TENNESSEE. 



667 



sists in proportional representation in the National 

 Council and the election of the Federal Council 

 by the direct vote of the people. The proposed 

 amendments to the Constitution by which these 

 changes in the governmental system of the country 

 were to be effected, after a long period of agita- 

 tion and popular discussion, were submitted to the 

 decision of the people on Nov. 4, 1900. Both pro- 

 posals were rejected, proportional representation in 

 the National Council by 242,004 popular votes to 

 163,548 and by 11 J cantonal votes to 10J, the 

 election of the Federal Council by the people by 

 264,087 popular votes to 134,167 and by 14 against 

 8 of the cantons. Even cantons that have adopted 

 proportional representation for themselves, such as 

 Solothurn and Neuchatel, gave a majority against 

 such an innovation in the national representation, 

 and the places where the new democratic theories 

 were cradled, the town of Basel and the town and 

 canton of Bern, rejected their immediate applica- 

 tion in the federal government. The popular 

 disaffection toward the statesmen who have man- 

 aged the public business was not so great but that 

 the people preferred to trust to their practical 

 ability and experience the nationalization of the 

 railroads, the arrangement of new commercial 

 treaties, and other economical questions for the 

 solution of which a tranquil state of the public 

 mind is desirable. The task of improving the mili- 

 tary resources of the republic so as to increase its 

 power of resistance to any possible aggression on 

 the part of the powerful states by which the 

 confederation is surrounded engages the study of 

 the authorities with the entire approval of the 

 citizens. The Federal Assembly by the vote of 

 both its branches declined to ratify that part of 

 the resolutions of the Hague Peace Convention 

 which seems to curtail or to fetter the right of a 

 nation to resort to a general levy of its men for 

 the defense of the country. It was decided to 

 retain the system of the levee en masse and to 

 make it as effective as possible by more rigorous 

 provisions. In December the National Council ap- 

 proved an agreement made by the Federal Council 

 and the railroad company for the transfer of the 

 Central Railroad, the first of the five great rail- 

 road lines to be taken over. The policy of the 

 nationalization of the railroads on both military 

 and economical grounds has been authorized by 

 the Swiss people in referendum by an overwhelm- 

 ing majority. If the Government and the stock- 

 holders are not able to agree upon a price in the 

 case of any of the railroads, the matter will be 

 taken before the Federal Court of Appeal. The 

 Federal Council desired to complete the arrange- 

 ments for the acquisition before the end of 1901 

 of all the Swiss railroads with the exception of 

 the St. Gothard line, which can not be acquired 

 before 1909. The struggle of the Boer republics 

 in South Africa attracted much attention in 

 Switzerland, chiefly from the point of view con- 

 cerning the Swiss national defense. Proposals to 

 intervene diplomatically appealed to some as com- 

 rting with the traditional efforts of the Swiss 

 overnment to further disinterestedly the peace of 

 nations, but they were rejected by the legislative 

 bodies. In reply to the request for mediation 

 which the Boer republics made to Switzerland as 

 to other powers, the Federal Council declined, in 



March, to take any initiative in the matter since 

 the British Government had already refused to 

 conclude peace on the basis of the independence 

 of the republics and had declared to the Cabinet 

 at Washington that it would not accept the inter- 

 vention of any power. 



The Institute of International Law, which held 

 its annual meeting in September at Neuchatel, 

 discussed the bearings of the Chinese situation 

 in connection with the question as to what are 

 the rights and duties of foreign powers and their 

 subjects, in case of an insurrection, with reference 

 to the established Government which is attacked 

 by the insurgents. Prof. Westlake proposed to 

 insert words that would limit the operation of 

 the principles recommended by the committee to 

 " states that are sharers in European civilization." 

 M. Rolin-Jacquemyns objected to the phrase as 

 possibly excluding Japan and Siam. A similar 

 objection was made to the phrase " Christian civ- 

 ilization." In the projet de reglement that was 

 finally adopted no qualifying phrase was used, the 

 principle being accepted that, in the absence of 

 any provision to the contrary, the rules voted by 

 the Institute are applicable only to " normal " 

 states, full members of the family of nations. A 

 distinction between " just " and " unjust '' insur- 

 rections was also rejected. Nonintervention in in- 

 surrections was declared to be an absolute duty. 

 Not even a formal declaration of the intention to 

 intervene can, according to the decision of the 

 Institute, give the sanction of international law 

 to intervention between a state and those subject 

 to its jurisdiction, Prof. Holland's amendment hav- 

 ing been voted down. Foreign governments must 

 not furnish rebels with arms or munitions of war, 

 though they are not bound to prevent export by 

 private individuals, nor can a government allow 

 the organization within its territories or waters 

 of an expedition in aid of insurgents; for an ex- 

 port of arms unaccompanied by the men who are 

 to use them, however, a government can not be 

 held liable, Prof. Holland's amendment to that 

 effect being approved. A government may mete 

 out the same punishment to foreigners taking part 

 in an insurrection against its authority as it can 

 to its own subjects, but on the motion of Prof. 

 Catellani this does not apply to cruel or excessive 

 punishments. When a state recognizes its insur- 

 gent subjects as belligerents this does not necessi- 

 tate similar action on the part of other states; 

 but a third state is bound to respect a blockade 

 established by insurgents who have been so recog- 

 nized, and must allow its vessels to be visited 

 by the war ships of either party. The theory of 

 renvoi, the application of foreign rules of law to 

 the decision of legal relations of foreign origin 

 which are not covered by domestic legislation, was 

 condemned. The responsibility of a state for in- 

 juries sustained by foreigners through riot or civil 

 war was the subject of much discussion. Occur- 

 rences in South America have made the question 

 one of practical interest, and considerable difficulty 

 is presented in the case of a federal government 

 which labors under a constitutional inability to 

 oblige one of its constituent states to give com- 

 pensation or inflict penalties for what has occurred 

 within the territory and jurisdiction of such 

 state. 



T 



TENNESSEE, a Southern State, admitted to sus since admission, was 105,602 in 1800; 261,727 

 the Union, June 1, 1796; area, 42,050 square miles, in 1810; 422,771 in 1820; 681,904 in 1830; 829,210 

 The population, according to each decennial cen- in 1840; 1,002,717 in 1850; 1,109,801 in 1860; 



