that a project of convention on the subject be formulated which should be submitted to the Eighth International Conference of American States. The resolution stated that in spite of repeated efforts the Committee on Juridical Problems was unable to secure a unanimity of opinion, and hence it was considered preferable to recommend that the study of coordination be done by the Committee of Experts.

Another project referred to the Committee of Experts was one on the immunity of government vessels (resolution XXXVI, appendix 62, p. 234). This resolution also recommended that the American republics adhere to the Convention of Brussels of April 10, 1926, relating to this subject.

The question of unification of the international American principle and of national legislation with respect to the problems of nationality, was considered by the Committee on Juridical Problems to be of such a technical nature as to require further study. The Conference therefore recommended that the question of nationality be referred to the Committee of Experts for study and consideration and afterward be considered by the Eighth International Conference of American States (resolution XXXVII, appendix 63, p. 235).

Codification of International Law

Resolution VI on the Codification of International Law (appendix 32, p. 211) was adopted and provides for a procedure somewhat at variance with that prescribed by the Seventh International Conference of American States in 1933. This resolution confuses the functions and jurisdiction of the Committee of Experts as provided by the Montevideo resolution and, if strictly interpreted, would make the Committee of Experts merely a revisory board with practically no powers of initiative.

The resolution of the Montevideo Conference had provided for the establishment of a Committee of Experts to act as a centralized and systematic agency for the codification of international law. According to that resolution the preliminary work was to be done by a group of seven experts chosen by all the American governments. This Committee of Experts was entrusted with the duty of formulating questionnaires on subjects susceptible of codification, and these questionnaires were to be submitted to the national committees in each country composed of officials and ex-officials of foreign offices, professors, and other authorities on international law. The Committee of Experts was to coordinate the replies and formulate drafts on the basis of the observations made by the various national committees. In this way the Committee of Experts would initiate action and would centralize and coordinate the work of codification.

The Buenos Aires resolution provides for the reestablishment of the three permanent committees created by the Sixth International

137099-37-3

Conference of American States at Habana in 1928, namely, one in Rio de Janeiro for the work relating to public international law; another at Montevideo for the work dealing with private international law; and another in Habana for the study of comparative legislation and the uniformity of legislations.* The functions of these committees are to make reports, solicit and obtain opinions, and formulate draft projects. This resolution provided that the national committees on codification should undertake studies of the doctrines on the various subjects to be codified and transmit the results of those studies to the permanent committees, which should then prepare draft conventions and resolutions to be transmitted to the Committee of Experts for revision and coordination. The revised drafts and studies would be transmitted to the various governments and, finally, to the International Commission of American Jurists.

The Buenos Aires resolution provides that the initiative in the work of codification shall rest with the twenty-one national committees, while the Montevideo resolution provides that the initiative shall be taken by the Committee of Experts. The inconsistency of these two resolutions and the resulting confusion will probably result in the postponement of effective work on codification. The situation can scarcely be clarified before the next inter-American conference, which is to be held in Lima, Peru.†

*See Report of the Delegates of the United States of America to the Sixth International Conference of American States, Habana, Cuba, January 16-February 20, 1928 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1928), p. 315.

†The Committee of Experts was organized in accordance with the Montevideo resolution and met at the Pan American Union April 5-19, 1937. The members of that Committee are: Víctor M. Maúrtua (Peru), Alberto Cruchaga Ossa (Chile), Carlos Saavedra Lamas (Argentina), Luis Anderson Morus (Costa Rica), Eduardo Suárez (Mexico), Afranio de Mello Franco (Brazil), and J. Reuben Clark (United States of America). Edward M. Borchard attended in place of Mr. Clark, owing to the latter's inability to be present.

In its last session the Committee signed a final act incorporating its conclusions. The Committee recommends that the national committees undertake the study of a treaty consolidating and integrating the methods for the codification of international law established in the various resolutions on the subject adopted by the international conferences of American states. In the interval, while the treaty is being elaborated and ratified by all the American republics, the procedure of codification established by the Montevideo Conference and by the Peace Conference of Buenos Aires is to govern.

The Committee also recommended that the governments inform the Pan American Union with regard to the work accomplished by the national committees in order that the Union may keep the governments in touch with developments in the codification movement in all parts of the continent.

The Juridical Division of the Pan American Union served as the Secretariat of the Committee, and it is at present occupied in preparing the report and in performing the other functions in connection with the codification of international law entrusted to it by the Conferences of Montevideo and Buenos Aires.

COMMITTEE V: ECONOMIC PROBLEMS

The Committee on Economic Problems considered the following topics which comprised section V of the program:

8. Measures to promote closer economic relations among the American Republics.

(a) Tariff truces and customs agreements.

(b) Agreement on sanitary regulations affecting the interchange of animal and vegetable products.

(c) Equality of opportunity in international trade.

(d) Financial cooperation.

(e) International aspects of the problems of immigration.

(f) Promotion of travel.

(g) Other measures.

9. Improvement of communication facilities.

(a) Maritime communications.

(b) The Pan American Highway.

(c) Other measures.

The Honorable Sumner Welles of the United States Delegation was chosen chairman of the Committee, and six subcommittees were designated to deal with the topics indicated above. The Committee submitted one convention, seven resolutions, and five recommendations, all of which were approved by the Conference.

