Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:38:16.180Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pacific Blockade or War?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Pitman B. Potter
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , April 1953 , pp. 273 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1953

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 February 15, 1953.

2 See, for example, letter in The Washington Post, Feb. 7, 1953, p. 10.

3 C. G. Fenwick, International Law (3rd ed., 1948), Ch. XXVII.

4 Fenwick, op. cit., pp. 535–537. See also P. B. Potter, The Freedom of the Seas (1922), pp. 118–119, and A. P. Higgins and C. J. Colombos, The International Law of the Sea (1943), pp. 301–304. The standard monograph is A. E. Hogan, Pacific Blockade (1908).

5 Hogan, op. cit., pp. 73–157.

6 Thus use of this institution might avoid recourse to war; the prejudice against pacific blockade came in part from formalists but in part from those who felt that it resembled war too much.

7 The Prize Cases (1862), 2 Black 635.

8 Editorial in The Washington Post, Feb. 12, 1953, p. 12 (“Wiley’s Aberration”).