|
The following list of books and articles relative to intervention is arranged alphabetically, substantially in accordance with the pattern of the cards printed by the Library of Congress. The indication of the classification or "book numbers" will make it possible for students using libraries which employ this system to obtain the book desired with the least effort, and by noting the card number on the left hand side, they may purchase separate cards for each item, from the Library of Congress. References to the principal bibliographies on intervention will be found in a foot note, but none of these, so far as I am aware, is extensive or critical.1 It has seemed, therefore, desirable to add a few words of comment upon the character and merits of the principal works. These superficial indications are by-products of my investigations, jotted down at different times in a sketchy, fragmentary manner, without any uniformity of treatment, and they are submitted for what they may be worth. No claim is made that they represent the compiler's final judgment upon the respective merits of the works discussed. It is to be hoped that other investigators will reform them, or submit suggestions and comments, in the event of the publication of a later edition. A system of stars has been used to indicate the relative merits of the more important works. Four stars indicate those that are considered to be the most meritorious. Under certain of the incidents of intervention included in the list will be found a few of the books and articles which discuss the facts and the justification or the action taken. It did not, however, seem desirable to confuse a bibliography devoted to the principles of intervention with a large number of works devoted almost exclusively to a consideration of diplomatic incidents and discussions. Except when the contrary is stated, I have tried to examine each item of this bibliography with such care as its importance appeared to justify. In the case of works which are not in the Library of Congress, I have indicated some other library where they are available, and when I have not discovered them in this country, the European repository has been mentioned. The trained librarians on the staff of the Library of Congress, The Harvard Law Library, the Library of the Carnegie Endowment for Peace, The New York Bar Association, Columbia Law School, and the New York Public Library have been generous with their assistance. In addition to the libraries above mentioned I have examined the card catalogues of the following: State Department; The University of Pennsylvania; The Pennsylvania Historical Society, The Library Company of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University, Boston Athenaeum. Without the spirit of cooperation and assistance which Mr. Herbert Putnam has inspired in every department of the Library of Congress, this bibliography could not have been made so complete, and to him I wish particularly to express my appreciation. ___________________________
[Aldebert,] De l'intervention [Dissertation, Paris] Paris, V, Giard and E. Brière, 1902, ii+152p. This work is cited by Jean Lagorgette: Le Rôle de la Guerre, p. 230, and appears to relate to public law, but when I obtained a copy from abroad I found it related solely to intervention in private law.
****Amos, Sheldon, 1835-1887. [Barrister-at-Law; late Professor of Jurisprudence in University College, London.] Political and Legal Remedies for War. London, 1880, ii+364 p., 23 cm. 10-16358 JX1948.AG [A New York edition of the same date by Harper and Bros, is smaller in size and type, and inferior in general makeup. The indexing of the material is the same in both.] One of the very few serious studies of the problem of the restriction of the unnecessary use of force. It is original, judicious in treatment, suggestive, and in the main also it is sound.
+Angell, James Burrill, 1829-1916. The European concert and the Monroe Doctrine. A discourse before the Phi beta kappa Society of Harvard University, June 28, 1905. 16 p., 23 cm. [Harvard Law Library] A14-1083 Valuable because of the broad diplomatic experience of the author and his unprejudiced examination of the question of the European concert and its supremacy, but the treatment is somewhat superficial.
Annuaire de 1'institut de droit international. See; Institut de droit international, Annuaire. 10-16478 Revised JX24.I4
Anonymous. Legal opinions and observations on the correspondence lately addressed by the acting French consul in Lisbon to the Portuguese Government. London, no date, 50 p., 8 º [Harvard Law Library]
Anonymous. Specific answers to the several demands of the acting French consul in Lisbon to the Portuguese Government in his note of March 28, 1831. London, no date, 15 p., 8 º [Harvard Law Library]
Anonymous. Particulars and corresponding documents relating to the French aggression on Portugal. London, no date. 44 p., 8º I have not examined this work.
+++Anonymous [under pseudonym of Stephanus Junius Brutus, accredited to Hubert Languet or Duplessis-Mornay]. Vindiciae contra tyrannos [Grounds of Rights against Tyrants]. 1579, and often thereafter. The Library of Congress has an edition printed at Basle 1589. 9-10598 JC.143.M3.1589 See W. A. Dunning: Political Theories, Luther to Montesquieu, p. 47. Prof. Dunning and Prof. Coker refer to Encyclopedia Brittaniea "Lanquet" and Janet: Histoire de la science politique, Vol. II, p. 31, note 2. They used the edition of 1595, bound with Machiavelli 's Prince. Esmein, who uses an edition of 1600, says (in Nouvelle revue historique de droit francais et etranger, 1900, p. 557), "It is one of the most original and powerful of the writings about religion (doctrine) and political controversy of that fecund period." F. W. Coker (Readings in Political Philosophy, Xew York, 1914, p. 207-221) has translated a portion, and Esmein gives French translations of other portions of the four questions considered. The fourth is: "Whether it is the right and duty of princes to interfere in behalf of neighboring peoples who are oppressed on account of adherence to the true religion, or by any obvious tyranny." Prof. Dunning Political Theories (p. 55) says: "The answer is affirmative on both branches of the question, and the ground is, in the one case, unity of the Christian Church; in the other, the unity of humanity, involving respectively, duty to God and duty to one 's neighbor. "This latter Prof. Dunning remarks strongly presents "an enlightened view of international solidarity."
Anonymous. De justa reipublicae Christianae in reges impios et haereticos authoritate justissima que catholicorum ad Henricum Navarraeum et quemcunque haereticum a regno Gallico repellandum confederatione. Paris, Guillaume Bichon, 1590. Esmein (in Nouvelle revue historique de droit franfais et etranger, 1900, p. 553) calls this "a curious little book inspired by a fierce passion and sometimes expressing the highest ideals." He says it supplied the Leaguers with arguments to justify war against the French Protestants (Calvinists) and the calling in of foreign aid on the ground that the Protestants were not French, and that it was a duty of other nations to repel them.
Anonymous. [See: Kamptz, Karl C. A. H. von]. Völkerrechtliche Erörterung des Recht der Europäischen Machte in die Verfassung eines einzelnen Staats sich zu mischen. Berlin, 1821, xvi+214 p., 8º [Harvard Law Library and Yale University Library]
+Anonymous. By "R. Q." A review of the preceding work by Kamptz. in Hermes, 1821, Vol. XI, p. 142-156. Contains an important discussion of intervention and severely criticizes Kamptz 's work.
Anonymous. By "M. M. D. et R." Traité sur le droit d'intervention. Paris, 1823. Cited by Rotteck (Einmischung, 1845, p. 8) ; in Bluntschli's Staatsworterbuch, 1860, Vol. V, p. 354; Also Heffter, § 44, note. I was unable to consult this work.
Anonymous. By "Decimus." Intervention and its fruits; a letter to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. London, Saunders and Otley, 1841, 32 p. [New York Library] Interestingly written attack upon Palmerston's policy regarding Turkey. The author advises England to hold aloof and let Russia occupy the Dardenelles, and France occupy Egypt. Defends policy of complete non-intervention.
Anonymous. An Appeal, on behalf of the British subjects residing in and connected with the river Plate, against any further violent interventions by the British and French Governments in the affairs of that country. London, 1846. 8º [Hague Peace Palace] I was unable to consult this work.
+Anonymous. Non-intervention, A Humbug, in Spectator of July 3, 1847, and reprinted in Living Age, 1847, vol. 14, p. 284-286.
Points out how frequently intervention occurs, and declares it is often a duty. Thinks no guiding rule is possible.
Anonymous. Intervention anglo-française dans le Rio de la Plata. Missions de MM. de Deffaudis et Walewski. Paris, 1848. 8º [British Museum, 8175.e.] I was unable to consult this work.
Anonymous. Intervengao estrangeira, ou documentos historicos sobre a intervencao armada de Franca, Hespanha e Inglaterra nos negocios internos de Portugal no anno de 1847. Vol. 1. Porto, 1848. 8º [British Museum, 8042. aaa.25] I was unable to consult this work.
Anonymous. Intervention franchise dans les affaires d 'Italic en 1859. Paris, 1859. 86 p. [New York Library, British Museum, 8032.h] Political pamphlet: reasons why France undertook war (p. 77); results of the war (p. 73). Does not discuss principles of intervention.
Anonymous. Le principe de non-intervention. Paris, 1860. 16 p., 8º [Boston Athenaeum Library] Relates to Russian intervention in Bessarabia. This article is of no juridical value.
Anonymous. [Harcourt's letters in the Times, 1863, were signed "Historicus."] See under Harcourt.
Anonymous. Intervention: A Duty or a Crime. London, 1864. 8º [British Museum, 8092. aaa] I was unable to consult this work.
[Anonymous.] L 'intervention militaire anglaise sur le continent. Paris and Nancy, Chapelot, 1912. 27 p., 8º [Listed in Berlin Cards, B.12.1819] This pamphlet does not relate to intervention, but discusses the military cooperation of England and France in the event of a war with Germany.
Anonymous. Our Policy in Nicaragua, by "A Friend of Justice." in North American Review, January, 1913, vol. 197, p. 50-61. AP2.N7 v. 197 Condemns interference of United States in the civil conflict in Nicaragua. Does not discuss the principles of intervention.
Anonymous. Intervention. Non-intervention theory and practice. The true tradition, in London Times, May 17, 1919. An argument justifying intervention in Russia against Bolshevists and pointing out that Great Britain has not observed the doctrine of non-intervention. Refers particularly to the view expressed by George III.
+++Arntz, E. R. N. [Professor of Law, University of Brussels.] The views of Prof. Arntz in regard to restrictions to be applied to intervention, especially humanitarian intervention, are quoted by Rolin Jaequemyns in Revue du droit international et de la legislation comparée, 1876, vol. 8. p. 675. 1-7465 JX3.E4 Vol. 8 Professor Arntz would restrict such intervention to collective action of the powers. In his "Programme du cours de droit des gens fait à 1 'Université de Bruxelles," (1882), Arntz discusses intervention (p. 69-84). After stating that non-intervention in internal affairs is the rule (p. 75), he gives three exceptions: (1) treaty stipulation; (2) when the institutions are a menace; (3) on the ground of humanity, but he would limit the latter to collective action (p. 77-8). Rougier (Rev. Gen. Vol. 17, p. 473) refers to this passage and states that Professor Arntz was the first to establish the theory of intervention on the ground of humanity, but Arntz himself refers to Woolsey as having previously set forth his views (Programme du cours de Droit des Gens 1882, p. 78), and the latter (Woolsey: International Law 1860, p. 111-12) quotes from Wheaton's Elements, part II, Chap. 1, § 10 Fedozzi (archivio giuiridico, Vol. 62, 1899, p. 518) says Arntz was the first to attempt to find a juridical basis for intervention. This ignores H. von Rotteck's work published in 1845. Arntz also refers to Hall as holding similar views.
Balance of Power. A valuable list of works on the Balance of Power will be found in the Library of Congress: List of References on (p. 49-57) Europe and International Politics, 1914. L. C. card, 14-30010 compiled under the direction of Hermann H. B. Moyer. A few of the more important works dealing with this particular purpose are: Donnandieu, Leonce: Essai sur In theorie de I'equilibré. Paris, 1900. 9-3782 JX1318.D7 Dupuis, Charles, 1863: Le principe d'equilibré. Paris, 1909. 9-27064 D217.D8
Baldwin, Simeon E. The limits of active intervention by a state to secure the fulfilment of a contract in favor of its own citizens entered into by them with other states. in 28th Report of the International Law Association, London, 1908, p. 180f. Justifies interposition and advocates obligatory arbitration as a substitute.
Barrillon, Francois Guillaume. Politique de la France et de 1'humanité dans le conflit Américain. Paris, 1861. 40 p., 25 cm. 8-10496 E469.B27 On the basis of humanity, the author advises France to take the initiative of an armed and collective intervention based, first, upon the abolition of slavery and second, upon the independence of the Confederate States. The article has no scientific value.
Bartholet. Du droit d'intervention. 1873. I was unable to consult this work. It is cited by Geffcken (Heffter's 7 ed.), $ 44, p. 107.
Becherowsky. L 'intervention et la peninsulé balkanique, 1892. I was unable to consult this work. It is cited by E. Robin: Occupations, p. 281.
Benton, Elbert Jay. 1871 - International Law and Diplomacy of the Spanish-American War. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1908. 300 p., 20y 2 cm. (The Albert Shaw lectures on diplomatic history, 1907.) 8-9495 E723.B47 Discusses the various grounds upon which intervention in Cuba was justified and gives a few references to the views of some of the authorities (p. 81-108). The question is examined in a broad and fair spirit, but the treatment is superficial and indicates a lack of comprehension of the principles of international law. The historical side of the question is carefully covered.
****Bernard, Mountague, 1820-1882. [Chichele Professor of International Law and Diplomacy, Oxford.] On the Principle of Non-intervention. A lecture delivered in the hall of All Soul's College. Oxford and London, J. H. and J. Parker, 1860. Pamphlet, 1+36 p., 23 cm. 10-17439 1 JX4478.B5 Prof. Bernard argues that intervention in internal affairs is contrary to international law. The argument is more philosophical than legal, and is confined to a consideration of intermeddling in the internal affairs of another state. Interposition and counter intervention are not discussed. Also discusses supervision over smaller states. Bernard counsels absolute nonintervention. It is one of the ablest works on the subject, and has exercised a very great influence on other writers and through them on the theory of international law and the conduct of international relations. Harcourt [Historicus] seems to have been influenced and later Hall, Lawrence, and Oppenheim. Bernard was one of few English writers who appear to have been familiar with the German authorities, and the only one who had given the subject of intervention serious consideration. He gives a bibliography of intervention (p. 11).
*****Berner Intervention [article on] in Deutsches Staats-Wörterbuch of Bluntschli, and Brater, Stuttgart and Leipsig, 1860. Vol. V., p. 341-354. One of the best discussions of intervention. Berner recognizes the general principle of nonintervention, but admits reasonable exceptions: balance of power; continued acts of inhumanity ("In final analysis, Man is the highest right before which all other rights must incline."); counter-claim [counter-intervention]; necessity. He appends a valuable bibliography, which we have utilized.
Berra, F. A. Teorici de las intervenciones. in Neuva Revista de Buenos-Ayres. Vol V., p. 397-465. I was unable to consult this work.
*Bignon, Louis Pierre Edouard, baron, 1771-1841 . Les cabinets et les peuples, depuis 1815 jusqu'à la fin de 1822 ; par M. Bignon. 2d ed. (revised and corrected), Paris. Béchet ainé, 1823. 18-5011 D383.B5 A well-written contemporaneous attack upon the arrogant pretensions of the Holy Alliance to interference in the internal affairs of other states. Discusses intervention policy of the powers toward Italy, Greece, and Spain. Very anglophobe (p. 382); criticizes England for merely proclaiming the doctrine of non-interference, and not trying to protect the states against interference. H. v. Botteck (Einmischung, p. 26) cites this work with high praise.
