the world and in which the destinies of nearly every civilized state outside the American continents are directly at stake. The war began by a denial on the part of a very great power that treaties are obligatory when it is no longer for the interest of either of the parties to observe them. The denial was followed by action supported by approximately one-half the military power of Europe and is apparently approved by a great number of learned students and teachers of international law, citizens of the countries supporting the view. This position is not an application of the doctrine sic stantibus rebus which justifies the termination of a treaty under circumstances not contemplated when the treaty was made so that it is no longer justly applicable to existing conditions. It is that under the very circumstances contemplated by the treaty and under the conditions for which the treaty was intended to provide the treaty is not obligatory as against the interest of the contracting party. This situation naturally raises the question whether executory |