United States is hereby authorized and empowered to employ such part of the land and naval forces of the United States as shall be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act." In so far as the exercise of this authorization would be inconsistent with the treaty of September 15, 1914 for the advancement of peace, we may be sure that the President will make no use of this authorization. And we may also be sure that the President will be loath to exercise the authority vested in him by the Act of Congress in violation of treaties in force between the belligerent countries and the United States. Although an Act of Congress would bind all American authorities, including the President, even if it were so inconsistent with treaties as to abrogate them, an authorization is not mandatory, it is not a command, and the President will doubtless be careful of the good faith of the nation even in the trying conditions to which American merchants are exposed.

The purpose of this editorial comment is two-fold. First, to point out the nature and purposes of British policy in attempting to prevent supplies from reaching enemy countries through the direct or indirect cooperation of British subjects, and the policy of the United States in the Civil War has been cited in order to show that it is the right of a Power at war to prevent the forwarding of supplies to the enemy; and second, to show that however serious and acute the controversy may be between Great Britain and the United States to give effect to this policy, there is, through the wisdom and foresight of the responsible statesmen of the two countries, a means at hand to compose their outstanding differences without a resort to arms. For the two countries have not only agreed to an arbitration convention and a commission of inquiry, either to decide or to investigate the disputes, but they have also given themselves a twelvemonth for the appeal to reason, and they have pledged their good faith not to resort to arms during the appeal to reason.

JAMES BROWN SCOTT.

THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE DECLARATION OF LONDON ORDERS IN COUNCIL

On July 7, 1916 the British Government issued an Order in Council, withdrawing the Order in Council of October 29, 1914 which adopted the provisions of the Declaration of London with "the exclusion of the lists of contraband and non-contraband" and modification of the articles relating to destination and the onus of the proof as to innocent destination. This Order in Council, of October 29, 1914 also authorized

the withdrawal of Article 35 of the Declaration of London, which stated that "conditional contraband is not liable to capture, except when on board a vessel bound for territory belonging to or occupied by the enemy, or for the armed forces of the enemy, and when it is not to be discharged at an intervening neutral port." This withdrawal was authorized when one of the Principal Secretaries of State was shown "that the enemy Government is drawing supplies for its armed forces from or through a neutral country." The other Orders in Council amending that of October 29, 1914 were also withdrawn on July 7, 1916.

One of the fundamental principles of the Declaration of London was contained in Article 65, which stated that the provisions of the Declaration formed "an indivisible whole." The General Report states "A legitimate expectation would be defeated if one Power might make reservations on a rule to which another Power attached particular importance."

Great Britain had by Order in Council of August 20, 1914 introduced many changes in the Declaration of London. The United States on October 22, 1914 in a communication to the American Ambassador in London had accordingly said:

Inasmuch as the British Government consider that the conditions of the present European conflict make it impossible for them to accept without modification the Declaration of London, * * * this Government will insist that the rights and duties of the United States and its citizens in the present war be defined by the existing rules of international law and the treaties of the United States.

In the British explanation, July 7, 1916, of the grounds for the withdrawal of the various Orders in Council relating to the Declaration of London, it is stated that the Orders adopting the provisions were issued, not because the Declaration in itself possessed "for them the force of law, but because it seemed to present in its main lines a statement of the rights and the duties of belligerents based on the experience of previous naval wars." Later the same explanation states that as the Declaration of London, drawn in 1909, as modified by various Orders in Council, did "not stand the strain imposed by the test of rapidly changing conditions and tendencies which could not have been foreseen," the Allies, in order that their purpose might not be exposed to misconstruction, "have therefore come to the conclusion that they must confine themselves simply to applying the historic and admitted rules of the law of nations." GEORGE GRAFTON WILSON.

ECONOMIC CONFERENCE OF THE ALLIED POWERS

The great war which is either killing or maiming the young manhood of Europe, has been unbelievably destructive of property in those portions of Europe which have been invaded by one side or the other and have been the scene of hostile operations. The natural resources of those stricken countries have been blighted and destroyed. What measures may be taken to make good the loss of life, if it can be made good, or to preserve the coming generation from the consequences of the war, can not be foretold. But the Teutonic Powers and their allies have, it is said, considered the policy which should be adopted in order to make good the economic losses of the war and the Allied Powers have given this subject great consideration, have hit upon a plan for present and future operation, and have entered into an agreement to put this plan into force and effect.