*Birkbeck, W., Lt. The principle of Non-intervention. No date or place of publication indicated. 4 p., 8º [in New York Public Library] Birkbeck in these four pages shows that he has carefully considered part of the subject. He emphasizes the need of definition of the terms employed (p. 4), and prefers those in Abdy's Kent. Strongly defends the right of intervention to defend the law, even when national interests are not immediately concerned.
***Bluntschli, Johann Kaspar, 1808-1881. French translation entitled, Le droit international codifié, by M. C. Lardy, from the German edition of 1868. Paris, 1870 and 1895. 10-16547† JX1268.B451895 Louis Renault, in his Introduction to the Study of International Law, says it is one of the few books which must always be consulted. This statement I have found to be particularly true for intervention. See: Violations of international law and the means to prevent them, 462-500, p. 247-269. I have also used the German original.
Bodin, Jean, 1530-1596. Les six livres de la republique de I. Bodin Angeuin. Ensemble une apologie de René Herpin. Paris, I du Puis, 1583, 1060 p., 18 cm. First pub. 1576, Latin edition De republica Libri Sex, 1586. 7-14933 See W. A. Dunning: Political Theories, Vol. I, 1910, p. 86. Bodin admitted the right of a foreign sovereign to intervene upon humanitarian grounds. See criticisms of this doctrine by Werdenhagen (below under Werdenhagen).
*Bompard, Raoul. Le Pape et le droit des gens. Paris, H. Rousseau, 1888, 228 p., 8º [Harvard Law Library] Discusses intervention and the interest and rights of European states in the affairs of the Papal states (p. 109-127) ; gives an account of the various interventions, from 1796-1870, which have concerned the Papal states (p. 127-184). This work is important because the opinions expressed about intervention are based upon study of documents and the practice of states, even though the position of the Pope is exceptional.
Borchard, Edwin M. The Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad, or the Law of International Claims. New York, 1915. xxxvii+988 p., 24y 2 cm. 15-1459 B, Revised JX4231.P8.B6 The best work on interposition for the redress of wrongs to nationals a veritable mine of information.
Bourgeois, J. Le principe de non-intervention à propos d'un livre récent. in Revue général de droit Internationale, 1897, Vol. IV, p. 746-757. JX.3.B56.vol.4 This is really a review of a book on the French Revolution.
Brewster, Benjamin Harris. Paper furnished by the Attorney-General, in 1883, upon the subject of intervention and also upon the subject of the Monroe Doctrine. Washington, Government Printing Office, 1884. 8 p., 8º [New York Public Library] This is not important.
Bringolf, Hans. Völkerrechtliche vertrage als quelle von interventionen bei internationalen verwickelungen. [Inaugural dissertation, Griefswald University.] Griefswald, J. Abel, 1899, 1+47 p., 8º l-G-419 JX4481.B7
British State Papers. 1-4026 JX103.A3 The principal collection of British source material: treaties and diplomatic correspondence with all other states.
Brocher de la Fléchere. Solidarité et souveraineté. in Revue de droit international et de législation comparée, 1894, vol. 26, p. 415f. JX.3.K4.vol.26 Not important. It is a discussion of an anonymous book on " L 'intervention et la péninsule balkanique." The latter is based upon the nationalistic ideas of Carnazza-Amari. The article criticizes them and considers intervention in Turkey necessary because Turkey failed to live up to her obligations and endangered the peace of Europe. Quotes Guizot: "No state has the right to intervene except when its own safety makes it unavoidable."
Callahan, James Morton, 1864 Cuba and International Relations. 1899. 99-3745, Revised. F1783.C215 See below under Cuba, 1868-1878.
Calvo, Charles, 1824-1906. Le droit international. 2 ed. (1st French edition), 1870; 4th ed., 5 vols., 1887-88; a supplementary volume, 1896. 10-15585 JX2984.D5 1896 Intervention is discussed in vol. I, livre III, §§ 107 ff., p. 264. Calvo discusses intervention and especially the interventions against Argentina and Mexico. Superficial and prejudiced and not always reliable, as Calvo is, he has nevertheless exercised a considerable influence. This may be in part due to the easily read French which he has chosen as his medium and the fact of his being a South American diplomatist. He was, I believe, the first to publish in French a complete treatise upon International Law supported by a comprehensive discussion of the incidents. The interest of the work is enhanced by means of carefully chosen and well connected extracts. Unfortunately, Calvo does not give specific references, but supplies bibliographies in a footnote at the end of each section. These references show the industry and wide reading of the author, and facilitate the researches of others. I have found one or two valuable references. The student of the principles of Intervention need expect little assistance from Calvo.
Carnazza Amari, Giuseppe, 1837- Nouvel expose du principe de non-intervention, in Revue du droit international et de législation comparée, 1873, Vol. V, p. 352-389, 531-565. (Book printed with same title in Italian, 1873.) JX.3.R4,V.5 Good statement of the views of the Italian nationalistic school. Denies legality of intervention for balance of power, and for humanity, but approves when it is to help national independence [self-determination], or when undertaken against intervention itself [counter-intervention].
Carnazza Amari, Giuseppe, 1837 Nuova esposizione del principio del non intervento. Discorso inaugurate pronunziato dal professore G. Carnazza Amari per 1'apertura degli studi della Regia universita di Catania; anno 1872-1873. Catania, Stabilimento tipografico Caronda, 1873, 124 p., 22y 2 cm. 11-12683 JX4481.C3 See French edition (preceding item) for criticism and notes.
Carnazza Amari, Giuseppe, 1837 Traité de droit Internationale public. [Translation from Italian.] Paris, 1880. 11-34126 JX2858.T4 Vol. I, ch. VI, "Du principe de non-intervention," p. 495-605, expresses the ideas previously published in his "Nuova esposizione del principio del non intervento."
Cass, Lewis. Non-intervention. Reprint of speech in the Senate, Feb. 10, 1852. 16 p., 8º [Boston Public Library] "Apropos of the situation in Hungary. Justifies intervention and discusses the consequences and principles of a diplomatic protest against the action of another state.
*Cavagliere, Arrigo. L'intervento, nella sua definizione giuridica; saggio di diritto internazionale. Bologna, L. Beltrami, 1913. 164 p., 24y 2 cm. 14-17732 JX4481.C4 After Cavagliere has discussed the various theories in regard to the juridical basis of intervention he expresses his opinion against the legality of intervention when undertaken by a single state (p. 46-60).' When, however, the particular interests of the individual state are of vital importance, Cavagliere thinks the right to defend them on the ground of necessity rests upon a juridical basis and permits, by way of exception, the disregard of the subjective rights of the other state (p. 47-8). For the protection of lesser interests this authority considers that retorsions may be employed (p. 49). But he recognized the right of the collectivity of states to intervene for the protection of the interests of all the states. The remainder of the study (p. 60-164) is a discussion of collective intervention.
Cimbali, Eduardo, 1862 II non-intervento; studio di diritto internazionale universale. Rome, 1889. 275 p., 8º [Harvard Law Library Columbia Law Library] Follows extreme views of Italian nationalistic school. Defends right to intervene to free an oppressed nation (p. 89). This he thinks is not intervention, because he defines intervention as just such an oppression of a people of another race. After discussing intervention, non-intervention, and the two together, Cimbali takes up the alleged exceptions which justify intervention (p. 125-255) and concludes that there is not one case in which intervention is justified and that it ought always to be condemned (p. 261). He states this view as follows: "II non-intervento, dunque, che constituise la pid perfetta e scrupolosa quarentegia della indipendenza nazionale dei populi e un diritto assoluto inviolabile" (p. 262).
** Clark, Joshua Reuben, Jr. Right to protect citizens in foreign countries by landing forces. Memorandum by the Solicitor for Department of State. [Washington, Govt. Printing Office, 1912?] 70 p., 23 ½ cm. 13-35233 JX4175.U6 The appendix contains a chronological list of occasions on which the Government of the United States has taken action by force for the protection of American interests, including certain instances in which similar action has been taken by other governments in behalf of their nationals. Discussion of grounds of intervention. The Solicitor finds that the views of the authorities and the practice of states justify, as in accord with the principles of international law, the use of force in foreign territory when necessary to the protection of the lives and property of citizens. Since, he argues, international law is ipso facto a part of our law, this authorizes the executive to use force for this purpose. The study is also one of the most complete relative to the views of the authorities as to grounds of intervention in international law. It is one of the most important studies of intervention.
*Cobbett, Pitt. Cases and Opinions on International Law. London, 1909, vol. I, Peace; 1913, vol. II, War and Neutrality. 2 vols., 22y 2 cm. 10-20525 Revised JX68.C72 Contains illuminating notes to the accounts of the incidents which make this work equally valuable as a commentary or as a collection of cases. The analysis of every question upon which this keen writer touches is worthy of attention.
**Condorcet, Marie Jean Antoine Nicholas Caritat, Marquis de Drafted the Statement of Motives adopted by the French Assembly, September 22, 1792. Annual Register, 1792, vol. 34, State Papers, p. 263-272. 17979-3 D2.A7 In this Statement of Motives, the Assembly justifies its treatment of Louis XVI, and blames Austria and Prussia for violations of international law in allowing the emigrants to make hostile preparations within their territory (p. 264). They also blamed Austria for violating the treaty of alliance, and signing a contradictory treaty with Prussia in an attempt to separate the king from the French people and to war upon the latter. "Never," the statement declares, did hostilities more really justify war, and to declare it was to repel it" (p. 265). Lingelbach (Intervention in Europe, p. 11) says: "This document formulates the principle of non-intervention [non-interference] on political grounds, and stands in strong contrast to the practice of Europe during this period."
Conrotte, Manuel. La intervención de Espaňa en la independencia de los Estados Unidos de la América del Norte. Madrid, v. Sudrez, 1920. 2986 p., 23 ½ cm. 20-22891 E249.C73 I have not examined this book.
Constant de Rebecque, Henri Benjamin, 1767-1830. [Benjamin Constant.] L 'esprit de conquête. Paris, 1813. Re-edited with a preface by Albert Thomas, Paris, Libraire Grasset, 61 rue des Saint-Pères, 1918, 62 p., 17 ½ cm. 20-1196 JC381.C72
Cox, Isaac Joslin. American Intervention in Florida, in American Historical Review, January, 1912, p. 290-311. This article is historical and does not enter into consideration of legal principles.
Cox, Isaac Joslin. The Mexican Problem: Self-Help or Intervention. in Political Science Quarterly, June, 1921, vol. 36, p. 226- Does not discuss principles of intervention.
Crawford, Price W. H. The intervention of Bulgaria and the Central Macedonian Question. London, 1915. [in Naval War College Library] Does not discuss or concern the principles of intervention. 5-26345 JX2514.F5
****Creasy, Sir Edward Shepard, 1812-1878. First Platform of International Law. London, 1876, XV+710 p., 23 cm. Chapter IX (p. 278-359), deals mainly with interposition, intervention, and interference. Creasy, in his discussion of these questions, is broad of view, and shows a thorough study of the authorities, but he is not so sure nor so profound as Westlake. Nevertheless, his study is illuminating and one of the best in English.
Cuba, 1851-1854. The diplomatic correspondence between the United States and Great Britain and France is of great importance from a juridical point of view. It relates to conquest, counter-intervention, international police, international cooperation, self-help, collective intervention, and the Monroe Doctrine. See also Soulé Pierre. Many important documents will be found in Moore's Digest, Vol. VI, § 906, p. 56-60.
Cuban Insurrection, 1868-1878. The Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States is important as relating to humanitarian intervention. See Moore 's Digest, Vol. VI, § 907, p. 61-105. Callahan, James M.: Cuba and International relations, 1899 [is mainly devoted to the diplomatic history of the insurrection of 1868-78. Chap. XIII is entitled: "Ten years war steps toward intervention," p. 412-52, but does not discuss the principles and the right of humanitarian intervention. The same is true of Chap. XIV relative to intervention in 1898.] 99-3745 Revised F1783.C215
Latané, John H.: Intervention of the United States in Cuba in North American Review, March, 1898, p. 350-61 [This article relates entirely to the insurrection of 1868-78, gives an account of Secretary Fish's threat of intervention on the ground of humanity and protracted struggle and relates how he attempted to secure cooperation of Great Britain without success. This negotiation was kept secret 20 years till published as a Congressional document.] See also Curtis, George Tichnor: The case of the Virginius considered with reference to the law of defense, 1874. [This was an incident of the insurrection.] 11-25163 F1785.C99
The Library of Congress lists, Butler, B. F. : Speech in the House of Representatives, June 15, 1870. 9-28807 F1785.B98
Cuban Insurrection, 1895-1898. One of the most important instances of humanitarian intervention. The intervention of the United States has been unjustly criticized by many writers or inaccurately justified upon the ground of removal of a nuisance. See discussion in text under § 8.
For diplomatic correspondence, see Moore 's Digest, Vol. VI, § 908, 909, p. 105-236. See also under Benton; Falck, H. E.; Fedozzi; Hershey; Hengstler; Institute de Droit International; Phelps; Le Fur; Phelps; Quesada; Woolsey, T. S.
Barrows, Samuel June: Intervention for Peace, Freedom, and Humanity, Speech in House of Representatives, April 28, 1898, 13 p. 8º 1-4892.
Becarra, Ricardo: Cuestion palpitante; un poco de historia a propósito de la independencia de Cuba y Puerto Rico, y la doctrina Monroe y la intervención norte-americana en Cuba .... Caracas, 1898. 9-21914 F1786.B38
Butler, Charles Henry: Intervention the proper course. 12-5427 E721.B98
Denby, Charles: The doctrine of intervention (in The Forum, Vol. XXVI, p. 385-92) [merely advocates protection of American interests and prophesies annexation of Cuba of no scientific value].
Desjardins, Arthur: L 'insurrection Cubane et le droit des gens in Revue de Paris July 15, 1896, Vol. 4, p. 347-383 condemns the action of the United States as a violator of international law and thinks the purpose is to secure the annexation of Cuba.
Guiteras, John: The United States and Cuba; a review of documents relating to the intervention of the United States in the affairs of Spanish-American colonies, Philadelphia, 1895, 18 p. 6-27946 F1786.G97
Robinson, Albert Gardner: Cuba and the intervention, New York, 1905, 359 p. 5-7752 F1786.E66
Washburn, William Drew, Jr.: Cuba and Spain. Our plain duty. Minneapolis, 1898, 8 p. [in Boston Public Library]
*Curtis, George Ticknor, 1812-1894. The case of the Virginius considered with reference to the law of self-defense. New York, 1874, 40 p., 23 ½ cm. 11-25163 F1785.C99 Important because this was one of the first works to recognize the principles of self-help involved in the Virginius controversy.
*Curtis, Roy Emerson The Law of Hostile Expeditions, in American Journal of International Law, 1912,vol. 8, p. 1-37, 224-255. A scholarly examination of this phase of what we have called self-help, with references to the precedents in American diplomatic history.
