326 BALCH— THE AMERICAN-BRITISH [April 22. 



International publicists are not unanimous on the question 

 whether war terminates all or every part of treaties. Formerly 

 the weight of opinion held to the view that a state of war between 

 two nations terminated the treaties between them in toto. To-day, 

 however, the weight of opinion, in accordance with the trend of 

 International Law towards the more humane goal of mitigating and 

 lessening war, tends to the view that many treaties, either in their 

 entirety or in part, are not abrogated by a state of war by the con- 

 tracting states. 



In support of the former or English view, there is Vattel, who 

 says :^*^ 



Les conventions, les traites fails avec une Nation, sont rompus ou annulles 

 par la guerre qui seleve entre les contractans ; soit parce qu'ils supposent 

 tacitement I'etat de paix, soit parce que chacun pouvant depouiller son ennemi 

 de ce qui lui appartient, lui ote les droits qu'il lui avoit donnes par des traites. 



Phillimore, the English jurist, maintains almost the same view.^'' 

 Oppenheim, formerly of the University of London, now of Cam- 

 bridge University, leans rather to the modern and more liberal view. 

 He says :^^ 



The doctrine was formerly held, and a few writers maintain it even now, 

 that the outbreak of war ipso facto cancels all treaties previously concluded 

 between the belligerents, such treaties only excepted as have been concluded 

 especially for the case of war. The vast majority of modern writers on 

 International Law have abandoned this standpoint, and the opinion is pretty 

 general that war by no means annuls every treaty. But unanimity in regard 

 to such treaties as are and such as are not cancelled by war does not exist. 

 Neither does a uniform practice of the states exist, cases having occurred in 

 which states have expressly declared that they considered all treaties annulled 

 through war. Thus the whole question remains as yet unsettled. But never- 

 theless with the majority of writers a conviction may be stated to exist on 

 the following points : 



3. Such political and other treaties as have been concluded for the purpose 

 of setting up a permanent condition of things are not ipso facto annulled by 

 the outbreak of war, but in the treaty of peace nothing prevents the victorious 

 party from imposing upon the other party any alterations in, or even the 

 dissolution of, such treaties. 



"Emer de Vattel, " Le Droit des Gens ou Principes de la Loi Naturelle." 

 A Amsterdam chez E. van Harrevelt, 1775, Vol. II., p. 81. 



" Robert Phillimore, " Commentaries upon International Law," Philadel- 

 ohia, 1857, Vol. III., p. 457, et seq. 



" L. Oppenheim, " International Law," London, 1906, Vol. II., p. 107. 