The Allied Powers not only recognize, as did the Second Hague Peace Conference, "the solidarity uniting the members of the society of civilized nations," but they recognize and proclaim by their economic conference, held in Paris, June 14-June 17, 1916, a very special "solidarity of views and interests," and representatives of these Powers in the Economic Conference proposed "to their respective governments suitable measures for realizing this solidarity," a solidarity which in uniting, unfortunately separates them from other members of the society of nations.

It is curious to note that the measures taken by one or the other of the belligerent groups are not of their own initiative. One group makes up its mind that the other group has done, is doing, or is planning to do something; therefore, the other group takes steps to counteract this action, demonstrating in the very act that they are not and that they can not be independent, one of another, and that their actions depend and must depend upon the conduct of the others. Even in proclaiming their independence, the preamble proves their interdependence. Thus the representatives of the Allied Governments at the Economic Conference perceived that the Central Powers "are preparing to-day, in concert with their allies, a struggle in the economic domain which will not only survive the re-establishment of peace but, at that very moment, will assume all its amplitude and all its intensity;" that the agreement 'which is being prepared for this purpose amongst the enemies of the Allies" has for its evident object the establishment of their domination

over the production and the markets of the whole world and to impose upon the other countries an inacceptable hegemony;" wherefore

The representatives of the Allied Governments consider that it is their duty, on the grounds of necessary and legitimate defense, to take and realize from now onward all the measures requisite on the one hand to secure for themselves and the whole of the markets of neutral countries full economic independence and respect for sound commercial practice, and on the other to facilitate the organization on a permanent basis of this economic alliance.1

A series of recommendations to the Allied Governments was adopted by the conference designed to give effect to the policy which the Allies regard as necessary for themselves and also for neutral governments, because in these matters each belligerent group, in pushing its own interests, is generously solicitous for the interests of neutrals which must be protected from the assaults of the enemy. The belligerent groups, however, will probably find in the future, as in the past, that the views of neutrals and belligerents radically differ, and that the neutrals will prefer to frame their own policies rather than to have their interests considered and decided by one or the other belligerent group, intent upon its own salvation and upon an economic war, even after the military operations shall have ceased.

The recommendations apply to two periods, namely, the period during the war, and the period of reconstruction after the war. From another standpoint, the recommendations are of three kinds, relating in the first place to measures to be taken during the continuance of the war; secondly, to measures of a temporary character and to be applied during the period of the commercial, industrial, agricultural and maritime reconstruction of the Allied countries; and finally, to permanent measures of mutual assistance and collaboration among the Allies.

The recommendations to be adopted by the Allied Powers and to be put into effect during the war look to the stoppage of trade with enemy countries and to the ousting of enemy firms from Allied countries. In the second period, the measures recommended, called transitory, are of a kind to enable the Allies to get on their feet as it were, after the war, and are calculated to re-establish the industry and commerce of the countries whose industries and commerce have suffered from acts of destruction, spoliation, and unjust requisition during the war, by mutually assisting

1 The full text of the recommendations of the Economic Conference is printed in the Supplement to this JOURNAL, p. 227.

the countries which have thus suffered; by giving the allied countries a prior claim on their own natural resources; and by preventing what may be called dumping upon them of merchandise of enemy manufacture or origin. The recommendations contemplating measures of a permanent kind relate to mutual assistance and collaboration among the Allies, and are intended to make their countries economically, industrially and agriculturally independent not only of the Central Powers of Europe, but in reality of all Powers; they are to be drafted with the express purpose of promoting trade between the Allied countries, by improving shipping, telegraphic and postal facilities, if need be by government aid, and finally, they are devised to advance not merely their industrial and commercial, but also their intellectual and artistic interests by similar laws in the matter of patents, trademarks, literary and artistic copyright. It seems advisable to refer more specifically to some of the more important provisions of the recommendations.

Measures during the War

In the first place these measures contemplate uniform laws and regulations prohibiting trade with the enemies, by prohibiting subjects and citizens of the Allies, and all persons residing within their respective territories, from trading with all persons residing within enemy territories, or with enemy subjects, or indeed with persons, firms and companies in neutral countries whose business is controlled in whole or in part by enemy subjects or "subject to enemy influence." The names of the enemy subjects, persons, firms and companies in neutral countries are to be included "in a special list," apparently the so-called Black List, treated elsewhere in the Journal.2

In the next place, the importation of all goods originating in or coming from enemy countries is to be prohibited. Not only is trade with the enemy to be cut off, but contracts with enemy subjects which are conceived by the Allies to be injurious to national interests are to be cancelled unconditionally.

A second class of measures to be devised and put into effect during the war falls under several heads and relates to the policy of sequestration or control of "business undertakings, owned or operated by enemy subjects in the territories of the Allies." The Allies evidently recognize the

2 Page 832.