[Davenant, Charles.] 1656-1714. Essays upon: I. The balance of power. II. The right of making war, peace, and alliances. III Universal monarchy. To which is added an appendix containing the records referred to in the second essay. London, 1701. 7-10865 H33.D25 [vol. 4]
Decimus [pseudonym], Intervention and its fruits; a letter addressed to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. London, Sounders and Otley, 1841. 32 p. [New York Public Library] Decimus 's interestingly written attack upon Palmerston's policy regarding Turkey advises the government to hold aloof and let Russia occupy Dardenelles and France, Egypt. Defends policy of complete non-intervention.
***Dickinson, Edwin De Witt, 1887 The Equality of States in International Law. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1920. xiii-\-424 p., 23 cm. 21-99 JX4003.D5
Dickinson, Goldsworthy Lowes. Causes of International War. London, The Swarthmore Press, Ltd.; New York, Harcourt, Brace and Howe, 1920. 110 p., 18 ½ cm. 20-22614 JX1952.D53 I have not consulted this book.
Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States. See Foreign Relations.
Doane, George Washington, bp. 1799-1859. Influence, without Intervention; the Duty of our Nation to the World: the oration, at Burlington College, on the seventy-sixth anniversary of American independence, and sixth, of the founding of the college, July 5, MDCCCLII: Burlington, N. J., J. Rodgers, 1852. 19-3099 E286.B9G
Defends the policy of non-intervention against the popular sentiment of that period.
Ducrocq, Louis. Représailles en temps de paix; blocus pacifique, suivi d'une étude sur les affaires de Chine (1900-1901) [These, University de Paris]. Paris, Pedone, 1901, 237 p., 25 cm. 6-40438 JX4471.D8 This work although it discusses the means for carrying out intervention, is also important for study of the grounds of intervention.
Dunn, Arthur Wallace. Uncle Sam on Police Duty, in American Review of Reviews, April, 1911, vol. 43, p. 462-5. AP2.R4V.43 A popular and interesting article showing the role of the United States in policing the Americas.
++Dupuis, Charles, 1863 Le principe d'equilibre et la concert Européen de la paix de Westphalie a 1'acte d'Algesiras. Paris, Perrin et cie, 1909, 525 p., 23 cm. 9-27064 D217.D8 A remarkable study of the Balance of Power, which should not be overlooked. The author is known as a scholar whose erudition is balanced by his sense of the necessities of practical politics.
Elmore, Alberto A. Ensayo sobre la doctrina de la intervención internacional. Lima, Impr. de "El Comercio," 1896.52 p., 20 ½ cm. 16-11357 JX4481.E4
Engelhardt, E. Le droit d'intervention et la Turquie. in Revue de droit international et de legislation comparée, 1880, vol. 12, p. 363-388. Reprinted Paris, 1880, 64 p., 8. 10-31105 JX3.E.56 Vol. 12 [Reprint in Harvard Law Library] Engelhardt recognizes the right to intervene to abolish the slave trade (p. 10). Restrictions upon sovereignty (p. 11). Studies the nature of the various interventions in Turkey, especially since 1856 (p. 13f), and concludes (p. 61) that Turkey is under the guardianship of the principal European powers. "C 'est à dire qu'elle est en tutelle [Depêche du due Decazes du 10 Janvier, 1876] et que la surveillance journalière dont elle est l'objêt dans ses affaires interieures a réduit à peu près à néant son autorité souveraine. " [Dèpechês de Lord Derby du 14 Juillet et du 27 Septembre.]
*Esmein, Adhemar, 1848 La theorie de l'intervention international chez quelques publicistes francais du XVIe siècle. in Nouvelle revue historique, de droit francais et etranger, vol. 24, p. 549-574. [New York Public Library, Harvard Law Library]
Falck, Horace Edgar, 1879 Diplomatic Relations Precedingthe War of 1898. in Johns Hopkins University Studies in History and Political Science, Series XXIV,Nos. 1-2, 1906. 95 p. 6-10943 H31.56 Vol. 24 This is really a study of American intervention in Cuba. It first sets forth views of authorities some of the most weighty being omitted then analyzes the various grounds upon which intervention in Cuba was justified: destruction of the Maine; injury to commerce; self-preservation; protection of property and lives of American citizens in Cuba; humanity; and reaches the conclusion that the circumstances did not justify intervention on any of these grounds.
**Falcke, Horst P. Le blocus pacifique authorized translation of German by Ant. Contat, Leipszig, 1919, Rossbergsche Verlagsbuch handlung [1st German edition, 1891.] A19-1536 [Not in Library of Congress. In Carnegie Endowment Library] Is a work of first importance, as the author gives carefully prepared accounts of many important incidents.
++Fedozzi, Prospero, 1872 Saggio sul intervento. Separately bound extract from, Archivio giuridico, 1899, Vol. 62, New Series, Vol. 3, p. 3-46; 247-280. [In Library of Congress, Law Periodicals] Divides his study into two parts: (I) the psychological and philosophical bases of intervention; and (II) the Juridical foundations for intervention. He considers that nations fight for ideas, and that by intervention they extend the beliefs they cherish. As examples, he discusses the propaganda of the Revolution. The Cuban intervention, he considers was for the United States a matter of civilization and not economics. In Part II, he analyzes the classes of instances of intervention and the judicial nature of each category. He gives an interesting explanation of the errors into which the nationalist school of Italy has fallen, particularly Carnazza Amari. The study shows much research, acumen, and fairness, and is clearly expressed, but the author appears to ignore some of the most important works, especially those in English and German.
Fiévée, J. De 1'Espagne, et des consequences de 1 'intervention armée. 3 ed., Paris, 1823, 8º [Peace Palace Library] I was unable to consult this work.
*Flöckher, Adolph von, 1867 Les consequences de 1 'intervention, in Revue générale de droit Internationale public, 1896, vol. 3, p. 329-333. 10-31105 JX3.K56, Vol. 3 Explains (p. 329-331) that force is the means of carrying out an intervention and distinguishes between the justice of an intervention and the means to carry it out. Refutes the doctrine of Heilborn that there is no need of a just cause of war, and therefore no need of a just cause for intervention. Discusses (p. 332-333) the just limits of the terms of peace. He thinks a state has a right to make war to defend legitimate interests and goes so far as to permit it to make war to secure new advantages indispensable for the development of the State, and thinks "such action is in the nature of a veritable necessity" (p. 333). Notwithstanding the injustice of an abuse of force, the author recognizes that new rights arise from the treaty of peace.
++Flöckher, Adolph von, 1867 De l'intervention en droit international. Paris, A. Pedone, 1896. 70 p., 25 cm. 9-8132 JX4481.F6 This is a valuable discussion of intervention in which the author brings out certain characteristics of the use of force in international relations, but is not able entirely to free himself from the existing confusion in regard to the use of terms. He defines intervention objectively as a mixing by one government in the affairs of another for the purpose of imposing its will. Yet further on, Flöckher restricts intervention in cases where force is used for the protection of interests. (Cf. Berner, p. 341.) The book is especially valuable because the author has carefully examined the German authorities, Geffcken, Heilborn, Strauch, and others.
Foelix. Intervention d'un état dans les affaires interieures d'un autre. [A review of Wheaton's Elements of International Law.] in Revue de droit francais et etranger, 1837, vol. 4, p. 161-179. [In Harvard Law Library] Foelix praises Wheaton for including a study of questions previously passed over in silence, and especially the intervention of a state in the internal affairs of another state. This review is not important from a scientific point of view.
Foreign Relations of the United States. 10-3793 JX233.A3 This official publication of the Government continuing the Diplomatic Correspondence 1861-1913 contains selected portions of the correspondence with foreign governments. It is a most valuable source of information, especially in the earlier years when more important material was made public. There is an index volume up to 1899. The Index, prepared by Miss Adelaide Hasse, of a portion of the material prior to the Diplomatic Correspondence (1861) is valuable.
Frankfurter, Felix, [Professor of Law, Harvard University]. Haiti and Intervention, in The New Republic, December 15, 1920, p. 71-2. A well written, brief comment on the intervention of the United States in Haiti, 1915-20. Professor Frankfurter admits the impossibility of absolute non-intervention and advocates making intervention of the United States in other American States subject to the control of a pan-american council.
***Fugitive Slaves. Report of the Royal Commission on the Surrender of Fugitive Slaves. Parliamentary Papers, 1876, vol. 28, [c-1516-I]. Most valuable for the study of the basic principles of humanitarian intervention.
**Geffcken, Friedrich Heinrich, 1830-1896. Das Recht der Intervention. Hamburg, 1887. 50 p., 24 cm. Reprint of his article in Holtzendorff 's Handbuch, Vol. 4, p. 131-168. 9-3625 JX4481.G4
Gericke, Josef Lodewijk Hendrik Alfred. De jure interventionis ante rerum conversionem in Gallia usurpato. [Inaugural dissertation, Leyden.] Lugduni Batavorum, C. C. vander Hoek, 1834. iv.+149 p., 22 cm. 10-17441† JX4478.G5
Gover, John M. Notes of Intervention [Interposition], in Law Magazine and Review, 1894-1895, vol. 20. [in Library of Congress, Law Periodicals] Not important.
Greece, 1827 The intervention of the powers in support of the Greek insurgents was mainly upon the ground of humanity. Of the numerous works we only refer to the following. Almost every writer on international law or European history discusses this incident. Phillips, Walter Alison: The War of Greek independence. New York 1897. 4-17CG913 BF.805.P58490
++++Grotius, Hugo, 1583-1645. De jure belli et pacis . . . accompanied by an abridged translation, by William Whewell. London, J. W. Parker, 1853. 3 vols., 22 cm. 8-36441 JX2093.E5 1853 The original edition published in 1625 will be found in the Harvard Law Library.
*Guizot, Francois Pierre Guillaume, 1787-1874. Memoires pour servir a Phistoire de mon temps. Paris, Michel Levy Freres. 1858-67. 8 vols., 21½ cm. 9-20829 DC255.G8A2 Since Guizot directed the foreign policy of France for a considerable period and was responsible for some of the most inexcusable instances of interference his excuses and reflections are of particular interest, quite apart from Guizot's real merit as a writer.
+++Grünther, Karl Gottlob Europäisches Völkerrecht. Altenburg, Richterschen Buckhandhung, Vol. I, 1787, Vol. II, 1792. JX23H.E8 This is one of the most scientific and most practical of the text books upon international law, and a proof is the careful consideration of intervention. Günther like Grotius recognizes the obligation to intervene in support of the law (I: 296) and in general emphasizes the superior right of the society of states over the rights of the separate nations (Vol. I, p. 296, 282; Vol. II, p. 289, note (e)). Upon this basis he recognizes the right of transit (Vol. II, p. 224-6) and also the right of action to preserve the balance of power (Vol. I, p. 322, 333, 358, 359, 360, 365). Particularly brilliant is his answer to the objections raised against the balance of power (Vol. I, p. 370-2). To the balance of power he devotes many pages (Vol. I, p. 321-389). In several places he seems to support action upon humanitarian grounds (Vol. II, p. 333, 334, 335, note (g), 286), but he does not justify the use of force for this purpose. Günther repeatedly and emphatically asserts the right of every independent state to settle its governmental and other internal affairs without interference (Vol. I, p. 280, 284-7, 293-4; Vol. II, p. 368-9, 373-9, 395, 400-4, 407-13, 417-18, 436). But he declares: "a due regard for the ties of international fellowship requires that in as far as possible all direct damage to other nations should be avoided and all that constitutes a continuing danger or cause for apprehension removed." (Vol. I, p. 289.) He recognizes the now discarded right to insist upon treaty rights of succession (Vol. II, p. 393) and in general fails fully to perceive the limits of the rights which treaties of guaranty can give (Vol. II, p. 379-8; cf. Vol. I, p. 287-8; Vol. II, p. 381, note (b;). But he sees that interference in a civil strife is only permissible when both sides request it (Vol. I, p. 288, but cf., p. 287). Günther appears to recognize the executive and directing control of the great states acting for the maintenance of peace and the protection of their common interests (Vol. I, p. 295-6). We should also note his painstaking efforts to establish some limit upon treacherous and abusive military preparations by recognizing a right to demand explanations (Vol. I, p. 289-313). Günther is rich in bibliographical notes and references to the incidents of practice upon which as a follower of the positive school he builds his system. On the whole it is one of the best studies and deserves to be consulted by all investigators.
***Hall, William Edward, 1836-1894. International Law. London, 1880. 4 ed. [containing last corrections of the author], London, 1895. 3-23670 JX2524.T7 1895 § 83-95 relate to intervention. The value of Hall's work is too well known to require comment. His is one of the best discussions of the subject in a general text-book, but is not free from inconsistencies, perhaps in part due to national bias and the effort to justify British policy on a basis of juridical principles. He pushes to an extreme the doctrine of necessity, and minimizes the right of humanitarian intervention. I have used the 4 ed. Later editions, even that of A. Pearce Higgins (7 ed., London, 1917), do not amplify the discussion of intervention. Happily Higgins has reverted to Hall's arrangement by sections, which Attlay had abandoned.
***Halleck, Henry Wager, 1815-1872. International Law. New York, 1861. 3-32038 JX2475.16.1861 Intervention is discussed, pp. 81-97, 289-334. Valuable because of the practical and original treatment and full references to authorities. The views expressed sixty years ago are more in accord with present opinion than those of many later writers.
***Harcourt, Sir William George Granville Venables Vernon, 1827-1904. [Published under pseudonym "Historicus".] Letters on some questions of international law. Reprinted from the Times with considerable additions. London and Cambridge, Macmillan & Co., 1863. xiii+212 p., 22 cm. 10-19738 JX4521.H3 Under a pseudonym, Sir Vernon Harcourt, in his well-known letters of "Historicus," reprinted from letters that appeared in the London Times, discusses various problems of neutrality raised by the Civil War. Amongst those considered are premature recognition and the obligation of non-intervention [non-interference]. In a preface the author refers to his discussion of the international doctrine of recognition as "the only parts of this publication which attempts anything like original investigation" and the result is a real contribution upon which succeeding writers have largely relied. Sir Vernon Harcourt says of the letter on intervention that it is of "rather a political than a juridical cast." We might add that he has confined his discussion to the political instances of interference rather than to juridical intervention. If we bear in mind that his generalizations apply mainly to instances of political interference in the internal affairs of other states, his valuable discussion of this phase of the subject will prove of great assistance. He does not take up interposition for the protection of, the rights of nationals under international law nor collective intervention to vindicate the law. If other authors who have discussed the whole range of intervention had been equally searching in their analysis, we should not find the subject in its present chaotic condition, but unfortunately, many of the authorities have applied Sir Vernon Harcourt 's generalizations intended to apply only to interference in international affairs to all phases of intervention without sufficient discrimination. The three letters on recognition, pp. 1-37,- and the letter on "The perils of intervention," pp. 39-51, is as has been said the portion of interest for the study of intervention.
[Harris, Norman Dwight, 1870 ] Intervention and Colonization in Africa. Boston, 1914. 15-1468 DT31.H3 Does not discuss or bear upon the principles of intervention.
