260 ROWE— AMERICA AS THE 



power from the basin of the Mediterranean to northern Europe is 

 probably the most striking illustration of the loss involved when 

 belligerent interests find no countervailing force. 



The situation which confronts us today marks another epoch in 

 the development of international law. The issue is clearly and defi- 

 nitely formulated : shall the interests of belligerents reshape and 

 determine the fabric of international law, or shall neutral interests 

 become an increasingly dominant influence in establishing the rules 

 that shall govern the relations between states ? 



Recent events in Europe have placed a new aspect on the part 

 w^hich America is called upon to play in the development of inter- 

 national law. The appeals of all the contending parties to accepted 

 legal principles, as justification for their respective policies, is suffi- 

 cient indication of a deeply-rooted respect for the " opinion of man- 

 kind/' which is, in the last analysis, the basis of the spirit of legal- 

 ity ; both in municipal and in international law. 



In spite of the constant appeals to established legal principles by 

 all parties, there is noticeable a disquieting and dangerous tendency 

 to encroach upon those neutral rights, the observance of which rep- 

 resents the results of a long and bitter struggle, marking one of the 

 great achievements, if not the greatest achievement, of the nine- 

 teenth century. The broadening of the rights of neutrals has been 

 accompanied by a corresponding development of neutral obligations. 

 Viewed from the broadest possible standpoint, the development of 

 neutral rights and obligations represents the most important step, 

 first, in narrowing the area of conflict, and, secondly, in developing 

 that world spirit of legality and settled rule which is the funda- 

 mental as well as the ultimate purpose of international law. 



Under the guise of adapting the principles of international law to 

 the new conditions of warfare, the policy pursued by the parties 

 to the present conflict has not only undermined the basis of neutral 

 rights, but threatens to destroy the hard-earned gains of the nine- 

 teenth century. We are apt to forget at times that the recognition 

 of neutral rights is a matter of so recent development that it repre- 

 sents the least stable division of international law. It is becoming 

 increasingly evident, furthermore, that the interests of advancing 



