Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:54:48.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Re-Examination of International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Herbert W. Briggs
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 36 , Issue 4 , October 1942 , pp. 637 - 640
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1942

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 Cf. Fundamental Principles of International Policy, U. S. Department of State, Publication No. 1079. Only the Portuguese reply to Secretary of State Cordell Hull’s statement of July 16, 1937, attempted to do more than agree with the lofty sentiments therein expressed. The Portuguese Government, after stating that everyone could agree with those sentiments, added in part: “Difficulties begin only when it is sought to pass from the field of intentions into that of action. . . . International society has endeavored to solve its difficulties . . . by means of abstract formulae, declarations of principles, solemn assertions, many texts and treaties. . . . Although much responsibility seems to lie with the abstract and generalizing tendency of jurists, the causes for the failure must be found . . . (a) in the inexistent or insufficient study of the causes of world unrest; (b) in the excessive ambition to find a sole formula for the solution of grave international problems, applicable urbi et orbi. . . .” Ibid., p. 48.

2 Farrar and Rinehart, 1942, pp. 103–104.

3 “The Prospect for International Law in the Twentieth Century,” 10 Cornell Law Quarterly (1925), pp. 434-435.