Hautefeuille, Laurent Basile, 1805-1875. Le principe de non-intervention et ses applications. Paris, 1863, 67 p., 8º What appears to be the same article was printed in the Revue Contemporaine, July 31, 1863, 2nd series, vol. 34, p. 211. [in New York Bar Association Library, Boston Public, and Boston Athenaeum] In the form of a scientific study of the principles of non-intervention, this is really a clever apology for Louis Napoleon's failure to intervene effectively in Poland. Hautefeuille attempts to justify as a proper instance of permissible diplomatic intervention the offers of mediation so called between the North and the South then in Civil War. (Cf. the biting satire with which "Historicus" ridicules Napoleon's suggestions.) This pamphlet must be considered either insincere or prejudiced to an unusual degree, but for the well-informed reader it contains much which is entertaining and something also of value. For instance, the criticism of the essential interests as a justification for interference (p. 48) and (p. 53) his characterization of the treaty of February 8, 1863, as an actual intervention [interference] in the Polish question; p. 54 he makes some wise reflections about the importance of secret counsels or representations.
***Heffter, August Wilhelm, 1796-1880. [Professor of Law, Berlin University.] Das Europäischer Volkerrecht der Gegenwart aus den bisherigen Grundlagen. 1st edition, 1844, translated into French by Bergson, Paris, 1857. After the author's death, Geffcken prepared 3 more editions. The edition, Berlin, 1881, adds nothing to the text of the 4th edition, 1861, relative to intervention ( 44-46) except a note p. 109. 20-3758 [2 edition] JX2787.E3.1843 This is one of the best text-books to consult upon the subject (See §§ 44f). The list of references in the notes shows careful study. Geffcken 's note (7 ed., p. 109) criticizes Heffter's statement of the right to intervene to end or to forestall civil wars.
***Heiberg, Dr. Das Princip der Nichtintervention in seiner Beziehung auf die aussere and inner organization des Staats. Leipzig, Otto Wigand, 1842. [Columbia Law Library] Heiberg sees in the revolution of 1830 the triumph of the principle of non-intervention [non- interference] giving expression to the rights of peoples as opposed to the former principle of intervention [interference] (pp. 3-11). He goes on to discuss the principle of non-intervention [non-interference], which he finds alone can allow each people the freedom necessary to conform to the law of nature. He asserts that man is capable of this adjustment, since man has life and movement as part of an ever developing nature, or the ever creating spirit (p. 12). In reference to intervention for humanity, Heiberg says: The foundation of all civilized states is the higher union which is attained through the maintenance of general peace and through the development of the social conditions [Kulturzustandt] of the peoples. "When these actual cosmopolitan interests, which rest upon assured rights and reciprocally recognized principles, are endangered and ignored intervention often becomes unavoidable." (pp. 14-15.) But Heiberg quotes with approval the elder Rotteck against interference in revolutionary troubles of a neighboring state, and criticizes Dr. Trummer's reply in which the latter argued that a state could not remain indifferent to the errors prevailing on the other side of its frontiers against the propagation of these doctrines, (p. 15). Heiberg remarks: "A state which can be ruined in this wise, must either be tottering, and out of touch with higher civilization (Kultur), or the ideas and danger-laden system which has gained recognition in the state from which the danger threatens must have truth in them (p. 16). The remainder of the study from page 27 on is devoted to a consideration of the rights of the German princes, as opposed to the rights of sovereignty of Germany.
*Heller, Karl Die Frage der Zulassigkeit der Völkerrechtliche Intervention. Dissertation, Erlangen University, Borna, Leipzig, 1915, viii+34 p., 8. [Harvard Law Library] This is a well arranged study of the admissible grounds of intervention which are enumerated, p. 12-30. Of especial interest is his discussion of humanitarian intervention, p. 24. The works show wide reading of the German authorities. Heller's plan of treatment is more comprehensive than is generally found, and he goes at the problem in the correct way but the work is not carried sufficiently far to give it the value which we might expect on account of the ability of the author.
Hengstler, L. T. The Principle of Intervention. (Lecture delivered in an extension course, San Francisco, November, 1898.) University of California Chronicle, Berkeley, 1898, p. 521-538. [New York Public Library, in Library of Congress [LD739 Vol. I], but not analyzed] An interesting popular discussion of the justification for intervention from a common sense point of view. It is to be regretted that the author did not make a thorough study of the question.
Hermant, Joseph. La revolution hongroise de 1848, Les nationalites, leurs luttes et leuis revendications, l'intervention polonaise et 1 'intervention russe. Paris, Rousseau, 1902. xiii+428 p., 8º [New York Bar Association Library]
Hermes, oder Kritisches Jahrbuch der Literatur. Leipzig, F. A. Brockhaus, 1819-31. 35 vols., pi., 23 cm. Quarterly, 1819-24; irregular, 1825-31. Vol. XI, p. 142-156, contains an important review of Kamptz's work, signed "E. Q." See Kamptz. 7-3737 AP30.H6 Vol. XI
Hershey, Amos Shartle, 1867- Intervention and the recognition of Cuban independence. In The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Philadelphia, 1898. Vol. xi, p. 353-380. CD 16-199 H1.A4. Vol. 11 A superficial discussion.
Hershey, Amos Shartle, 1867- Incursions into Mexico and the Doctrine of Hot Pursuit. In American Journal of International Law, July, 1919, vol. 13, p. 557.
Hertslet, Sir Edward, 1824-1902. The Map of Europe by Treaty; showing the various political and territorial changes which have taken place since the general peace of 1814. With numerous maps and notes. London, Butterworths [etc.] 1875-91. 4 vols., maps (part fold), 25 cm. Vol. 4: Printed for H. M. Stationery office by Harrison and Sons. 10-15038 JX626 1875
Hervé, Frangois-Edouard, Intervention. In Block's Dictionnaire generate de la politique, Vol. II, 1874. 9-10566 JA62.B7 An ill-considered article. Hervé concludes a superficial account by condemning intervention absolutely. He seems to be thinking principally of intervention on the grounds of humanity.
Heyne, G. J. Reges a suis fugati externa ope in regnum reducti. Goettingen, 1791, folio. This work is cited by A. de Floeckher: L 'intervention, p. 34. I have not been able to consult this work.
**Hobart, Vere Henry Hobart, Lord, 1818-1875. Political Essays. London and Cambridge, Macmillan & Co., 1866. 152 p., 23 cm. [Originally published in "Macmillan's Magazine," December, 1864, vol. 2, p. 114-123.] A11-2730 H35.H68 Hobart makes an effort to find a rule of conduct regarding intervention. He first discusses when intervention would be justifiable if feasible without expense, and then considers the price which should be paid. He advocates recourse to intervention in those cases when it is justifiable, and when the cost is not out of proportion to the result to be obtained. He also advocates remonstrance ("moral intervention") even when recourse to force is not intended. He adopts Mamiani's doctrine of nationalistic intervention, and regards the struggles of nationalities on the same plane as those between independent states. The study is valuable, particularly as an early effort to establish some sound and practical rule of conduct to govern state action. Noteworthy, also, is his discussion of the right to intervene in defense of international law.
*Hodges, Henry Green, 1888 The Doctrine of Intervention. Princeton, The Banner Press, 1915. 17-18355 JX4481.H6 1915a This doctrinal dissertation from the University of Pennsylvania has the usual defect of immaturity, and was evidently not based upon a thorough study of the authorities. Nevertheless, the author has considered the problem in an intelligent manner, and is one of the few who have attempted a comprehensive classification of the grounds of intervention. The consideration of the justification for humanitarian intervention (p. 91) may be considered characteristic of the whole work. He appreciates the importance of this institution, and foresees for it a greater development in the future. He then refers to several writers of lesser merit, without mentioning Kougier, Arntz, Bernard, and the German writers who have studied the question more profoundly. The treatment cannot be considered juridical.
+Hogan, Albert Edmond. Pacific Blockade. Oxford, The Clarendon Press, 1908. 183 p., 23 cm. 9-6476 JX4494.H7 Contains valuable accounts of incidents of intervention in those cases when pacific blockade has been used. Many comments of interest.
Holland, Thomas Erskine, Sir, 1835 Studies in International Law. London, 1898. 4-14210 JX2531.S3 1898 Pacific Blockade is discussed, p. 130-150.
Humanitarian Intervention. For especial consideration of humanitarian intervention see Rougier; Snow; Arntz; Fugitive Slaves; Woolsey, T. S.; American Foreign Policy, p. 74-6 passim; and under Cuba 1868-1878; Cuba 1895-98; Greece 1827. Many other references will be found in the text § 8 to § 8(g). Consult also index.
Hungarian Revolution, 1848-1852. Russia's interference raised the question of the obligation of " counter-intervention by other states. This also led to the discussion of the difference between the right and the obligation to intervene and the question of protest without armed intervention. In the matter of the Hungarian refugees in Turkey, England intervened to prevent their enforced extradition.
Boardman, Henry A.: The new doctrine of intervention tried by the teachings of Washington, 1852. 63 p. [An interesting and powerful argument against intervention in favor of Hungary.] 10-25312 E429.B66
Doane, George Washington, bp., 1799-1859; Influence without intervention, 1852. [Not important.] 19-3099 E286.B96 1852
Goepp, Charles: "E Pluribus Unum" a political tract on Kossuth and America. 36 p. 10-25311 E429.G59
Hermant, Joseph: La Revolution Hongroise de 1848, Les Nationalités leurs luttes et leurs revendications; L 'Intervention polonaise et 1 'intervention russe, Paris (Arthur Rousseau) 1902 XIII - 428 p., 8º [New York Bar Association Library]
Reid, William Bradford: A few thoughts on Intervention by a citizen of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1852, [opposes intervention in favor of Hungary]. 11-14820 E429.K32
Sproxton, Charles, 1890-1917: Palmerston and the Hungarian revolution, Cambridge University Press 1919. XI+148 p. [A very important study which shows how Palmerston did intervene to prevent Russia and Austria from constraining Turkey to deliver over the Hungarian refugees.] 20-286 DB936.S7 U. S. Dept. of State. Affairs of Hungary 1849-1850. Government Printing Office 1918, 64 p. Senate Document No. 282, 65 Congress, 2d Session. 18-26872 DB938.A5 1918
U. S. Dept. of State. The Austro-Hungarian question, Correspondence between Mr. Hülseman and Mr. Webster. Washington, 1851. 23 p. 11-34452 E429.U58
The following speeches were made in the Senate relative to intervention in favor of Hungary:
Bell, John, April 13, 1852. On Non-intervention in the affairs of Europe. 16 p. [Condemns meddling.] 10-25151 E429.B43
Case, Lewis, January 4, 1850. On Suspending diplomatic relations with Austria. 8 p. 11-24457 E429.C34
Cass, Lewis, February 10, 1852. Non-intervention. 16 p. [Discusses the consequences of protesting against the action of another state and defends the right and utility thereof.] [Reprint in Boston Public Library]
Clemens, Jeremiah, December 10, 1851. On Mr. Seward's resolution relative to Louis Kossuth. 10-25149 E429.C62
Clemens, Jeremiah, February 12, 1852. On Non-intervention. 8 p. [Refutes arguments of Kossuth and opposes intervention against Russia. Is not important.] [Reprint in Boston Public Library]
Clarke, John H., February 9, 1852. On the subject of intervention. [Reprint in Boston Public Library]
Cooper, James, April 28, 1852. On Non-intervention. 23 p. [Reprint in Boston Public Library]
Hunter, Robert M. T., January 31, 1850. On suspending diplomatic relations with Austria. 7 p. 10-25150 E429.H94
Jones, James C., March 18, 1852. On Non-intervention. 16 p. 20-18467 E429.J77
Miller, Jacob W., February 26, 1852. In defense of American policy of Non-intervention. 7 p. [Reprint in Boston Public Library]
Reward, William H., March 9, 1852. On the proposed protest of the United States against the armed intervention of Russia in the Hungarian revolution. 16 p. [Reprint in Boston Public Library]
Stockton, Kobert F., February 2, 1852. On Non-intervention, 8 p., 8. 19-20271 E.429.S86
Smith, William B., in the House of Representatives December 15, 1851 [spoke in opposition to Kossuth and intervention in favor of Hungary], 16 p. 11-24458 E429.S66
*Hyde, Charles Cheney, 1873 - [Professor of Law, Northwestern University]. Intervention in Theory and in Practice. Illinois Law Review, May, 1911, vol. 6, p. 1-16. Also printed in Law Students' Helper, 1911, vol. 19. An objective study of the policy of the United States in regard to intervention, with careful consideration of the instances. Professor Hyde discusses the practice of the United States, and gives full references to sources. He concludes his discussion with a statement of the cases when the United States may be expected to intervene. This is one of the best short considerations. No attempt is made to discuss the fundamental principles, but Mr. Hyde traces in broad lines the theory as it has influenced the practice of the United States Government.
Institut de droit international. Report presented by M. Desjardins on intervention and recognition in the case of insurrection. In Annuaire, 1898, vol. 17, p. 71-95. 10-16478 JX24.I4. Vol. 17 This report bears upon the Cuban question which was a question of general interest at that time. Intervention for Humanity: See Humanitarian Intervention.
Kamarowski, Count The Principle of Non-Intervention [in Russian] Moscow, 1874. F. de Martens includes this in his bibliography, cited also by Donnadieu. I was unable to find it in this country.
