Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:50:07.556Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Legal Liability of the Kaiser

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Quincy Wright
Quincy Wright
Affiliation:
Harvard University
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
Notes on International Affairs
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , February 1919 , pp. 120 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1919

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 41–42 Vict. c. 73.

2 U. S. v. Davis, 2 Simmer 482 (1873).

3 L. R. 2 Ex. D. 63 (1876).

4 Mighell v. Sultan of Johore, 1 Q. B. 149 (1894); DeHaber v. Queen of Portugal, 17 Q. B. 196 (1851).

5 2 H. of L. Cases, 1.

6 Hatch v. Baez, 7 Hun. 596; Underhill v. Hernandez, 26 U. S. App. 573 (1895).

7 27 Eliz. c. 1 (1585).

8 Willis-Bund, , State Trials (1879), I, 264, 269.Google Scholar

9 11th ed., V, 911.

10 Grotius, I, 4, 9; Vattel, IV, 7, 108; Satow, , Diplomatic Practice, I, 7.Google Scholar

11 7 Federal Cases 64.

12 Napoleon, the Last Phase, p. 59.

13 7 Federal Cases 66. See also Underbill v. Hernandez, supra note 6.

14 De Iure Belli ac Pacis, II, 21, 4.

15 Judges, c. 15.

16 Plutarch, Lucullus.

17 Plutarch, Cato the Younger.

18 Grotius, op. cit., citing Marianna, 20: 1.

19 In re Ezeta, 62 Fed. Rep. 972; Ornelas v. Ruiz, 161 U. S. 502. Treaties of Netherlands with France, 1844, art. 3; with Great Britain, 1874, art. 6; with United States, 1887, art. 3.

20 Moore, , Digest, IV, 250Google Scholar; For. Rel. (1894), p. 730.

21 Grotius, op. cit. III, 11, 7.

22 III, 8, 159.

23 U. S. Rules of Land Warfare (1914), art. 47.

24 Ibid., art. 71.

25 Ibid., art. 376.

26 Ibid., art. 16.

27 Ibid., art. 336. The British Manual of Land Warfare (art. 443) provides that a belligerent “may punish the offender or commander responsible for such order (under which members of the armed forces have committed violations of the recognized rules of warfare) if they fall into his hands.” The immunity of the individual soldier who has committed illegal acts under order, though provided in both manuals, has been criticized as “contrary to the Anglo-American jurisprudence that the individual is personally responsible for his acts whether committed under order or not.” Jour. Comp. Leg. and Int. Law, xviii, 154. However, under the law of war, the responsibility of the superior officer seems to be sufficiently recognized.

28 Cross v. Harrison, 16 How. 164; Lamar v. Brown, 92 U. S. 193; Magoon's Report, 16; Birkheimer, , Military Government and Martial Law, 1st ed., p. 282.Google Scholar

29 Neeley v. Henkel, 180 U. S. 109.

30 Hague Conventions (1907), V, art. 11.

31 The German Chancellor, Max of Baden, had published a manifesto November 9, 1918, stating that the “Emperor and King has decided to abdicate the throne.” Official U. S. Bulletin, No. 460, p. 4.

32 III, XI, 184.

33 II, 24, 7.

34 U. S. Army, General Orders No. 100 (1863), arts. 56, 67.

35 U. S. v. Baker, 5 Blatch. 6 (1861); Hall, , International Law, sec. 81.Google Scholar

36 British and Foreign State Papers, II, 665, 734.

37 Ibid., III, 200.

38 56 George III, c. 22.

39 Hansard's Debates, xxxiii, 213 (March 12, 1816).

40 Rosebery, op. cit., p. 58.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.