Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T05:05:51.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Law of Nations*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Alpheus Henry Snow
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

After the Reformation, when Europe divided itself into a number of separate states, each claiming to be an independent nation, the necessary contacts between them led to frequent wars. The question arose how to bring about a concert of action between them, which should result in peace and order. All that could be done by agreement was done. But it was clear that peace and order were constantly imperilled so long as the settlement of the questions constantly arising out of these necessary contacts was dependent upon treaties, because at any time on slight pretext these might be rescinded. It was perceived that the only assurance of peace and order among nations, as among individuals, lay in the establishment of a law governing the actions and relations of the nations. Publicists therefore set themselves to the task of formulating and establishing such a law.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , October 1912 , pp. 890 - 900
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1912

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Printed, with permission, from the original manuscript of an article which appeared in a French translation in the May-June, 1912, number of the Revue Générale de Droit International Public, pp. 309–318.

References

1 This expression was used in his essay on The Principles of Morals and Education.

2 In an article on “The Primary Sources of International Obligations” printed in the Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law, held at Washington, D. C, April 27-29,1911, pp. 280-289, Professor William L. Hull suggested a distinction between “the law of nations, or extranational law; the law between nations, or international law; and the law over nations, or supranational law.” Extranational law he defined as “a composite photograph [or] an amalgamation of national interpretations of international law”; international law as “a collection of the rules in force between pairs or groups of nations;” and supranational law as “a body of law so universal in scope, so expressive of the genius of the family of nations as a whole, that it may serve as a basis for a genuine international court of justice.” The terms “extranational law” and “international law,” as defined by Professor Hull, seem to the author to be incorrect, since “law,” in the sense in which that word is used in the science of jurisprudence, always comes from “above” persons or nations — not merely from “outside” of them, and not at all from “between” them. “Supranational law,” as thus defined by him, seems to the author to be indefinite. “Supranational law,” (or “supernational law,”) in the sense in which that expression is used by the author, is “the federal law of the society of nations; “regarding which, see an article by the author, in the same volume with that of Professor Hull, pp. 320-337, entitled “The Proposed Codification of International Law and the Relation of Codification to the Proposed Establishment of a Supreme International Court of Arbitral Justice.” Professor Hull interprets his definition of “supranational law” in this sense. He regards supranational law as the law of “the Family of Nations,” and draws an analogy between this law and “the law which was brought into existence (in 1789] for that new entity termed ‘The United States of America.’” See his article, p. 281.

3 International Law, by John Westlake, Part I, Peace, ed. 1910, p. 1.