**[Kamptz, Karl C. A. H. von], 1769-1849, [published anonymously]. Völkerrechtliche Erörterung des Rechts des Europäischen Mächte in die Verfassung eines einzelnen Staats sich zu mischen. Berlin Nicholaischen Bitchhandlung, 1821. XVI+214 p., 8º [Harvard Law Library] [Yale University Library] This work attempts to justify interference in the internal affairs of independent states on the ground that revolutionary changes even if only by their example endanger the peace and security of other states that is of the whole structure of international society. This indefensible policy which had at that time recently been adopted by the Holy Alliance under the guidance of Metternich is supported with all the skill of an expert partisan. Kamptz, the anonymous author, is sound in his premise that "the peace and security of the community of European States" is a sufficient ground for action, and again he is correct in declaring that intervention for such a purpose is for the society of states as necessary as is police action within each of the separate states (cf. Preface, p. VII, VIII), but he nowhere shows that a constitutional change or revolution does constitute such a danger. Kamptz sets down with lucidity the fundamental proposition that every independent state is free to settle its internal affairs as may seem to it best (p. 1) and he supports this principle by a great and learned array of authorities and documents. But as he briefly states: "This independence of the European States is certainly not unconditional" (p. 3, par. 2). He then points out still without the possibility of dispute that independence must be used in such a manner as not to injure the common interests of all the states. This he reminds us is no sacrifice of the rights of a state for in return it benefits from the same restriction placed upon the other states. So far so good. It is only when Kamptz proceeds to apply this rule and to make an effort to justify interference to prevent constitutional changes through revolutions that he parts company with law and indulges in what appears to be a highly prejudicial if not insincere effort to support the arbitrary policy of his government (Prussia) and the Holy Alliance. The plan of the argumentation is admirable and worthy to serve as a model. After he has laid down his proposition clearly and defended it by a brief argumentation and supported it by such a judicious, we might better say prejudiced, but none the less impressive, selection of authorities, he devotes the remainder of the book (p. 85-214) to a discussion of the instances which have occurred in history to show that the states in their practice have interfered upon the grounds which it is the avowed intention of this work to justify. The anonymous review in Hermes (Vol. XI, p. 142-156) severely criticizes the author of this work and his insincerity and prejudice in his selection of references to the authorities. H. von Rotteck (Recht der Einmisehung, 1845, p. 9-10) criticizes Kamptz severely as a creature of Prussian bureaucracy preparing an excuse for the anticipated action of the Congress of Verona, and concludes, "Let us leave Herr von Kamptz who hardly needs refutation." Notwithstanding the defects we have noted, the work is of value if used cautiously by one familiar with the principles and the authorities. Professor Kebedgy modestly lays claim (p. 28) to undertake merely an elementary essay upon intervention. Nevertheless, he has given us a valuable study, albeit not a complete one, since we find for instance no consideration of counter-intervention. His analysis is accurate and fine. The definition which he gives, page 29, follows Bluntchli, to whom he refers. Pages 29 to 38 give interesting analyses of the cases of non-intervention and contain the gist of Professor Kebedgy 's views. On page 40 he lays down the general principle that intervention is illegal and then admits certain exceptions when "absolutely necessary," and (page 42) he considers that states have a right to intervene for their self-preservation. Justifying intervention by virtue of a treaty he does not explain that treaties do not create the right (p. 70f). He goes carefully into humanitarian intervention (p. 78f) but would limit it to collective action or to mandatory action by which the discretionary action of the intervening state is eliminated (p. 82). He next takes up to deny the right of intervention in civil war in response to an appeal from the state and upon religious grounds. The remainder (p. 104-217) is devoted to a study of the instances in which the powers have intervened in Turkey.
**Kébedgy, Michel S. De l'intervention, théorie générale et étude spéciale de la question d'Orient. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Paris.] Paris, A. Giard, 1890. 224 p., 25 cm. 9-8119 JX4481.K5
**Kluber, Johann Ludwig, 1762-1837. Droit des gens moderne de 1 'Europe, avec un supplement contenant une bibliotheque choisie du droit des gens. Nouv. fid. rev., annotée et completée par M. A. Ott. 2 ed. Paris, Guillaumin et cie. [etc.] 1874. xxxi+573 p., 22½ cm. 9-188857 JX2804.D6
*Kraus, Herbert. Die Monroedoktrin in ihren Beziehungen zur amerikanischen Diplomatic und zum Völkerrecht. Berlin, J. Guttentag, 1913. 480 p., 24 cm. 13-25349 JX-1425.K77 Herbert Kraus's "Monroedoktrin," is a painstaking and reliable investigation, well adapted to present the matter to the German scholars and others familiar with the German language. With this object in view, a short study of the diplomatic history of the question is included and the various instances where European countries have employed force in their dealings with the American States are carefully chronicled. It is only incidentally that the author takes up the question of intervention. Nevertheless, in the section devoted to the Monroe Doctrine and intervention, pp. 369-98, Kraus shows his familiarity with the authorities and supplies valuable bibliographical notes for intervention, non-intervention, self-help, self-preservation, balance of power, etc. These notes have an additional value because of the author's familiarity with the German authorities, to whom references are given. Selected bibliographies of the works on international law and of those relative to the Monroe Doctrine are included. The work is brought down to May, 1913.
***Krug, Wilhelm Traugott, 1770-1842. Dikäopolitik, oder neue Restaurazion der Staatswissenschaft mittels des Rechtsgesetzes. Leipzig, bei T. H. F. Hartmann, 1824. X+420 p., 8º. [In my own Library] Krug enters upon a discussion of the legal justification of intervention. After carefully drawing the line between mediation and intervention, he takes up the grounds which he considers Justify intervention. But the context shows that he is only considering the ground for interference in constitutional affairs and in civil disputes. He states that interference in the latter case is only justifiable in two eases: First, when it is based upon a treaty (p. 329-330) and Second, when an intentionally hostile propaganda is carried on in a neighboring state (p. 330-332). Krug then takes up by way of illustration of the first instance the justification for Russia's pending intervention in Turkey (p. 332-8). Thereafter he comes to what is evidently the purpose of all his preliminary statement of principles, namely: the discussion of French intervention in Spain (p. 338-364). His analysis of this instance is very interesting. He states and refutes the grounds alleged to justify French interference, and defines the limit of action which was justifiable on the grounds of national interests and security. Discussing the necessity which drives a nation to make war, Krug denies that there can be a national physical necessity and considers that it has its source in a desire to extend dominions and gain in prestige (p. 66-67). He remarks that all states entering upon war declare that they do so to secure their rights (p. 370) and when they make peace they swear an eternal friendship, although this eternity is always of short duration, since they always find new occasions for war. All of this goes to show the place which the idea of society of the states, based upon law, holds, but this can only gradually be reached like every ideal (p. 371). He enters upon a remarkable discussion of the causes and motives for war and the hopes of attaining the ideal of peace. The nature of the balance of power is considered (p. 372f). Just war and the right of self-defense is taken up (p. 375f). Other questions, such as indemnity, and the right of the victor over conquered territory are also discussed. This is one of the most philosophical and comprehensive considerations which had appeared at that date.
Latané, John Holladay, 1869 The Diplomatic Relations of the United States and Spanish America. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1900. 294 p., 20½ cm. 1-2466 JX1428.S7L3
Latané, John Holladay. Intervention of the United States in Cuba, in North American Review, March 1898, vol. 166, p. 350-361. AP2.N7. vol. 166 Relates to Cuban insurrection of 1868-1878, which see.
Laveleye, Emile, baron de, 1822-1892. On the causes of wars and the means of reducing their number. In Cobden Club Essays, Second Series, 1871-1872, p. 1-55, London, 1872. 6-43714 H31.C55 Laveleye lists the causes of war. This list serves as well for the causes of recourse to other means of constraint, but his arrangement indicates that he does not go very deeply into the question.
*Lawrence, Thomas Joseph, 1849-1919. The Principles of International Law. 4th edition, Boston, 1910. xxi+745 p., 21 cm. 10-26825 JX2542.P3 1910 Suggestive, simple, clear and sound for the most part but not uniformly juridical or consistent.
Le Fur, L. Êtude sur la guerre hispano-américaine de 1898 envisagée an point de vue du droit international public. Paris, A Pedone, 1899. xlii+316 p., 24½ cm. 2-126 M2 E723.L49 Criticizes U. S. intervention in Cuba as unjustifiable. Says intervention on ground of humanity only justified when intervener is disinterested (p. 42-43).
Lévides, S. M. Le droit d' intervention des grandes puissances à propos du conflit gréco-roumain. in Revue générale de droit international public, 1906, vol. 13, p. 582-588. 10-31105 JX3.R56 Criticizes Romania and advocates collective intervention of powers. Not important.
Limburg, Stirum, J. P. van Tets. Over de Volkenrechtelijke interventie. Leyden: Klein, 1895, 93 p., 23 cm. Thesis, Leyden, 1895. [Columbia University Library, Harvard Law Library]
***Lingelbach, William Ezra, 1871- The doctrine and practice of intervention in Europe. in The Annals of the American Academy of political and social science, Philadelphia, 1900, vol. 16, No. 1, p. 1-32. CD 17-41 H1.A4 Based upon the paper read before the Rouen Conference of the International Law Association, 1900 Report, p. 106-116; an article, original, sound, and constructive; it shows that Intervention is a valuable sanction to enforce international law, and points out that, being the instrument of a political government, it is given a political tinge to correspond with the sentiments of the epoch.
Liszt, Franz von, 1851-1919. [Professor of Law, Berlin University.] Das Völkerrecht. 10 ed., Berlin, 1910; 11 ed., 1918. [An unaltered reprint is dated Berlin, 1920.] 20-20582 JX3445.V4 1920 The consideration of intervention is not very exhaustive, but is important because of the ability of this author, his high standing as a learned and scientific jurist, and also because of his influence on German thought. The Carnegie Endowment for Peace announces a French translation.
Liverpool, lord. Debate in House of Lords, February 19, 1821, relative to justification of conduct towards Naples. in Hansard's Debates, New Series, vol. IV, p. 760-771. Justification for interference Proper to remonstrate in certain cases when interference is not justifiable Denies that there was a refusal by the Government to recognize the Naples Government.
Lorimer, James, 1818-1890. The Institutes of the Law of Nations. Edinburgh and London, 1883-1884. 2 vols. 5-394 JX2548.15 1883 Important discussions of the basic principles of intervention and of the balance of power.
Lynden van Sandenburg, Frederik Alexander Carel van. Eenige beschouwingen over interventie in het internationaal recht. Utrecht, P. den Boer, 1899. [Disseration, Utrecht University.] D-297 JX4481.L9
+Mackintosh, Sir, James, 1765-1832. History of the Revolution in England in 1688. [Completed and published posthumously.] London, 1834. clxxvi, 734 p., 28 cm. 2-28671 DA435.M18 In Chapter IX discusses right of revolution, and compares to the right of making war; lays down principles (p. 297), remarks upon perils of calling in auxiliaries (p. 302-3). In Chapter X discusses interference. Creasy probably refers to Chapter X when he says: "For a complete exposition of the causes which, and which alone, justify insurrection and foreign intervention on behalf of the insurgents, see Mackintosh's 'Review of the Causes of the Revolution of 1688,' chap, ix [X]. Students of Ethics, of History, and of International Jurisprudence cannot bestow too much attention to this chapter, which is the gem of all Mackintosh's works." (Creasy: First Platform of International Law, p. 297 note.) "The first portion of this volume, consisting of the fragment by Sir James Mackintosh, was published separately under . . . title: View of the reign of James II, Lond. 1835." (Lowndes: Bibliographer's manual of Eng. lit.)
Maine, Sir Henry James Sumner, 1822-1888. International Law; a series of lectures delivered before the University of Cambridge, 1887. London, J. Murray, 1888. 4 p. I., 234 p., 23 cm. (The Whewell lectures, 1887.) 4-3855 JX2555.16 1888
*Mamiani della Rovere, Terenzio, conte, 1799-1885. Bights of Nations, or The New Law of European States applied to the Affairs of Italy. [Translated from the Italian (Turin, 1859), and edited with the author's additions and corrections, by Roger Acton.] London, 1860. 10-17147 JX2897.D3 1860 Mamiani, in his dedication of the English edition, calls it an English version of an Italian book of English principles, and the English edition is dedicated to Lord John Russell in memory of his despatch addressed to the courts of Paris and Vienna, the sixteenth of August, 1859, prohibiting the intervention of any foreign force to put down the will of the people in central Italy …….. About one-third of the book is devoted mainly to a discussion of intervention. Mamiani 's work must be considered important because it is often referred to, and has influenced others, in part no doubt, because there were not at that time so many books available to English readers dealing with the subject of intervention. Page 140f., Mamiani denies the right of intervention in a civil war, but permits such intervention when the war is waged by a subject people, as in the case of the Dutch against the Spaniards, the Swiss against Austria and Burgundy, etc. (p. 144). In chapter X, discussing the maintenance of equilibrium in the states of Europe, he criticizes intervention for that purpose, seeming to fear that the maintenance of the European equilibrium might stand in the road of the consummation of national aspirations. Chapter XI defends the principle of non-intervention. Chapter XII begins with a declaration that - "It is now time for us to examine those peculiar cases in which, more especially, it is sought at the present day to find a right of intervention, those cases, namely, in which revolutions and political changes in the interior of a state are deemed pernicious to the security and the tranquility of other states, and chiefly of those adjacent to it." He then proceeds to examine whether there are exceptions to this principle. Mamiani recognizes the right of intervention against intervention, discussing intervention on the ground of humanity (p. 182), and so hedges around the right of intervention claimed by Grotius as practically to deny it Rougier speaks of Mamiani as a founder of a theoretical school which placed the doctrine of non-intervention upon the plane of an intangible dogma and says that he had as a brilliant disciple Carnazzi Amari. (Revue générale, vol. 17, p. 297.) Bernard (Non-intervention, pp. 18-19) says of this work: "Count Mamiani is a man who has suffered and labored much for the regeneration of Italy. He has been an insurgent, a prisoner, an exile, was President of Ministers during Pius the Ninth's short attempt at Parliamentary government, remained at Rome, I believe, till the French entered it, has since been an active member of the Sardinian Parliament, and in January last became Minister of Public Instruction under Victor Emmanuel. He has this year (? 1860) published a thoughtful and eloquent, though not very closely reasoned, book, entitled "A New European Public Law," the scope and drift of which are such as we might expect from the antecedents of the writer, - that is, it shares with some of the best existing books on international law the defect of having been composed to support a foregone conclusion. Hall (4 Ed.) quotes Mamiani with approval in footnotes to his discussion of intervention. He refers to Mamiani at least four times.
+++Manning, William Oke. Commentaries on the Law of Nations. [A new edition revised with supplementary matter by Sheldon Amos.] London, 1875. [First published in 1837.] 10-17126 JX2558.C7 1875 For a discussion of intervention, see Bk. Ill, ch. I, p. 91-102; Bk. IV, ch. I, p. 131-141. The careful revision and notes of Amos give this work an additional value for the study of intervention.
Marckart, Jo. Guil. De jure atque obligatione gentium succurendi injuste oppressis. Harderov, 1748. Cited by Heffter: Volkerrecht, 4 ed., § 46, p. 95. I was unable to consult this work.
Martens, Fedor Fedorovich von, 1845-1909. Traité de droit international. Tr. du russe par Alfred Leo. [Also into German by Bergbohm, 1883-6. 2Vols.] Paris, Chevalier-Marescq et tie., 1883-87. 3 v. 22½ cm. 1-18881 JX2951.T5 Often referred to because of the prominence of the author. The discussion of intervention is biased and incomplete. It is of value as the exponent of Russian policy under the old regime.
+++Martens, Georg Friedrich von, 1756-1821. Précis du droit des gens moderne de 1 'Europe. Augmenté des notes de Pinheiro-Ferreira. Paris, Guillaumin et tie., 1864. 2 vols., 18 cm. [1st ed. was published in French in 1788.] 10-17086† JX2324.P3 1864 De Martens' Precis is generally recognized as one of the earliest and also as one of the best texts of the positive school which bases international law upon the principles as shown by the practice of states and not deduced apriori from principles dogmatically asserted. Upon this basis de Martens denies the right of interference in internal affairs (Ed. 1821, § 116, p. 215; § 117, p. 216), save in certain exceptional cases, and he does not include permission to interfere on the ground of constitutional objection to provisions and changes (Ed. 1821, § 73, p. 137; § 79, p. 138; § 78, p. 146). De Martens recognizes that even a guarantee of the previous constitution does not authorize interference (§ 78, p. 146). De Martens recognizes the right to intervene to prevent religious persecution (i.e. humanitarian intervention: on the ground of intolerance) but he recognizes that in practice political considerations govern recourse to this action (Ed. 1821, § 114, p. 211). It is especially profitable to read what de Martens says in regard to the Balance of Power and the right of growth (§§ 120-4, p. 219-231). A sense of measure and the needs of statecraft derived from practical experience and combined with extraordinary learning place de Martens in the first rank of publicists.