MEASURES TO PROMOTE CLOSER ECONOMIC RELATIONS AMONG THE AMERICAN REPUBLICS

Under the general topic "Measures to Promote Closer Economic Relations Among the American Republics", the Conference approved a number of resolutions and recommendations, among them two resolutions which originated with the United States Delegation and which pledged support to the principles of a liberal trade policy. These relate to Equality of Treatment in International Trade and Restrictions on International Trade.

Equality of Treatment in International Trade

Resolution XLIV (appendix 70, p. 240) on Equality of Treatment in International Trade states that the American republics are convinced that the growth of international trade can serve to strengthen the foundations of peace by improving the material welfare and contentment of nations and by drawing them together in mutual understanding and interest. It recognizes the fact that important benefits of trade can only be achieved if governments regulate their trade in such a manner as to conform to the spirit of equality and neighborliness and that discriminatory practices which impair the advantages naturally enjoyed by various countries in international trade tend to give rise to dissatisfaction and ill-will, thereby frustrating the peaceful ends which trade should serve.

The resolution reaffirms the policy enunciated at the Montevideo Conference that "the principle of equality of treatment stands and must continue to stand as the basis of all acceptable commercial policy". It also recommends that each government declare its determination to bend every effort to enforce in all the phases of its general commercial policy the peaceful and equitable principle of equality of treatment and, in accordance with this principle, suppress as soon as possible all discriminatory practices, including those arising in connection with import-license systems, exchange control, and bilateral clearing and compensation agreements. (The Government of El Salvador approved this recommendation with a reservation.)

Restrictions on International Trade

The second recommendation on economic matters, presented by the Delegation of the United States, was that entitled "Restrictions on International Trade" (XLVI, appendix 72, p. 242). It recommends that the American states abstain, so far as possible, from raising or augmenting tariff barriers and every other kind of restriction which hinders international trade and resulting payments; it recommends a policy of abolishing or gradually reducing such excessive and unreasonable prohibitions and restrictions upon international commerce; and it recommends that this policy be made effective as early as possible, in order that the Eighth International Conference of American States and the Economic Financial Conference which is to be held in Santiago, Chile, might mark a definite step toward a system of greater freedom in international commerce. It also resolved to invite all governments not participating in the present Conference to follow the policy proposed in this recommendation.

In the preamble this recommendation states that the development of international trade unquestionably contributes to the progress and well-being of nations; that closer commercial relationships contribute to drawing peoples together and create bonds of greater solidarity between countries which maintain them; and that trade is being impeded by a great number of excessive or unreasonable restrictions and prohibitions. It also states that, as a preliminary step toward eliminating and gradually reducing such prohibitions and restrictions, it is essential to prevent any increase in the obstacles which hinder international trade and render it more difficult.

Miscellaneous Subjects

A resolution of particular interest to the Delegation of the United States was that entitled "Sanitary Police Regulation of Vegetable and Animal Products" (XL, appendix 66, p. 237). This resolution asserts that the agricultural and cattle-raising industries constitute the principal source of wealth of almost all the American countries,

and that it is therefore to the common interest of all that measures of an international character for the sanitary inspection of animal and vegetable products be adopted to prevent the propagation of epidemics and parasites and to secure their elimination. The Conference requested the Pan American Union to prepare at an early date a draft convention for the creation of a Pan American institute of vegetable and animal sanitation, which might be consulted by the several governments of the American countries prior to the inter-American conference on agriculture to meet in Mexico City in 1937.

Another resolution issuing from Committee V was that entitled "Monetary Conference" (XXXVIII, appendix 64, p. 236), which recommended that the Pan American Union determine, as soon as possible after consultation with the various American governments, whether it would be opportune to hold a meeting of delegates of the ministries of finance and of the central banks of the American countries to study and endeavor to bring about monetary stabilization and the lifting or termination of the systems of exchange control which the various states members of the Pan American Union had applied as a result of the depression.

Committee V also considered the topic of "Immigration". Resolution XLV (appendix 71, p. 241) asserted that immigration is an important factor affecting international peace. Mentioning the fact that on the American continent there are large unpopulated areas which might help peaceably, through bilateral agreements, to meet the reciprocal necessities of countries of emigration and countries of immigration, the Conference recommended that the governments make studies of their respective ability to receive immigrants. Such studies are to be communicated to the Pan American Union; and these studies, together with those made by the International Labor Office, are to be used in the preparation of draft conventions and recommendations for use as the bases for bilateral labor treaties. The preparation of appropriate standardized treaties is to be put in charge of a committee of experts, the conclusions of which might be considered by the Lima Conference.

The Conference, by resolution XXXIX on the Ratification of the Conventions of the Pan American Commercial Conference of Buenos Aires (appendix 65, p. 236), recommended the early ratification of the conventions signed at the Pan American Commercial Conference held in Buenos Aires in 1935.

In resolution XLII, entitled "Organization of an Inter-American Institute of Economics and Finance" (appendix 68, p. 239), the Conference resolved that the Pan American Union should include in the agenda of the next Pan American Conference to be held at Lima the project approved at the Seventh Conference in Montevideo for the creation of an inter-American institute of economics and finance.