298 WRIGHT— POWER TO MEET RESPONSIBILITIES. 



as exchanging salutes by public vessels, though customary, are really 

 matters of courtesy rather than law. Doubtless good citizenship 

 in the family of nations requires that states exchange diplomatic 

 officers and cooperate in matters of world service; that they aid each 

 other in the suppression of crime and administration of justice ; that 

 they attempt to prevent war by offering mediation and suggesting 

 arbitration ; but except as provided in treaty, international law does 

 not require such acts.^^ 



However, in case international law or treaty is violated, inter- 

 national law imposes the obligation of reparation. This may take 

 the form of payment of money, cession of territory, the making of 

 formal amends such as apology or salute of flag. Sometimes a de- 

 mand has been made for the trial or delivery of a criminal in repa- 

 ration, but it has been generally held that international law does not 

 require such reparation. ^^ It is with the power to meet " claims " 

 or demands for reparation and to perform specific obligations of 

 contract, agreement and treaty that we are at present concerned. 



139. The Determination of Obligations. 



The precise determination of national obligations, by the applica- 

 tion of the principles and rules of international law and treaty to 

 concrete facts, has always proved a difficult problem. It is a recog- 

 nized common law principle that no one should be judge in his own 

 case, and there has been judicial opinion in England to the efifect 

 that even an act of Parliament infringing this principle would be in 

 so far void.^'^ The same principle is recognized in the federal sys- 

 tem of the United States and a jurisdiction is established to try 

 cases between the states of the union.^^ So also in international law 

 it has been recognized on occasion that treaties should be interpreted 



If* Hall, International Law (Higgins). pp. 56-60. 



1^ Wright, Enforcement of Int. Law, pp. 94-100, supra, sec. no. 



1^ Dr. Bonham's Case, 8 Co. Rep. 107a, 114a (1600); Day v. Savadge, 

 Hob. 8s, 87 (1610) ; City of London v. Wood, 12 Mod. 669, 687 (1701); 

 Thayer, Cases on Const. Law, 47 ct seq.; Hobbes, Leviathan, chap. 15, Every- 

 man ed., p. 81. 



18 U. S. Const., Art. Ill, sec. 2. 