Martin, Charles Emanuel. The Policy of the United States as Regards Intervention. New York, 1921. In Columbia University Studies in Political Science, No. 211, 1921, vol. 93. 173 p., 22½ cm. 21-3655 JX4481.M3 Restricted to a discussion of the policy of the United States, this work does not particularly consider the principles governing intervention.
Martinet, André. La seconde intervention française et le siege d'Anvers, 1832. Brussels, 1908. 8º. [Hague Peace Palace Library] I was unable to consult this work.
*Maxey, Edwin, 1869. [Professor of Law, West Virginia University.] International Law with Illustrative Cases. St. Louis, 1906. 6-11647 JX3151.I5 1906 For a discussion of intervention, see ch. IV, p. 338-342. Professor Maxey gives a very concise and accurate summary of the views generally accepted. His book is listed for this reason. Professor Maxey denies the validity of intervention for humanity (p. 341).
Mexico, 1861-1868. This instance was in part interposition for redress and in part a political interference by France against which the counter-intervention of the United States was directed. It is of little value for the study of the principles.
Duniway, Clyde A.: Reason for the withdrawal from Mexico in American Historical Association Report, 1902, Vol. I, p. 313-28. Blavehot : Intervention franchise au Mexique, Paris, 1911, 3 vols. [New York Bar Association Library] Many other references will be found in the Library of Congress Bibliography on "Arbitrations," p. 101-114.
Mexico, 1911-1921. Relates to interposition for redress; Interference in the internal affairs of Mexico; Delayed recognition; The supervisory capacity of the United States; Self-Help and Collective Action. Only two works of importance have come under my eyes: Moore, John Bassett: Principles of American Diplomacy, New York, 1918, p. 213-38 [gives a succinct but noteworthy account of the events and of the policies of the Wilson Administration towards Mexico up to 1917]. Schoenborn, Walter: Die Besetzung von Vera Cruz. Hodges: Intervention [comments favorably upon the policy of the Wilson Administration towards Mexico]. Inman, Samuel Guy: Intervention in Mexico, foreword by Professor William R. Shepherd. New York, Association press,1919. 19-13639 F1234. 1 57 Anonymous: Nicaragua and Mexico in Nation, September 12, 1913, vol. 95, p. 326 (A P 2, N 2, V. 95) [condemn landing of American troops in Nicaragua and opposes intervention in Mexico.] Anonymous: Our duty in Mexican disorder, in Literary Digest, September 21, 1912, Vol. 45, p. 455-456 (A P 2, L 58, v. 45). [Interesting resumé and extracts from press commenting on the situation in Mexico and the pros and cons of intervention.] Bell, Enoch F.: Intervention and the Mexican Problem in The Journal of International Relations, October, 1919, pp. 138-150. [A well written article arguing against armed intervention and pointing out the peaceful methods of helping Mexican progress. ] Culberson, Charles A.: Brief in support of Senate resolution of April 20, 1911, relative to intervention in affairs 'n Mexico. Washington, 1911. 7 p., 23 cm. (U. S. 62d Cong., 1st Sess. Senate. Doc. 25). 11-35422 JX1428.M5A4 1911 Hershey, Amos S.: Mexico and International law. In Independent, April 6. 7.077, vol. 70. p. 708-711. (A P 2, I 53 v. 70) [Interesting popular discussion of the obligations and rights of the U. S. in regard to Mexico. Quotes Root with approval as denying the right to collect contract debts by force]. Turner, John Kenneth: What we should do about Mexico. In Nation, December 13, 1919, pp. 740-742. Turner, John Kenneth: Why we should leave Mexico alone. In Nation, November 29, 1919, pp. 680-682. Tarle, A. de: L 'Intervention Militaire des Etats-Unis au Mexique. In Questions diplomatiques et coloniales, May 1, 1912, Vol. 33, p. 526-538 [Discusses the military situation of the United States in the event of intervention in Mexico]. The Library of Congress in a typewritten list gives the following additional items from the Congressional Record: Slayden, James L.; Stone, William J.; Murray, William H.; Sherwood, Isaac E., and the debate of August 21, 1913, in the Senate.
++++Mill, John Stuart, 1806-1873. A Few Words on Non-intervention, in Frazer's Magazine, May, 1859, p. 766-771; also in Mill's Dissertations and Discussions, London, 1868, vol. Ill, p. 153-178. 8-4265 AC8.M48 A strong argument for veritable non-intervention in all cases.
Mill, John Stuart, 1806-1873. The Letters of John Stuart Mill; edited, with an introduction, by Hugh S. R. Elliot. London, 1910, 2 vols., 23½ cm. A 10-473 For remarks on intervention, see vol. I, p. 195; vol. II, pp. 24, 305.
Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine relates especially to counter-intervention and the right of preventive action. It is also closely connected with the ill-defined supervision of the United States over less developed states of Central and South America. Unfortunately the numerous works upon the subject do not generally appear to have discussed the principles of intervention. For this reason I did not think it profitable to attempt to make a complete examination of the material. The student is referred to the account given by Professor John Bassett Moore: Principles of American Diplomacy, p. 269, and Herbert Kraus: Die Monroedoktrin. The Library of Congress supplies a large collection of cards upon this topic.
+++Moore, John Bassett, 1860 A Digest of International Law. Washington, 1906. 8 vols. 6-35196 JX237.M7 Volumes V, VI, and VII contain documents and comments of first importance for the study of the theory and practice of international intervention. Vol. VI is devoted entirely to Intervention.
***Moore, John Bassett, 1860 The Principles of American Diplomacy. New York, 1918. xv+477 p., 8º 18-2711 JX1407.M8 1918 Brings the author's American Diplomacy, 1905, down to date. Discusses the American Policy of "Non-Intervention" p. 197-238. For references, see p. 269. Discusses Monroe Doctrine, p. 238-69. Bibliography, p. 269. Morillon, Charles, de. Du principe d'intervention en droit international public et des modifications qu'il a subies an cours de 1'histoire. Dijon, Imprimerie regionale, 1904. 182 p., 25 cm. 8-29311 JX4481.M7
++Moser, Johann Jakob, 1701-1785. Versuch des neuesten europaischen Volkerrechts in Friedens-und Kriegs-zeiten. Frankfurt, 1770-80. 10 v. in 12. 20½ cm. Vol. 9-10 each in two parts. 10-16946t JX2333.V5 1777 Moser in the sixth part of his "Versuch" (p. 96-7, 184, 312) passes in review the right of independent states to be free from interference (p. 313, 318, 398-9) and enumerates, rather dogmatically, it is true, certain of the rightful causes of action. These he supports with instances drawn from the experience of states since 1740. Among the exceptions to the general rule of non-interference, Moser recognizes as grounds of intervention or "meddling" (mengen, as he calls it) the following: When a constitution is guaranteed and when the action is based upon a treaty (p. 314-15); when an invitation is freely extended by the sovereign, but he qualifies this in cases where the state is divided into two contending factions (p. 323). Although Moser in his discussion of the relations of states, due to religious matters (p. 184-312; cf. 157-183) excludes interference upon religious grounds (p. 166-7 passim) he recognizes the right to intervene when necessary to protect individuals from persecution for their religion (p. 184) and he declares that "when one or more religions beside the state religion are permitted or tolerated in a state, the state religion may not make use of its privileges to injure the legally acquired rights of the other religions, either in spiritual or worldly matters" (p. 167). In general he recognizes the right of intercession and peaceful representation by a foreign state to prevent persecution (p. 96-7) and he reproduces by way of precedent and illustration the very forcible instructions addressed by Lord Harrington March 5, 1745, to the British Minister at Vienna to continue to make the strongest efforts to prevail upon the Queen to revoke the decree expelling the Jews from Prague. It appears that the Netherlands had likewise made representations against this act. (p. 96-7, Moses cites Mercure; 1745, Vol. I, p. 363). This is a clear and early instance of humanitarian action in favor of the Jews. In this connection we may refer to Moser's recognition of the right of each sovereign state to receive within its own territory fugitives who have left their native land because of persecutions on account of their religion or beliefs (p. 176-8). Another ground of intervention which Moser enumerates is when disorder and anarchy cause injury or constant apprehension to neighboring states (p. 320), or when there exist circumstances which justify apprehension of attack (prevention).Upon this head Moser remarks that the states of Europe would not be justified in placing too great a reliance upon their neighbors, but he thinks that the peaceful intentions of republics are guaranteed by their constitutions, their [lack of] strength and their interests, and proved by experience (p. 400). An interesting discussion of the obligation of the sovereign, in the interest of the preservation of peace, to try to give the requisite assurances to quiet the apprehension of his neighbors (p. 319-406) is supported by instances drawn from the practice of states (p. 406-420). Moser's positive method is that which has been followed by later writers and the fact that he intends to and does derive his views of intervention from existing state practice places him as an early authority of the highest rank.
Ninagawa, A. Intervention. in Japanese Journal of International Law, November 1912, vol. XI. Manuscript English translation may be consulted in the Carnegie Endowment for Peace Library, 2 Jackson Place. Ninagawa only tries to get a definition for intervention. He sees the confusion of the authorities, but does not himself reach a perfectly clear comprehension of intervention.
Nys, Ernest. Le concert européen et la notion du droit international, in Revue de droit international, 1899.
Oliva, Giuseppe, Del diritto d'intervento. Messina, 1881. 285 and appendix 45 p., 8. [New York Bar Association Library and Harvard Law Library]
Olivi, Luigi, 1847 La questione sul diritto d'intervento. Dinanzi alia scienza. in Archivio giuridico, Pisa, 1880, vol. 24, p. 560- 574. [In Library of Congress, Law Periodicals]
Oppenheim, Lassa Francis Lawrence, 1858-1919. International Law, a Treatise. 3d ed., London, 1912. 2 vols. [3 ed., vol. 1, 1920, edited by Ronald F. Roxburgh.] 12-9559 Additions JX3264.I6 1912
+++Payn F. W. Cromwell on Foreign Affairs, together with four essays on international matters, one of which is entitled: "Intervention Among States." London, C. J. Clay and Sons, 1901. 2-12277 DA45.P2 The third paper is entitled "Intervention Among States." The author contributes an original investigation of the subject. He has examined the principal authorities and perceives how impossible it is to find any guiding consensus of opinion. His own analysis and classification is suggestive and should not be overlooked. It is, however, based upon the somewhat dangerous presumption that the affairs of the states grouped in international society must in certain respects bear close analogies to individuals in a modern state. Proceeding on this basis, Payn points out that a large body of the individuals of our state do not directly manage their own affairs since they are under a legal disability. He divides them into two classes: Those who are the normal subjects of this disability, such as women and children, and the abnormal, such as imbeciles, convicts, and bankrupts. The application of this classification to various states leads, he thinks, to the conclusion that the interventions against Turkey in 1840 and against China in 1900 were in the nature of action taken to restrain dangerous lunatic states. Another series of interventions Payn considers to have been undertaken on behalf of the minor states in different stages of weakness, imbecility, and decay. The list of instances which he enumerates includes the intervention in Portugal in 1826, in Greece in 1827, in Belgium 1830-32, Quadruple Alliance in Portugal 1834, in Turkey 1840, 1854 and 1877, and he reaches the conclusion that: "All the cases in this group have one feature in common. The interventions were undertaken on behalf of minor states in different stages of weakness, imbecility and decay, and in every case it is arguable that the intervention was in the main for the benefit of the State in the affairs of which it occurred, and was salutary in its effects on that State." Mr. Payn sums up his views as follows: "In order to discuss the subject with even the possibility of arriving at any tangible and profitable result, we submit that three stages are necessary, viz.: (1) a consideration of the analogy which undoubtedly exists between the phenomena of the lives of individuals in a modern civilized State; (2) a consideration of the principal modern instances of intervention as illustrating that analogy; (3) a deduction of the principles of intervention based upon that analogy." Even if we are not ready to give to the analogy between states and individuals all the weight that the author believes it is entitled to, we must agree that he has adopted the correct course in basing his principles upon a careful consideration of the instances. He cites as authorities, Hall, Walker, Arntz, and criticizes the "Chinese Wall" theory of state life advocated by Carnazza Amari, pp. 75-78. He also commends the book of Chancellor Kent, p. 78.
Phelps, Edward John, 1822-1900, [formerly American Minister to Great Britain]. Letter on Cuban Intervention, in New York Herald, March 9, 1898. This article is important, not as a correct appreciation of fact or principle, but because of the support it lent to the prejudices of writers on the Continent who condemned the American intervention. For an indication of its contents, see under Cuba, 1895-98. Mr. Phelps was appointed Professor of Law at Yale University and was elected President of the American Bar Association.
**Phillimore, Sir Robert Joseph, bart, 1810-1885. Commentaries upon International Law. London, 1854, 4 vols., 22 cm. 3d. ed. 1879-89. 10-15576 JX2565.C4 1879 Intervention is discussed in 1st ed., vol. 1, Part III, Ch. X, XI, XVII, Part IV, ch. I, p. 433-483, 2d ed., 1871, Preface, p. VII-XV. This work is very useful as a collection of material and in part for its discussion, but Phillimore does not grasp the principles of intervention. He even confuses mediation and intervention, vol. I, p. 442-3. From his discussion of intervention on religious grounds it is hard to discover what view he takes. Of self-help he has given us an excellent discussion.
**Phillips, Walter Alison, 1864 The Confederation of Europe; a study of the European alliance, 1813-1823, as an experiment in the international organization of peace. [Six lectures delivered in the university schools, Oxford, at the invitation of the delegates of the common university fund. Trinity term, 1913.] London, Longmans, Green & Co., 1914. xv+315 p., 23½ cm. 14-8401 D363.P5 Mr. Phillips has also written a concise statement (about 500 words) of the Balance of Power in the Encyclopedia Britannica, 11 ed., vol. Ill, p. 235.
Poucel, Benjamin, 1807-1872. Les ôtages de Durazno; souvenirs du Rio de la Plata pendant l'intervention anglo-française de 1845 a 1851. Paris, A. Faivre; Marseille, Camoin, 1864. vii+351 p., 25 cm. 3-11096 F2846.P87 Not important.
Pourcher, Charles. Essai d'étude du droit d'intervention en Turquie appliqué au problème balkanique. [Dissertation, University of Paris.] Clermont Ferraud, Dumont, 1904. 208 p., 24 cm. [Columbia University Library] Pradier-Fodéré, Paul Louis, Ernest, 1827-1904. Traité de droit international public européen & américain, suivant les progrès de la science et de la pratique contemporaines. Paris, 1885-1906, 8 vols. 6-32700 JX2725.T7 1885 This author devotes a part of Vol. I, (p. 546-678) to the discussion of intervention. He shows that he has thoroughly covered the literature and that he is conversant with the important instances, but his treatment is superficial. He adds little or nothing to the understanding of the principles, at the same time ho a voids many of the errors and pitfalls.
