Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:18:59.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Neutrality Claims Against Great Britain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1927

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.)

References

1 Treaty Series No. 756, this Journal , Vol. 21, p. 542.

2 Also published as Special Supplements to this Journal,Vols. 9 (1915), 10 (1916), and 11 (1917).

3 Printed in this Journal, Vol. 10 (1916), p. 422.

4 Cushing, Adm'r., v. United States (1886), 22 Court of Claims, 1: “Municipal law is not a measure of international responsibility, but it is binding within the jurisdiction of the state upon all its subordinate agents, including the courts. The decree in one of the cases before us, which was appealed to the civil tribunals, shows . . . that questions of treaty or international law were not ruled upon, the court being guided alone by the statutes of France. In the face of precedents of this kind, an appeal was a vain and expensive form, as an affirmation of the judgment below necessarily must follow.” (p. 46.) See also The Peggy (1801),1 Cranch 103, 110; Ship Tom v. United States (1893), 29 Ct. Cl. 68; Ship Governor Bowdoin s. United States (1901), 36 Ct. Cl. 338. Kane's Notes on the Commission under the treaty of July 4,1831, with France, Moore's Arbitrations, 4472; Bark Jones (U. S.) v. Great Britain, treaty of Feb. 8, 1853, Moore's Arbitrations, 3046, 3053.