JURISPRUDENCE AND AMENDMENT OF THE LAW. INTERNATIONAL LAW SECTION. LAW OF NATIONS.1 What, if any, are the modifications required in the existing Law of Nations? And how may Municipal Law best be brought into harmony with International Obligations? By C. H. E. CARMICHAEL, M.A. D URING the present year some important questions connected with International Law, and the relations between Municipal and International Law, have been raised, which seem to deserve our most careful attention. It so happens that the cases to which I wish to refer have not yet arisen in our own country, but it is impossible to tell when our international relations might be subject to similar complications, and it may be well to consider how they should be met. It is obvious that the difficulties which arose between Germany and Belgium in the early part of the current year might arise between Germany and any other State, or between any other States. The reason why Germany has raised the question seems to be simply the extreme susceptibility of German. statesmen and diplomatists to any European condition unfavourable to the full pursuance of the Imperial German policy, or the consolidation of the Imperial power. In February last Count Perponcher brought two charges against Belgium in his note to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, which I quote, as I shall the rest of the documents connected with the subject of my paper, from the Mémorial Diplomatique.' These two charges, though different in character and in fact, bore upon the same point, viz. the influence of the acts 1 See Transactions 1874, p. 154. of Belgian subjects on the internal affairs of another State, and the way in which those acts must be regarded from the point of view of International Law. The Acts were (1) Pastorals of Belgian Bishops, followed by an address of the Committee of Pontifical Works, to the Bishop of Paderborn, expressing sympathy with the clergy who resisted the Falck Laws, and encouraging their continued resistance; (2) the offer by the charcoal-burner Duchesne, made to the Archbishop of Paris, to assassinate Prince Bismarck. Count Perponcher hereupon renews in writing the observations which he had previously made orally to the Belgian Foreign Minister, -viz. that it is indisputably established in International Law that a State must not permit its subjects to disturb the tranquillity of another State, and that it must conform its legislation to the fulfilment of its international obligations. Having enunciated this general maxim in what seems studiously vague language, Count Perponcher proceeds to soften the severity of his rebuke by saying that, the most powerful States have, when necessary, modified their legislation in this direction." He then goes on to allude to the privileges enjoyed by Belgium as a neutral State, and to adduce the example of the action of another neutral country, Switzerland, in modifying its legislation. Belgium,' says Count Perponcher, is bound to see that her territory be not made a workshop for conspiracies against the tranquillity of neighbouring States and the security of their subjects, in return for the privileges attached to her neutrality. The entire fulfilment of this obligation is one of the tacit conditions of that neutrality.' This last sentence certainly seems to convey a covert threat of the possible withdrawal of the recognition of neutrality, a serious threat to use in diplomatic correspondence, and one opening constant possibilities of the disturbance of European diplomatic arrangements. The object of this correspondence was by direct or indirect pressure to obtain changes in the municipal law of Belgium, an object thus expressed in Count Perponcher's words: The Belgian Government will doubtless recognise that the existing laws require to be supplemented, if they do not furnish the means of protecting, in neighbouring and friendly States, the internal peace and the life of persons against the attacks of Belgian subjects.' It is to be supposed that the internal peace' of the Imperial German Government was troubled by the fulminations of Belgian bishops; we may wonder that it has not yet been troubled by similar fulminations, dated Westminster and elsewhere within the United Kingdom. Perhaps our turn has yet to come; it may be well to consider what is |