Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T21:54:16.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Return of Enemy Property

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Kenneth S. Carlston
Kenneth S. Carlston*
Affiliation:
University of Illinois Law School
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
Third Session
Information
Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at its annual meeting (1921-1969) , Volume 52 , 1958 , pp. 53 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1958

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 39 A.J.I.L. Supp. 245 (1945).

2 13 Dept. of State Bulletin 208, 210 (1945).

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid. 114,1023 (1946).

5 Howard, “The Paris Agreement on Reparation from Germany,” ibid. 1023, 1024, 1026 (1946); see de Vries, “The International Responsibility of the United States for Vested German Assets,” 51 A.J.I.L. 18 (1957).

6 Report on Germany, September 21, 1949–July 31, 1952 (Office of the United States High Commissioner for Germany) 49 (1952)Google Scholar.

7 N. Y. Times, April 13, 1954, p. 25, col. 1.

8 Fortune Magazine, January, 1958, pp. 63, 65.

9 Bentwich, The Law of Private Property in War 26, 79–80 (1907); Bonfils, Manuel de Droit International Public 842–843, 907 (1914); 4 Calvo, Le Droit International 248 (5th ed., 1896); 3 Fiore, Nouveau Droit International Public 224, 283–286 (1886); Funck-Brentano and Sorel, Précis du Droit des Gens 257–258 (1900); Gainings, International Law and American Treatment of Alien Property 14 (1940); 2 Guggenheim, Traité de Droit International Public 375 (1954); Hall, A Treatise on International Law 509, 532 (1924); Hershey, Essentials of International Public Law and Organization 567, 653 (1927); 3 Hyde, International Law Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied by the United States 1735–1736, 1890–1894 (2d rev. ed., 1945); Lawrence, Principles of International Law 373–379, 440–449 (6th ed., 1910); 1 Mérignhac and Lémonon, Le Droit des Gens et la Guerre 1914–1918, 480 (1921); Moore, International Law and Some Current Illusions 13 et seq. (1924); 2 Oppenheim, International Law 281–282, 403–404, 462 (7th ed., 1952); 2 Westlake, International Law 35, 42–45, 141 (1907); Hague Conventions of 1899 (II) and 1907 (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, Regulations, Art. 46, Scott, The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907, 123, 129, 131 (1915).

10 8 Cranch 110, 123 (1814).

11 U. S. v. Percheman, 7 Pet. 51, 86 (1833).

12 11 Wall. 268 (1870).

13 12 Stat. 319 (1861).

14 Kirk v. Lynd, 106 U. S. 315, 316–317 (1882); Oakes v. U. S., 174 U. S. 778, 790–791 (1898).

15 3 Hyde, International Law Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied by the United States 1735 (2d rev. ed., 1945).

16 12 Stat. 589 (1862).

17 Note 14 above.

18 96 U. S. 279, 285 (1877).

19 Note 15 above.

20 Secs. 2(a), 7(c), 40 Stat. 411, 418 (1917).

21 Central Union Trust Co. v. Garvan, 254 U. S. 554, 569 (1921); Woodson v. Deutsche G. & S. S. V. Roessler, 292 U. S. 449, 454 (1934); Sielcken-Schwarz v. American Factors, 60 F. 2d 43, 45 (2d Cir. 1932); Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Stearns, 65 F. 2d 371, 374 (2d Cir. 1933); Cummings v. Société Suisse Pours Valeurs de Métaux, 85 F. 2d 287, 288 (App. D. C. 1936).

22 40 Stat. 411, 424 (1917).

23 41 Stat. 35 (1919); 41 Stat. 977 (1920); 42 Stat. 1511 (1923); 45 Stat. 254 (1928).

24 Holtzoff, , “Enemy Patents in the United States,” 26 A.J.I.L. 272 (1932)Google Scholar.

25 55 Stat. 839 (1941).

26 7 Fed. Reg. 1971, 5205 (1942).

27 H. R. Rep. No. 1507, 77th Cong., 1st Sess. 3 (1941); Sen. Rep. No. 911, 77th Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1941).

28 87 Cong. Rec. 9859, 9865 (1941).

29 Ibid. 9861.

30 U. S. v. Chemical Foundation, 272 U. S. 1, 9–10 (1926); Josephberg v. Markham, 152 F. 2d 644, 648 (2d Cir. 1945); Koehler v. Clark, 170 F. 2d 779, 782 (9th Cir. 1948); 91 Cong. Rec. 11359 (1945); Sen. Rep. No. 572, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. 3 (1951).

31 26 Dept. of State Bulletin 687 (1952); 61 Stat. 1245, 1757, 1915, 2065 (1947).

32 32 Dept. of State Bulletin 791 (1955).

33 See definition of “national” in Executive Order 9193, 7 Fed. Reg. 5205 (1942).

34 See statement of author, Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary, Return of Enemy Property, U. S. Sen., 84th Cong., 1st and 2d Sess., Nov. 29, 30, 1955, and April 20, 1956, p. 371.

35 50 U.S.C.A. App., Sec. 39, 62 Stat. 1240, 1246 (1948).

36 Convention on the Settlement of Matters Arising out of the War and the Occupation, signed at Bonn, May 26, 1952, in force May 5, 1955, Ch. 6, Art. 3; Sen. Doc. 11, 84th Cong., 1st Sess.; 49 A.J.I.L. Supp. 69, 97 (1955).

37 Jessup, , “Enemy Property,” 49 A.J.I.L. 57, 62 (1955)Google Scholar.

38 31 Dept. of State Bulletin 69 (1954); Hearings on S. 2423, 83rd Cong., 2d Sess., 1954, pp. 160–161; Hearings, op. cit. note 34 above, pp. 27, 42, 523–524; see also Dept. of State Press Release 157, March 29, 1958, in 38 Dept. of State Bulletin 703 (1958).