++Pradt, Dominique Georges Frédéric de Riom de Prolhiac de Fourt de, abp. of Machlin, 1759-1837. Le vrai système de l'Europe relativement a l'Amérique et a la Grèce. Paris, 1826. 8º. This is a plea for the recognition of the Latin American republics and the support of Greece to achieve her independence. Ch. XX, (p. 128-47) is entitled "Le droit d 'intervention." XXXI "Du droit d 'intervention dans les affaires de la Grèce." The theory of "moral contagion" is discussed and intervention on this ground condemned (p. 142). The grounds of intervention are summed up and their justification denied (p. 146). This work is more than the political pamphlet it appears to be. The references are to a copy in the New York Public Library bound with Pradt's "Guaranties a demander a 1'Espagne," Paris 1827. Von Listz refers to "Les Cabinets et les peuples depuis 1815 jusqua la fin de 1822" (3 ed.) Paris 1823. The Library of Congress lacks this but has Pradt's "L 'Europe et L'Amérique en 1821," Paris 1822. [Card 8-10921, Class D.383.p6.]
Quabbe, Georg. Die Völkerrechtliche Guarantie [A portion of Staats- und Verwaltungsrecht by Brie and Fleischmann]. Breslau, 1911. 11-14728 JX4171.A863 This work was awarded a prize by the Law faculty of the University of Breslau (1909). The author supplies a valuable bibliography (p. VII-IX). He adds some notes to this (p. 6-8).
Quesada, Antonio Miro. La intervencion Americana en Cuba. [Dissertation, Universidad de Lima.] Lima, Peru. 20 p., 18 cm. [State Department Library, Cuban Pamphlets 5, No.16] I did not think it necessary to consult this work.
Quintana, Manuel. Discursos Parlamentarios sobro ol dorecho de intervencion. Buenos Aires, Boulosa, 1902. [Harvard College Library, SA5016.13] I did not think it necessary to examine this work.
"R. Q." [Pseudonym]. An important review of Kamptz's work, in Hermes [a German periodical], vol. XI, p.142-156. 7-3737 AP30.H6 Vol.11
Reynolds, William B. Intervention. Fort Leavenworth, 1898. 21 p. [New York Public Library] I did not think it necessary to consult this work.
***Rivier, Alphonse Pierre Octave, 1835-1898. Principes du droit des gens. Paris, A. Rousseau, 1896. 2 vols., 22½ cm. Rivier also published in Germany, 1889, his Lehrbuch des Volkerrechts. 2-19974 JX2739.P9 Rivier has a reputation deservedly high in all countries. The student should not fail to consult him. Westlake (vol. I, p. 306) says of Rivier, "...one of the most accomplished jurists who have employed themselves on international law." J. B. Moore (Principles, p. 208), "...one of the most eminent publicists in Europe."
+++Robin, Raymond. Des occupations militaries en dehors des occupations de guerre (étude d'histoire diplomatique et de droit international). [Doctoral dissertation reprinted with introduction by Louis Renault, p. i-iv.] Paris, L. Larose and L. Tenin, 1913. viii+824 p., 26 cm. 15-7007 JX5003.R6 University of Paris theses, published the same year, with a preface by Louis Renault, pp. I-V. This is the most complete treatment of the subject of occupation with which we are familiar. M. Robin's careful study of those international incidents which have led to occupation of foreign territory is of great assistance for the study of intervention. Although the author has not devoted himself particularly to the matter of intervention, he has given it, incidentally, his careful consideration. A full index and table of contents makes it easy to locate the material. Professor Louis Renault, who never was given to mere compliment, is enthusiastic in his praise of this volume, which he calls a mine of information. (See Preface by Louis Renault.) We are especially indebted to M. Robin for his accounts of those instances which involve occupation for the guarantee of payment, occupation or intervention as a mandatory, and collective occupation or intervention.
+Rolin-Jaequemyns, Gustave, 1835 Le droit international et la phase actuelle de la question d'orient [International Law and the present situation of the Near Eastern question], in Revue de droit international et de legislation comparée, 1876, vol. 8, pp. 295-385. 1-7465 JX3.E4.Vol.8 A very important study which must have exercised some influence upon the action of the powers at the time. R-J considers the situation in the Near East as a menace to the peace of Europe, and concludes (p. 347) that the powers acting collectively derive from history and from treaties the right to unite to preserve the peace of Europe and to protect the interests of humanity. This study elicited from Professor Arntz a valuable letter which Rolin-Jaequemyns publishes (ibid, p. 675-682) with further discussion. [See under Arntz.] Rolin-Jaequemyns would seem to place the Near East in a special category in regard to the right of intervention. Hall (4 ed., § 95, p. 308, note) criticizes this view when set forth by the same author in regard to the Graeco-Turkish conflict of 1885-6. (Revue de droit international, vol. 18, p. 603.)
++Rolin-Jaequemyns, Gustave, 1835 Note sur la theorie du droit d'intervention, in Revue du droit international et de legislation comparée, 1876, vol. 8, p. 673-682. 1-7465 JX3.R4.Vol.8 In addition to the preceding article which was called forth by the letter of Professor Arntz herein printed with further discussion by Bolin-Jaequemyns.
Rolin-Jaequemyns, Gustave, 1835 La question d'orient en 1885-86. in Revue du droit international et de legislation comparée, 1885, vol. 18, pp. 378-432, 506-535; continued under the title, Le conflit greco-turc en 1885-86, ibid, p. 591-626. 1-7465 JX3.R4.Vol.18 Discusses collective intervention and the control of the Balkans by the concert of Europe. Blames the jealousies of powers for unsatisfactory condition. Considers that collective intervention in the Orient is on a different place from elsewhere (p. 605). Hall (4 ed., § 95, p. 308, note) criticizes this view.
****Rossi, Pellegrino. Intervention. in Archives de droit et de legislation, (Brussels) 1837, vol. I, p. 353-375. [In Library of Congress, Law Periodicals] Written apropos of the appearance of Wheaton's Elements of International Law, London, 1836. This brief study of the theory and practice of intervention is to be ranked with that by Senior as among the very best. The juridical basis for intervention is laid down in a masterly fashion. Although the incidents are treated with a too evident bias in favor of the Monarchy of July, every word is illuminating. Everything considered, it is perhaps the discussion of intervention which has best known how to insist upon the fullest respect for the principles of international law without disregarding the reasonable requirements of practical statecraft. Hidden away in a little known and short lived magazine this valuable article appears to have escaped the notice of all but a few investigators.
++++Rotteck, Hermann Rodecker von, 1816-1848. Das Recht der Einmischung in die inneren Angelegenheiten eines fremden Staates vom vernunftrechtlichen, historischen und Politischen Standpunkte erörtert. Freiburg i. B., A. Emmerling, 1845. xxviii+104 p., 21 ½ cm. 10-5804 JX4481.R7 This work seems to be the first to undertake a systematic and comprehensive study of intervention. Rotteck defines intervention by the postulate, "No state has a right to intermeddle in the internal (that is the constitutional) affairs of another state." (p. 7; cf. p., 16-17.) He enumerates the alleged exceptions (p. 10-11), and in the following pages (11-47), takes them up seriatim. He attempts to refute them or to show that they are not really exceptions. The remainder of the work examines the incidents which have occurred, and discusses the primacy of the great powers. Rotteck denies the right to intervene on the ground that changes in a neighboring state, constitute a danger for internal affairs (p. 22-3). In discussing the doctrine of necessity (p. 20-25), he says that necessity does not make legal, but excuses violations. Humanitarian intervention should be considered as a violation of law, but sometimes excused, or even applauded, as we excuse a crime (p. 36). Bernard, Mill, and Hall have adopted this latter doctrine. Berner classes this as one of the best treatments. Rotteck, he says, has shown intelligence and learning, but places too much emphasis on the principle of non-intervention. I would add that Rotteck is remarkably fair, but not a close reasoner.
****Rotteck, Karl Wenzeslaus Rodecker von, 1775-1840. [Grossherz, Bad. Hofrath und Professor.] Lehrbuch des Vernunftrechts und der Staatswissenschaften. Stuttgard, Gebruder Franckh, 1829-35. 4 vols., 21 cm. 10-23478t JC233.R85 Berner rates it as one of the most important works taking into account the historical development and fundamental principles. Vol. Ill is devoted in part (p. 1-166) to a study of foreign relations and international law.
++Rougier, Antoine. Les guerres civiles et le droit des gens. Paris, Larose, 1903. 569 p., 8º. 6-27289 JX4541.R7 Intervention in civil wars is discussed, pp. 315f.
Rougier, Antoine. L 'intervention de 1 'Europe dans la question de Macedoine. in Revue generate du droit international public, 1906, vol. XIU, p. 178-200. 10-31105 JX3.R56.Vol.13
***Rougier, Antoine. La theorie de l'intervention d'humanite. in Revue generate du droit international public, 1910, vol. XVII, p. 468-526. 10-31105 JX3.R56.Vol.17 Is a very thorough consideration of the question which does much to clear up the theory. Rougier first shows the weakness in the postulate of the absolute independence and equality of States, and consequently overcomes the strongest argument in support of the doctrine of Non-intervention. He then examines whether there is any law of humanity in support of which intervention may be undertaken and finds it in the law of solidarity. He next discusses who may intervene and well says that the generally accepted idea of collective intervention adds nothing to the justice of the action. Finally, he advocates intervention by a disinterested power. He does not seem to consider that such a requirement would remove intervention from practical politics. The various instances of intervention on the ground of humanity are noted and tersely analyzed. The article is of first rate importance for the study of this part of the subject.
**Rougier, Antoine. Maroc: La question de 1 'abolition des supplices et l'intervention européenne. in Revue générale de droit international public, 1910, vol. XIX, p. 98-102. 10-31105 JX3.R56.Vol.19 I have translated a portion of this in the text. See § 8 (d). Royal Commission: See, Fugitive Slaves. Report on, 1876.
*Russell, Bertrand Arthur William, 1872. [M. A., F. R. S., Sometime Fellow and Lecturer in Trinity College, Cambridge.] Why Men Fight, A Method of Abolishing the International Duel. New York, 1917, 272 p., 19½ cm. 17-1513 HN389.R96 Written mainly before 1915, to judge by the footnotes. Russell makes a valuable contribution to the study of the causes of war and the means to avoid it. This he finds in a substitution of creative "impulses" (instincts) for "impulses of possession." In the main, it is a fair and objective study. Nevertheless, the author seems to take for granted that all men condemn the competitive evolution of war, which Steinmetz considered the purpose and justification of war, almost its sanctification. Russell is the most objective of the subjective pacifists I have encountered. No student of politics should fail to read this work.
Russell, John Russell, 1st earl, 1792-1878. Public address discussing policy of government relative to intervention, in London Times, September 28, 1863. Discusses Polish question, and excuses failure of Great Britain to intervene; declares intervention in Mexico was for the protection of British rights only; conduct towards United States neutral and fair. Cited by Abdy's Kent, p. 48.
+Russell, John Russell, 1st earl, 1792-1878. An Essay on the History of the English Government and Constitution from the reign of Henry VII to the Present Time. New edition, London, Longmans, Green & Co., 1865. [Harvard Law Library] Certain phases of intervention are discussed in the introduction (p. Irxxi-xciii), and Russell makes an attempt at definition (p. Ixxi-lxxii). See criticism of this by Stapleton (p. 10-15), who perhaps misunderstands Russell's careless language. Russell discusses Denmark's rejection of England's suggestions for compromise (p. xcii); but compare Sir Robert Morier (vol. I, p. 385-392), who gives the real reason why Denmark refused.
Salvioli, Giuseppe, 1857- Le concept de la guerre juste d'apres les ecrivains anterieurs a Grotius. [Translated by Georges Hervo.] Paris, 1918, 128 p., 17 cm. 19-19535 JX4508.S3
Schönborn, Walther, 1883 Die Besetzung von Veracruz (zur Lehre von den volkerrechtlichen Selbsthilfeakten) mit einem Anhang: Urkunden zur Politik des Prasidenten Wilson gegeniiber Mexiko. Berlin [etc.], W. Kohlhammer, 1914. 16-15253 F1234.S36
Schubert. Ueber die Lehre der politischen Intervention. Cited by H. von Kotteck (Recht der Einmischung 1845), p. 8. Kdnigsberg, 1831. I was unable to consult this work.
****Senior, Nassau William, 1790-1864. Review of Wheaton's International Law. in Edinburgh Review, 1843, vol. 156, p. 334-358. AP4.E3 Vol.156 In an article in the Edinburgh Review, Mr. Nassau Senior discusses Wheaton 's book which had recently appeared. The article is more than a review. It is a valuable commentary on certain portions of international law. Mr. Senior devotes especial attention to the question of intervention and discusses the action taken to preserve the balance of power and to dictate in regard to internal affairs. He points out that the former is the weapon of the weak against the strong and is difficult to organize. From this, he concludes, it is not likely to be often resorted to or abused. Interference in the internal affairs is, on the contrary, the weapon of the strong against the weak. Mr. Senior discusses several instances in European history and reaches the following conclusion on pp. 365-66: "It does not appear that interference for the mere purpose of preventing the oppression of subjects by their prince, is now held lawful by any nation "On the other hand it appears to be the opinion of Russia, Austria and Prussia, that the rights of a sovereign against his subjects are whatever he may think fit to claim "England admits the validity of every established government, whether depending on usage, on popular revolt, or on royal usurpation. Subject to the universal exception, that every state has a right to protect itself against great mischief, or even imminent danger, arising out of the domestic affairs of another, she denies that international law allows one state forcibly to interfere in the internal affairs of another, on any pretext or to any extent whatever. She denies that third parties can lawfully interfere to force a people to obey their sovereign; as she denies that they can lawfully interpose to force a sovereign to respect the liberties of his people." Senior's discussion is one of the best which has appeared. It probably has not exerted as large an influence as it deserves because the back files of a magazine are not always accessible, but he is cited by several authorities (Moore's Digest VI: 3; Creasy, p. 297).
Snow, Alpheus Henry, 1859-1920. The Question of Aborigines in the Law and Practice of Nations. Washington, D. C., Government Printing Office, 1919, 218 p., 23½ cm. 20-13103 JV305.S6 See Chapter XIV, p. 187-201, "The Doctrine of 'Intervention for Humanity' and its Effect in the Development of the Law of Nations regarding Aborigines."
Soule, Pierre, 1802-1870. Speech on Non-intervention, in the U. S. Senate, March 22, 1852. Washington, J. T. Towers, 1852. 46 p., 22½ cm. 10-25145 E429.S72 Recalling various precedents in American diplomatic history, Soule argues that the United States should vigorously oppose the action of Great Britain in policing the sea about Cuba to prevent the landing of hostile expeditions on that island.
Sproxton, Charles, 1890-1917. Palmerston and the Hungarian Revolution. [A dissertation which was awarded the Prince Consort prize, 1914.] Cambridge, University Press, 1919. xi+148 p., front (port.) 20 cm. 20-286 DB936.S7 An excellent account of the political history of the Hungarian Revolution and the connected question of the refugees in Turkey. Palmerston's fear that a weakened Austria would remove a counterpoise (pp. 37, 77) is given as the motive of his refusal to oppose Russian interference. Palmerston was consistent in supporting Italy against Austria since he considered Italy a weakness for Austria (p. 38). Napoleon III refusal to intervene was due to his desire to secure the support of the Northern powers by a revision of the treaties of 1815 (pp. 99-100) and on the very eve of invading Hungary Nicholas declared he would recognize the French Republic (p. 101). Responding to the pressure of public opinion, Palmerston exerted pressure on Turkey to prevent the extradition and to secure the liberation of the refugees, (p. 111.)
Stambler, Bernard. L'histoire des Israelites roumains et le droit d'intervention. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Paris.] Paris, Jouve et tie., 1913. 315 p., 25 cm. 15-10261 DS135.R7S7 Stambler's book is principally devoted to a study of the Jews in Romania and the law of nationality. Intervention is considered (p. 197-225, more especially the right of the United States to protest (1902) against the treatment of the Jews. The author does not consider that the action of the United States constitutes an intervention, and denies the right to intervene on the grounds of humanity. The bibliography of the question of the Jews in Romania (p. 309-312) touches but incidentally works upon intervention. Reviewed in revue de droit international et de legislation comparée 1914, Vol. 46, p. 88.
**Stapleton, Augustus Granville, 1800-1880. Intervention and Non-intervention; or, The Foreign Policy of Great Britain from 1790 to 1865. London, J. Murray, 1866. ix+308 p., 23 cm. 10-17440† JX4478.S8 Under the cover of a scientific discussion of the principles governing intervention Stapleton launches into a bitter partisan attack upon Palmerston and his policy of interference in support of liberalism on the Continent. But the very method of attack requires Stapleton to lay down the fundamental principles of action undertaken to constrain other states to adopt a desired course, and this discussion is of real scientific value notwithstanding the errors into which Stapleton falls. He defines (p. 6) the true rule of non-intervention [non-interference] as follows: "No State has a right FORCIBLY to interfere in the internal concerns of another State, unless there exists a casus ~belli against it. For, if every powerful State has a right at its pleasure forcibly to interfere with the internal affairs of its weaker neighbors, it is obvious no weak State can be really independent. The constant and general violation of this law would be, in fact to establish the law of the strongest. "This principle as here laid down is the true principle of 'non-intervention.' But, by leaving out the word forcible, and by then applying it, without limitation or explanation, much confusion respecting it has arisen. "It is essential therefore that it should be correctly defined; for, taking it in the broad sense in which it is sometimes taken, as forbidding all kinds of intervention in the internal affairs of neighboring States, it is neither defensible in theory nor harmless in practice." Stapleton does not perceive that intervention or interference would have no effect the moment that his rule was sufficiently well recognized to restrain the action of would-be law-abiding states. His formula is the reductio ad absurdum which we find so frequently in the followers of Cobden. Palmerston himself refuted this doctrine when in 1832 he wrote: "In" adverting, therefore, to the affairs of Poland, great delicacy and caution will be required. It would be inconsistent with the power and dignity of the British Empire to insist too strongly upon points which, from the considerations stated above, it might be inexpedient, if not impossible, to enforce by arms." (British State Papers, vol. 37, p. 1439-1440.) We must, however, give Stapleton credit for perceiving the folly of a general condemnation of all intervention or interference which is not undertaken in defense of clearly recognized rights (see discussion of political action in our §§ 20-23). He is also to be commended for basing his attack and his criticism upon a careful analysis of the grounds of the various instances of intervention. The remainder of the book (pp. 37-308) discusses with marked partisan bias the foreign policy and interventions of the British Government from 1790-1865. The appendix (pp. 279-308) contains valuable documents.
+Stockton, Robert Field, 1795-1866. Speech on Non-intervention, delivered in the U. S. Senate, February 2, 1852. Washington, Printed by J. T. Towers, 1852. 8 p., 23 cm. 19-20271 E429-S86
Stowell, E. C. and Munro, H. F. International Cases, Vol. I, Peace ; Vol. II, War and Neutrality. Boston, Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1916. 16-9557 JX68.S8 Contains concise accounts of some of the more important incidents of intervention and interference.
Strauch, Hermann [Professor, Heidelberg]. Intervention. in Bluntschli's Staatswörterbuch (Löning's edition). Zurich, 1871, vol. II, p. 274 f. 9-200741 JA.63.B8 Cf. below this author's more complete study of intervention, 1879.
++++Strauch, Hermann [Professor, Heidelberg].. Zur Interventionslehre; eine völkerrechtliche Studie. Heidelberg, 1879. 39 p., 8º. [State Department Library, Harvard Law Library, Boston Athenaeum] This little pamphlet prepared in honor of Professor Bluntschli's fifty years of teaching is probably the most complete and most rigidly scientific discussion of intervention in any language. For Strauch intervention is a right of the community of states to prevent any abuse of independence which endangers the common security, including necessarily all serious violations of the law of nations. He recognizes the right of third nations to intervene in such cases as he recognizes the right of individual states to intervene in internal matters when the latter are in such a condition as to endanger the rights of other states. But Strauch excludes humanitarian intervention because he thinks such questions are not matters which concern the community of states. Every state, however, is free to check the barbarous or inhumane conduct of any other state which does not enjoy a fully independent status. Any attempt of another state to oppose such corrective action is, according to Strauch, a political matter.
Strezoff, G. L 'intervention et la peninsule balkanique [Dissertation, University of Geneva]. Geneva, 1893. 252 p., 23 cm. [Columbia University Library]
Tanoviceano, Jean. De 1 'intervention au point de vue du droit international. [Dissertation, University of Paris. Bound with and following a dissertation on Roman Law, "De 1'infantia."] Paris, 1884. 153 p., 8. [Harvard Law Library, New York Public Library] Holland (Studies, p. 174) says: "Romania in the person of M. Tanoviceano, has produced an international jurist of no small merit. His treatise, De V intervention, is the best book on the subject." I cannot find that the work is of unusual merit.
Trevilla Paniza, Diego. La intervencion por causas financieras. [Doctoral dissertation.] Granada, Tip. P. Ventura Traveset, 1910. 71 p., 21 cm. 16-3712 JX1393.D8T7 Discusses intervention and the Drago doctrine. I did not examine this work.
Trummer, Dr. K. Anti-Rotteck. Eine Reihe von Fragmenten iiber des Prof. v. Rottecks Lehrbuch des Vernunftrechts. Hamburg, 1836. [Reichstag Library, Berlin] Cited by Heiberg (p. 15), who indicates that Trummer was an advocate of wide latitude in interference.
U. S.: Solicitor of the Department of State. Right to Protect Citizens in Foreign Countries by Landing Forces. See Clark, Joshua Reuben, Jr.
Ureña y Sanz, Rafael de. Nuevas orientaciones del principio de intervención, doctrina de Drago. Madrid, Est. tip. de los hijos de R. Alvarez, 1910. 71 p., 24 cm. 11-25359 JX4481.U8 A preliminary study of intervention, followed by a consideration of the Drago doctrine. Good for Drago doctrine, but of no particular value for intervention.
Urien, Carlos M. El derecho de intervencion y la doctrina de Monroe (antecedentes historicos). Buenos Aires, Impr. J. Peuser, 1898. 174 p., 17½ cm. 9-19546 JX1425.U8
Valverde, Antonio L. La intervencion; estudio de derecho internacional publico - con emprologo del Sr. Rafael Montoro. Habana, Ruis y hermano, 1902. x+195 p., 8º . Obra premiada por el colegio de abigados de la Habana en el certamen de 1900 a 1901. [New York Library, Harvard Law Library] One of the most extensive studies of the text-book authorities. The author (p. 74) concludes that the Italian school is wrong in considering intervention as always illegal, but thinks intervention is a political matter, and that it is impossible to fix its limits exactly as some writers claim to do. The remainder of the book considers the instances of intervention. The study is careful, but does not add to the understanding of the deeper problems of the subject.
++Vattel, Emmerich de, 1714-1767. The Law of Nations [Le droit des gens; ou Principes de la loi naturelle appliques a la conduite et aux affaires des nations et des souverains 1758], C. G. Fenwick's English translation, with an introduction by Albert de Lapradelle. Washington, Carnegie institution of Washington, 1916. 3 vols. 26 cm. (Vol. 3 contains the trans- lation.) [In Carnegie Classics of International Law.] 16-17762 JX2414.A1 1916
++Vidari, Ercole. Memoria del Prof. Ercole Vidari. Del principio di intervento e di non intervento. Milan, Amminestrazione del Politecnico, 1868. A reprint from "II Politecnico." 81 p. Signed Pavia, December 22, 1867. [Harvard Law Library] This is one of the best of the early studies of the subject, and shows the author's scientific spirit by a fair analysis, at a time when the national aspirations of Italy were distorting men's vision, as shown in Mamiani 's work.
Vie, Louis. Des principales applications du droit d'intervention des puissances européennes dans les affaires des Balkans depuis le traité de Berlin de 1878 jusqu'a nos jours, fitude de droit international public et d'histoire diplomatique. [Inaugural dissertation, University of Toulouse.] Toulouse, Impr. Lagarde et Sebille, 1900. 158 p., 4º. 1-6411 JX4481.V6
Wachter, Alfred von. Die völkerrechtliche Intervention als Mittel der Selbsthülfe. [Dissertation at Erlanger University.] Munich, J. Kramer, 1911. 67 p., 8. [New York Public Library Berlin Card, U.12.946] A painstaking, but somewhat immature study, as shown by the failure to appreciate the relative value of the authorities, some of the most important of which are omitted. It is not an important work.
*Warner, Horace Everett, 1839 The Ethics of Force. Boston, Ginn & Co., 1905. v+126 p., 20 cm. 5-19064 JX1953.W36 "This little volume had its origin in a series of papers read to the Ethical club of Washington, D. C., at the time just preceding and following the Spanish war." ( Pref.) Library of Congress analysis of contents: I. Introduction. II. The ethics of heroism. III. The ethics of patriotism. IV. Can war be defended on the authority of Christ? V. Can war be defended on the grounds of reason? VI. Some objections. One of the few rational discussions upon the theme of the irrationality of war, by one who knows from experience whereof he speaks.
Werdenhagen, Angelius. Synopsis in sex libros. Johan Bodini de Republica, έρωτοπορειον generate et necessarium. Amsterdam, 1645. Esmein, in Nouvelle revue historique de droit français et etranger, 1900, p. 574, says this author corrected Bodin's logic: "He only admits the repression of a tyrant by a neighboring king when the territory of the latter has been invaded by the tyrant." Esmein remarks that this is the denial of all right of intervention in internal affairs. We should take note of this as an early exposition of the doctrine of absolute non-intervention. I have not examined this work.
Westlake, John, 1828-1913. Reprisals and War. in Law Quarterly Review, April, 1909, p. 127-136. A very searching examination of the principles governing the use of force without war. Also published in The Collected Papers of John Westlake on Public International Law, Cambridge [Eng.], 1914. [15-9571 JX2588.C7 1914.]
++++Westlake, John, 1828-1913. International Law. Cambridge, England, Part I, Peace, 1st ed., 1904; 2 ed., 1910. Part II, War, 1st ed., 1907; 2 ed., 1913. 11-1990 JX2588.I 6 1910 These two volumes contain the best and most comprehensive discussions of the principles of intervention. Westlake is the student 's surest guide. Especially important are vol. I, ch. XIII, "Political Action of States," (p. 300-327); "Self-defense [self-help] on the open sea in time of peace" (p. 171-176); "Recognition of new states arising from insurrections" (p. 57f ); vol. II, ch. I, p. 1-31, "War and forcible measures short of war;" Ch. VII, (p. 190-198), "The Theory of Neutrality." It is interesting to compare these opinions with Westlake's Chapters on the Principles of International Law, Cambridge, 1894, for we see how carefully the author had gone over what he had written a decade before.
Wharton, Francis, 1820-1889. De l'assistance prêté a une insurrection étrangère. Referred to in Clunet's Journal, 1883, p. 375-377. Discusses the insurrection in Naples. Of no particular importance.
*Wheaton, Henry, 1785-1848. Elements of International Law: with a sketch of the history of the science. London, B. Fellowes, 1836. 2 vols., 22 cm. 5-29661 In reviews of Wheaton, Pellegrino Rossi and Nassau Senior have both criticized Wheaton for his defective treatment of intervention and each critic has been himself stimulated to write remarkable studies of this subject. Indirectly we owe to Wheaton the best discussions of intervention which have appeared in English and French.
Wheaton, Henry, 1785-1848. History of the Law of Nations in Europe and America ; from the earliest times to the treaty of Washington, 1842. New York, Gould, Banks & Co.; [etc., etc.] 1845. xiv+797 p., 24½ cm. 5-29665 JX2495.H2 1845 "Originally written and published in the French language as a Mémoire in answer to the following prize question proposed by the Academy of moral and political sciences in the Institute of France: 'Quels sont les progres qu'a fait le droit des gens en Europe depuis la paix de Westphalie?' - Pref.
Wildman, Richard. Institutes of International Law. London, W. Benning & Co., 1849-50. 2 vols., 22 cm. 10-17173† JX2592.I5 1849
***Woolsey, Theodore Dwight, 1801-1889. Introduction to the Study of International Law. Boston and Cambridge, J. Munroe & Co., 1860. xvii+486 p., 19½ cm. Preface is dated May 17. 6th ed., rev. and enl. by Theodore Salisbury Woolsey, New York, C. Scribner's Sons, 1901. xix+527 p., 21 cm. 10-17164† JX2498.I6 1860 4-4618-4 JX2498.I6 1901 At this period, so important for the development, of the law governing intervention, this American work takes advanced ground. Especially interesting are §§ 18-23, 41-50; p. 21-28, 18-112. There have been many later editions of this useful work.
***Woolsey, Theodore Salisbury, 1852 America's Foreign Policy. New York, The Century Company, 1898. x+294 p., 19 cm. 98-428-4 Revised. JX1415.W7 Is a collection of articles on diplomatic incidents considered from the point of view of the principles justifying the action taken, and therefore of great value for a study of the justifiable grounds for intervention. It is one of the best discussions of Intervention in Cuba, (p. 25-100), and shows an understanding of the fundamental principles. Of especial value is Professor Woolsey 's consideration of humanitarian intervention.
*Wright, Quincy. Effects of the League of Nations Covenant. in American Political Science Review, November, 1919, p. 556-576. Discusses the obligation to intervene to vindicate the law and considers that the establishment of such an obligation is due to the League of Nations.
Zeballos, E. C. Intervention armée européenne en Venezuela a la suite de reclamation. in Bulletin Argentine de droit international privé, 1903. Vol. I, p. 145-177. Discusses the limits of the right of interposition for protection of national rights.
|
| « CHAPTER 5 | TOP |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |