Founded October 12, 1912 
 Inaugurated December 29, 1915 
 
 ad 
 
 Return this book on or before the +4) 10!/5 LIBRARY 
 Latest Date stamped below. “24 
 
 [27.1918 © 
 
 University of Illinois Library 
 BPR —& 195) 
 
 Bia Ae s of Nations 
 
 Rights 
 
 L161—H41 
 
ee ee geitin ea one 
 
 Er See See A ; 
 iy. Te et PT a GRA ee 
 # 
 
 Rr eh a 
 
 Ste ae 
 
 ORE pn ERE sill Ae 
 Seeiastoh:* 5 
 
 ea 
 
 Mi 
 
 5) 
 vag 
 ¥ 
 
— | The national Law 
 
 URIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY 
 
 NOV 27 1918 
 
 Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Nations 
 
 Official Commentary Upon the Rights 
 and Duties of Nations 
 
 Constitution and By-Laws 
 
 Officers and Members 
 
COMMENDATION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF INTER- 
 NATIONAL LAW BY OFFICIAL ASSEMBLIES OF A LEGAL, 
 POLITICAL AND SCIENTIFIC NATURE, COMPOSED OF 
 REPRESENTATIVES OF ALL THE AMERICAN REPUBLICS. 
 
 The Third Committee of the Commission of American Jurists, 
 which met at Rio de Janeiro to consider the codification of inter- 
 national law, at its meeting of July 16, 1912, adopted a resolution: 
 
 Commending the initiative taken to found an American In- 
 stitute of International Law, as the Committee considers an 
 institution of this kind of great usefulness to assist in the work_ 
 of codification that the statesmen of the New World have in 
 view. 
 
 The Governing Board of the Pan American Union, at its meeting 
 held in the City of Washington on December 1, 1915, unanimously 
 adopted the following resolution: 
 
 Whereas the official inauguration of the American Institute 
 of International Law, founded in Washington October 12, 1912, 
 is soon to take place under the auspices of the Second Pan 
 American Scientific Congress, and 
 Whereas said Institute, consisting of representatives of every \ 
 one of the American Republics, recommended by the International 
 Law Associations of their respective countries, will result in 
 strengthening, through the active codperation of jurists and 
 thinkers of the whole continent, the bonds of friendship and 
 union now existing between these Republics, and will contribute 
 to the development of a common sentiment of international 
 justice among them, 
 The Governing Board of the Pan American Union 
 Resolves to tender to the founders and members of the Amer- 
 ican Institute of International Law a vote of commendation and 
 encouragement for the foundation of said organization, which 
 represents a step of the highest important in the moral ad- 
 vancement of the continent and in the strengthening of the 
 sentiments of friendship and harmcay among the Republics. 
 
 The Second Pan American Scientific Congress, which met at 
 Washington December 27, 1915-January 8, 1916, adopted the fol- 
 
 lowing resolution, which is included in its Final Act: | 
 The Second Pan American Scientific Congress extends to the 
 American Institute of International Law a cordial welcome into 
 the circles of scientific organizations of Pan America, and 
 
 records a sincere wish for its successful career and the achieve- 
 ment of the highest aims of its important labors. 
 
UNIVERSITY OF TLLINDIS LIBRARY 
 NOV 27 1918 
 The American Institute of International Law 
 
 Founded October 12, 1912 
 Inaugurated December 29, 1915 
 
 Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Nations 
 
 Official Commentary Upon the Rights 
 and Duties of Nations 
 
 Constitution and By-Laws 
 
 Officers and Members 
 
saa PRRAAL,, n 
 
 A ry ; A. 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 Page 
 Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Nations...... 1 
 Official Commentary upon the Declaration of the Rights 
 PUCCIO, On NATIONS eee gabe sa loth teeade A gl 2a 3 
 Constitution of the American Institute of International 
 PERE VRP E EY OeTANe Gi wec Ad MMe a tL WeamaLKES MA ner Sha llad Nana a a Leg 16 
 
 By-laws of the American Institute of International Law 22 
 Officers and Memhers of the American Institute of Inter- 
 Fahey me 6S 6s Oe) bits hae CERRR, Sty CERNE ORTON ROR RUC RaE ALAA fea 8 29 
 
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 
 adopted by the American Institute of International Law at 
 its first session in the City of Washington, January 6, 1916 
 
 WHEREAS the municipal law of civilized nations recognizes 
 and protects the right to life, the right to liberty, the right to the 
 pursuit of happiness, as added by the Declaration of Independence 
 of the United States of America, the right to legal equality, the right 
 to property, and the right to the enjoyment of the aforesaid rights; 
 and 2 
 
 WHEREAS these fundamental rights, thus universally recog- 
 nized, create a duty on the part of the peoples of all nations to ob- 
 serve them; and 
 
 WHEREAS, according to the political philosophy of the Declara- 
 tion of Independence of the United States, and the universal prac- 
 tice of the American Republics, nations or governments are re- 
 garded as created by the people, deriving their just powers from the 
 consent of the governed, and are instituted among men to promote 
 their safety and happiness and to secure to the people the enjoyment 
 of their fundamental rights; and 
 
 WHEREAS the nation is a moral or juristic person, the creature 
 of law, and subordinated to law as is the natural person in political 
 society ; and 
 
 WHEREAS we deem that these fundamental rights can be stated 
 in terms of international law and applied to the relations of the 
 members of the society of nations, one with another, just as they 
 have been applied in the relations of the citizens or subjects of the 
 states forming the Society of Nations; and | 
 
 WHEREAS these fundamental rights of national jurisprudence, 
 namely, the right to life, the right to liberty, the right to the pursuit 
 of happiness, the right to equality before the law, the right to prop- 
 erty, and the right to the observance thereof are, when stated in 
 terms of international law, the right of the nation to exist and to 
 protect and to conserve its existence; the right of independence and 
 the freedom to develop itself without interference or control from 
 other nations; the right of equality in law and before law; the right 
 to territory within defined boundaries and to exclusive jurisdiction 
 therein; and the right to the observance of these fundamental 
 rights; and 
 
 WHEREAS the rights and the duties of nations are, by virtue 
 of membership in the society thereof, to be exercised and performed 
 in accordance with the exigencies of their mutual Interdependence 
 expressed in the preamble to the Convention for the Pacific Settle- 
 ment of International Disputes of the First and Second Hague 
 Peace Conferences, recognizing the solidarity which unites the mem- 
 bers of the society of civilized nations; 
 
2 
 
 THEREFORE, Ture AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF INTERNA- 
 TIONAL Law, at its first session, held in the City of Washing- 
 ton, in the United States of America, on the sixth day of Jan- 
 uary, 1916, adopts the following six articles, together with the 
 commentary thereon, to be known as its 
 
 Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Nations. 
 
 I. Every nation has the right to exist, and to protect 
 and to conserve its existence; but this right neither im- 
 plies the right nor justifies the act of the state to protect 
 itself or to conserve its existence by the commission of 
 unlawful acts against innocent and unoffending states. 
 
 II. Every nation has the right to independence in the 
 sense that, it has a right to the pursuit of happiness and is 
 free to develop itself without interference or control from 
 other states, provided that in so doing it does not inter- 
 fere with or violate the rights of other states. 
 
 III. Every nation is in law and before law the equal of 
 every other nation belonging to the society of nations, and 
 all nations have the right to claim and, according to the 
 Declaration of Independence of the United States, “to as- 
 sume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and 
 equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s 
 God entitle them.” 
 
 IV. Every nation has the right to territory within de- 
 fined boundaries and to exercise exclusive jurisdiction 
 over its territory, and all persons whether native or 
 foreign found therein. 
 
 V. Every nation entitled to a right by the law of nations 
 is entitled to have that right respected and protected by 
 all other nations, for right and duty are correlative, and 
 the right of one is the duty of all to observe. 
 
 VI. International law is at one and the same time both 
 national and international: national in the sense that it is 
 the law of the land and applicable as such to the decision 
 of all questions involving its principles; international in the 
 sense that it is the law of the society of nations and appli- 
 cable as such to all questions between and among the mem- 
 bers of the society of nations involving its principles. 
 
Official Commentary upon the Declaration of the 
 Rights and Duties of Nations, adopted January 6, 
 1916. 
 
 I. Every nation has the right to exist, and to protect 
 and to conserve its existence; but this right neither im- 
 plies the right nor justifies the act of the state to protect 
 itself or to conserve its existence by the commission of 
 unlawful acts against innocent and unoffending states. 
 
 This right is to be understood in the sense in which the 
 right to life is understood in national law, according to which 
 it is unlawful for a human being to take human life, unless 
 it be necessary so to do in self-defense against an unlawful 
 attack threatening the life of the party unlawfully attacked. 
 
 In the Chinese Exclusion Case (reported in 130 United 
 States Reports, pp. 581, 606), decided by the Supreme Court 
 of the United States in 1888, Mr. Justice Field said for the 
 Court: 
 
 To preserve its independence, and give security against 
 foreign aggression and encroachment, is the highest duty 
 of every nation, and to attain these ends nearly all other 
 considerations are to be subordinated. It matters not in 
 what form such aggression and encroachment come, 
 whether from the foreign nation acting in its national 
 character or from vast hordes of its people crowding in 
 upon us. The government, possessing the powers which 
 are to be exercised for protection and security, is clothed 
 with authority to determine the occasion on which the 
 powers shall be called forth; and its determination, so 
 far as the subjects affected are concerned, are necessarily 
 conclusive upon all its departments and officers. 
 
 The right of a state to exist and to protect and to conserve 
 its existence is to be understood in the sense in which the 
 right of.an individual to his life was defined, interpreted and 
 applied in terms applicable alike to nations and individuals 
 
4 
 
 in the well known English case of Regina vs. Dudley (re- 
 ported in 15 Cox’s Criminal Cases, p. 624; 14 Queen’s Bench 
 Division, p. 273), decided by the Queen’s Bench Division of 
 the High Court of Justice in 1884, to the effect that it was 
 unlawful for shipwrecked sailors to take the life of one of 
 their number, in order to preserve their own lives, because it 
 was unlawful according to the common law of England for 
 an English subject to take human life, unless to defend him- 
 self against an unlawful attack of the assailant threatening 
 the life of the party unlawfully attacked. 
 
 The right of a State to exist and to protect and to conserve 
 its existence, as laid down by the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, is recognized not merely in the United States but in 
 Latin America, as appears from the views of the well-known 
 publicists, Messrs. Bello and Calvo, who may be considered 
 representative of Latin American thought and practice. 
 
 Thus Bello, writing in 1832, said: 
 
 There is no doubt that every nation has the right of 
 self-preservation and is entitled to take protective meas- 
 ures against any danger whatsoever; but this danger must 
 be great, manifest and imminent, in order to make it 
 lawful for us to exact by force that another nation alter 
 its institutions for our benefit. (Andrés Bello, Principios 
 de Derecho de Jentes, part 1, chap. 1, VII.) 
 
 And Calvo, half a century later, said: 
 
 One of the essential rights inherent in the sovereignty 
 nd the independence of States is that of self-preserva- 
 tion. This right is the first of all absolute or permanent 
 rights and is the fundamental basis of a great number 
 of accessory, secondary, or occasional rights. We may 
 say that it constitutes the supreme law of nations, as well 
 as the most imperative duty of citizens, and a society that 
 fails to repel aggression from without neglects its moral 
 duties toward its members and fails to live up to the very 
 purpose of its institution. (Carlos Calvo, Le Droit Inter- 
 national Théorique et Pratique, 5th ed., Vol. 1, § 208.) 
 
II. Every nation has the right to independence in the 
 sense that, it has a right to the pursuit of happiness and is 
 free to develop itself without interference or control from 
 other states, provided that in so doing it does not inter- 
 fere with or violate the rights of other states. 
 
 III. Every nation is in law and before law the equal of 
 every other state composing the society of nations, and 
 all nations have the right to claim and, according to the 
 Declaration of Independence of the United States, “to as- 
 sume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and 
 equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s 
 God entitle them.” 
 
 The right to independence and its necessary corollary, equal- 
 ity, is to be understood in the sense in which it was defined in 
 the following passage quoted from the decision of the great 
 English admiralty judge, Sir William Scott, later Lord 
 Stowell, in the case of The Louis (reported in 2 Dodson’s 
 Reports, pp. 210, 243-44), decided in 1817: 
 
 Two principles of public law are generally recognized 
 as fundamental. One is the perfect equality and entire 
 independence of all distinct states. Relative magnitude 
 creates no distinction of right; relative imbecility, 
 whether permanent or casual, gives no additional right 
 to the more powerful neighbor; and any advantage seized 
 upon that ground is mere usurpation. This is the great 
 foundation of public law, which it mainly concerns the 
 peace of mankind, both in their politic and private capaci- 
 ties, to preserve inviolate. The second is, that all nations 
 being equal, all have an equal right to the uninterrupted 
 use of the unappropriated parts of the ocean for their 
 navigation. In places where no local authority exists, 
 where the subjects of all states meet upon a footing of 
 entire equality and independence, no one state, or any of 
 its subjects, has a right to assume or exercise authority 
 over the subjects of another. 
 
 The right of equality is also to be understood in the sense 
 in which it was stated and illustrated by John Marshall, Chief 
 Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, who said, 
 
6 
 
 in deciding the case of The Antelope, in 1825 (reported in 
 10 Wheaton’s Reports, pp. 66, 122): 
 
 In this commerce thus sanctioned by universal assent, 
 every nation had an equal right to engage. How is this 
 right to be lost? Each may renounce it for its own 
 people; but can this renunciation affect others? 
 
 No principle of general law is more universally ac- 
 knowledged, than the perfect equality of nations. Russia 
 and Geneva have equal rights. It results from this 
 equality, that no one can rightfully impose a rule on 
 another. Lach legislates for itself, but its legislation can 
 operate on itself alone. A right, then, which is vested in 
 all, by the consent of all, can be divested only by consent; 
 and this [slave] trade, in which all have participated, 
 must remain lawful to those who can not be induced to 
 relinquish it. As no nation can prescribe a rule for 
 others, none can make a law of nations; and this traffic 
 remains lawful to those whose governments have not 
 forbidden it. 
 
 The right of equality is further to be understood in the 
 sense in which it was expressed and illustrated by Mr. Elihu 
 Root, in the following passage from the address which he 
 delivered, when Secretary of State of the United States, and 
 in the presence of the official delegates of the American Re- 
 publics accredited to the Third Pan-American Conference held 
 at Rio de Janeiro on July 31, 1906: 
 
 We wish for no victories but those of peace; for no 
 territory except our own; for no sovereignty except the 
 sovereignty over ourselves. We deem the independence 
 and equal rights of the smallest and weakest member of 
 the family of nations entitled to as much respect as those 
 of the greatest empire, and we deem the observance of 
 that respect the chief guaranty of the weak against the 
 oppression of the strong. We neither claim nor desire 
 any rights, or privileges, or powers that we do not freely 
 concede to every American Republic. We wish to in- 
 crease our prosperity, to expand our trade, to grow in 
 wealth, in wisdom, and in spirit, but our conception of 
 
7 
 
 the true way to accomplish this is not to pull down others 
 and profit by their ruin, but to help all friends to a com- 
 mon prosperity and a common growth, that we may all 
 become greater and stronger together. 
 
 It would seem that the measured judgments of Lord Stowell 
 and of Chief Justice Marshall, not to speak of Mr. Root’s 
 opinion, given as Secretary of State, are sufficient to estab- 
 lish a principle of international law, and that it is unneces- 
 sary to cite other authorities, if the ones already quoted fail 
 to produce conviction. In order to show, however, that inde- 
 pendence and equality are the law of the American Continent, 
 the authority of the two great Latin-American publicists may 
 be again invoked. 
 
 Thus, Bello says: 
 
 From the independence and the sovereignty of nations 
 it follows that no one nation is permitted to dictate to 
 any other nation the form of government, of religion, or 
 of administration that it must adopt, or to hold it ac- 
 countable for the relations between its citizens or those 
 between the government and its subjects. (Bello, Prin- 
 cipios de Derecho de Jentes, part 1, chap. 1, VII.) 
 
 All men being equal, the groups of men composing 
 universal society are equal. The weakest republic enjoys 
 the same rights and is subject to the same duties as the 
 mightiest empire. (Bello, Principios de Derecho de Jentes, 
 part 1, chap. 1, II.) 
 
 And to the same effect, but more at length, Calvo says: 
 
 States possess, by virtue of the law of their organiza- 
 tion and of their sovereignty, their own exclusive and 
 particular sphere of action. In this respect, they depend 
 upon no one and are bound to provide for the mainte- 
 nance of those rights and for the observance of those 
 duties alone which are the fundamental and necessary 
 basis of every free society. Absolute sovereignty neces- 
 sarily implies complete independence. Hence States, in 
 so far as they are moral persons, have a fundamental 
 right: the right of freely carrying out their destinies; and 
 
8 
 
 a duty that is no less imperative: the duty of recognizing 
 and of respecting the sovereign rights and the absolute 
 independence of other States. (Calvo, Le Droit Inter- 
 national Théorique et Pratique, 5th ed., Vol. I, § 107.) 
 
 The equality of sovereign States is a generally recog- 
 nized principle of public law. It has the twofold conse- 
 quence of giving all States the same rights and of impos- 
 ing upon them the same mutual duties. The relative size 
 of their territories cannot justify, in this regard, the 
 slightest difference or the slightest distinction be- 
 tween nations considered as moral persons, and,. 
 from the point of view of. international law, as 
 well as from that of equity, what is lawful or un- 
 just for one State is likewise lawful or unjust for all 
 others. “Nothing can be done to a small or weak nation,” 
 said Mr. Sumner in the United States Senate on March 
 23, 1871, “that would not be done to a large or powerful 
 nation, or that we would not allow to be done to our- 
 selves.” (Calvo, Le Drott International Théorique et 
 Pratique, 5th ed., Vol. I, § 210.) 
 
 IV. Every nation has the right to territory within de- 
 fined boundaries and to exercise exclusive jurisdiction 
 over its territory, and all persons whether native or 
 foreign found therein. 
 
 This right is to be understood in the sense in which it was 
 stated by Chief Justice Marshall tn the following passage of 
 his judgment in the case of the schooner Exchange (reported 
 in 7 Cranch’s Reports, pp. 116, 136-7), decided by the 
 Supreme Court of the United States in the year 1812: 
 
 The jurisdiction of the nation, within its own territory, 
 is necessarily exclusive and absolute; it is susceptible of no 
 limitation, not imposed by itself. Any restriction upon it, 
 deriving validity from an external source, would imply 
 a diminution of its sovereignty, to the extent of the 
 restriction, and an investment of that sovereignty, to the 
 same extent, in that power which could impose such re- 
 striction. All exceptions, therefore, to the full and com- 
 plete power of a nation, within its own territories, must 
 
9 
 
 be traced up to the consent of the nation itself. They can 
 flow from no other legitimate source. 
 
 This consent may be either express or implied. In the 
 latter case, it is less determinate, exposed more to the 
 uncertainties of construction; but, if understood, not less 
 obligatory. The world being composed of distinct sov- 
 ereignties, possessing equal rights and equal independence, 
 whose mutual benefit is promoted by intercourse with 
 each other, and by an interchange of those good offices 
 which humanity dictates and its wants require, all sover- 
 eignties have consented to a relaxation, in practice, in 
 cases under certain peculiar circumstances, of that abso- 
 lute and complete jurisdiction within their respective ter- 
 ritories which sovereignty confers. This consent may, in 
 some instances, be tested by common usage, and by com- 
 mon opinion, growing out of that usage. A nation would 
 justly be considered as violating its faith, although that 
 faith might not be expressly plighted, which should sud- 
 denly and without previous notice, exercise its territorial 
 powers in a manner not consonant to the usages and 
 received obligations of the civilized world. * * * * 
 
 This perfect equality and absolute independence of sov- 
 ereigns, and this common interest impelling them to mu- 
 tual intercourse, and an interchange of good offices with 
 each other, have given rise to a class of cases in which 
 every sovereign is understood to waive the exercise of a 
 part of that complete exclusive territorial jurisdiction, 
 which has been stated to be the attribute of every nation. 
 
 In view of the fulness of Chief Justice Marshall’s exposi- 
 tion of this right and its consequences, and in view also of the 
 acceptance of The Exchange as an authority in every civilized 
 country, both as to the right and its limitation, it does not seem 
 necessary to quote statements of Latin-American publicists, in 
 order to sustain what may be called the obvious, and which is _ 
 deeply imbedded in the legislation of the American Republics. 
 
 In lieu of many illustrations that might be drawn from the 
 civil codes of the Latin-American States, one will suffice, 
 namely, Article 14 of the civil code of Chile, which declares 
 that, 
 
10 
 
 the law is binding upon all the inhabitants of the Repub- 
 lic, including foreigners. 
 
 V. Every nation entitled to a right by the law of nations 
 is entitled to have that right respected and protected by 
 all other nations, for right and duty are correlative, and 
 the right of one is the duty of all to observe. 
 
 This right is to be understood in the sense in which it was 
 stated in the following passage from the judgment of Chief 
 Justice Waite in the case of United States vs. Arjona (reported 
 in 120 United States Reports, pp. 479, 487), decided by 
 the Supreme Court of the United States in 1886, holding that 
 as each nation had by international law the exclusive right to 
 fix its standard of money, it was the duty of the United States 
 as a member of the Society of Nations to protect the money of 
 a foreign country, in this case Colombia, from forgery: 
 
 But if the United States can require this of another, 
 that other may require it of them, because international 
 obligations are of necessity reciprocal in their nature. The 
 right, if it exists at all, is given by the law of nations, 
 and what is law for one is, under the same circumstances, 
 law for the other. A right secured by the law of nations 
 to a nation, or its people, is one the United States as 
 the representatives of this nation are bound to protect. 
 
 VI. International law is at one and the same time both 
 national and international: national in the sense that it is 
 the law of the land and applicable as such to the decision 
 of all questions involving its principles; international in the 
 sense that it is the law of the society of nations and appli- 
 cable as such to all questions between and among the mem- 
 bers of the society of nations involving its principles. 
 
 International law, then called the law of nations, was de- 
 clared by judges and commentators before the Declaration of 
 Independence of the United States to form an integral part 
 of the common law of England, and by judges and commen- 
 
11 
 
 tators of the United States as adopted at one and the same time 
 with the adoption of the common law of which it formed an 
 integral part. Thus, in the case of Buvot v. Barbuit (reported 
 in Cases Tempore Talbot, p. 281), decided by Lord Chancellor 
 Talbot in 1733, that distinguished judge and upright man is 
 reported by Lord Mansfield, who was then the ornament of 
 the bar and was counsel in the case, to have said: 
 
 That the law of nations, in its full extent, was part of 
 the law of England. That the act of Parliament was de- 
 claratory, and occasioned by a particular incident. That 
 the law of nations was to be collected from the practice 
 of different nations, and the authority of writers. 
 
 In the case of Triquet v. Bath (reported in 3 Burrow, p. 
 1478), decided by the Court of King’s Bench in 1764, Lord 
 Chief Justice Mansfield held, quoting the judgment of Lord 
 Talbot in Buvot v. Barbuit, that the law of nations was part 
 of the law of England; and three years later, in the leading 
 case of Heathfield v. Chilton (reported in 4 Burrow, p. 2015), 
 Lord Chief Justice Mansfield reiterated his opinion, stating 
 that, 
 
 the privileges of public ministers and their retinue depend 
 upon the law of nations; which is part of the common law 
 of England. And the act of Parliament of 7 Ann. c. 12 
 did not intend to alter, nor can alter the law of nations. 
 
 The distinguished commentator, Sir William Blackstone, 
 who had been counsel in both these cases tried before Lord 
 Mansfield, wrote in the first edition of the fourth volume of 
 his Commentaries upon the Laws of England, published in 
 1769, that: | 
 
 The law of nations (wherever any question arises which 
 is properly the object of its jurisdiction) is here adopted 
 in its full extent by the common law, and is held to be a 
 
12 
 
 part of the law of the land. And those acts of Parlia- 
 ment, which have from time to time been made to enforce 
 this universal law, or to facilitate the execution of its de- 
 cisions, are not to be considered as introductive of any | 
 
 ~new rule, but merely as declaratory of the old funda- 
 mental constitutions of the Kingdom; without which it 
 must cease to be a part of the civilized world. 
 
 In accordance with the views of English judges interpreting 
 and applying the Common Law and in reliance upon the ex- 
 press language of the illustrious English commentator from 
 whom they had learned their law, the Revolutionary statesmen 
 of North America understood and stated that international law 
 was a part of the law of the United States. Thus, Thomas Jef- 
 ferson, Secretary of State under Washington’s Administration, 
 referred in the year 1793 to “the laws of the land, of which the 
 law of nations makes an integral part.’’ (American State 
 Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. 1, p. 150.) His great opponent, 
 Alexander Hamilton, differing in most respects from Thomas 
 Jefferson, nevertheless concurred in the view that international 
 law was a part of the law of the land, and explained it more 
 elaborately than Mr. Jefferson in the following passage quoted 
 from the essays which Hamilton, under the pseudonym of 
 Camillus, wrote for the Press in 1795 in defense of the Jay 
 Treaty: 
 
 A question may be raised—Does this customary law 
 of nations, as established in Europe, bind the United 
 States? An affirmative answer to this is warranted by 
 
 - conclusive reasons. 
 
 1. The United States, when a member of the British 
 [E-mpire, were, in this capacity, a party to that law, and not 
 having dissented from it, when they became independent, 
 they are to be considered as having continued a party 
 to it. 
 
 2. The common law of England, which was and is in 
 force in each of these States, adopts the law of nations, 
 the positive equally with the natural, as a part of itself. 
 
13 
 
 3. Ever since we have been an independent nation, we 
 have appealed to and acted upon the modern law of nations, 
 as understood in Europe—various resolutions of Congress 
 during our Revolution, the correspondence of executive of- 
 ficers, the decisions of our courts of admiralty, all recog- 
 nize this standard. 
 
 4, Executive and legislative acts, and the proceedings 
 of our courts, under the present government, speak a simi- 
 lar language. The President’s proclamation of neutrality 
 refers expressly to the modern law of nations, which must 
 necessarily be understood as that prevailing in Europe, and 
 acceded to by this country; and the general voice of our 
 nation, together with the very arguments used against the 
 treaty, accord in the same point. It is indubitable, that 
 the customary law of European nations is as a part of the 
 common law, and, by adoption, that of the United States. 
 (Lodge’s “Works of Alexander Hamilton,” 1885, Vol. 
 V, pp. 89-90.) 
 
 A recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States 
 defines the relation of international law to the law of the land 
 as it was stated by Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries 
 published before the American Revolution. Thus, in the case 
 of The Paquete Habana (reported in 175 United States Re- 
 ports, pp. 677, 700), decided in 1899, Mr. Justice Gray, deliv- 
 ering the opinion of the Court, said: 
 
 International law is part of our law, and must be ascer- 
 tained and administered by the courts of justice of appro- 
 priate jurisdiction, as often as questions of right depend- 
 ing upon it are duly presented for their determination. 
 For this purpose, where there is no treaty, and no con- 
 trolling executive or legislative act or judicial decision, 
 resort must be had to the customs and usages of civilized 
 nations; and, as evidence of these, to the works of jurists 
 
 and commentators, who, by years of labor, research, and - 
 
 experience, have made themselves peculiarly well ac- 
 quainted with the subjects of which they treat. Such 
 works are resorted to by judicial tribunals, not for the 
 speculations of their authors concerning what the law 
 ought to be but for trustworthy evidence of what the law 
 really is. 
 
14 
 
 It may be said in summing up the relation of inter- 
 national law to the common law of England and to the 
 municipal law of the United States, that international law is 
 part of the English common law; that as such it passed with 
 the English colonies to America; that when, in consequence 
 of successful rebellion, they were admitted to the society 
 of nations, the new Republic recognized international law as 
 completely as international law recognized the new Republic. 
 Municipal law it was in England; municipal law it remained 
 and is in the United States. Without expressing an opinion 
 upon the vexed question whether it is law in the abstract, the 
 courts, State and Federal, take judicial cognizance of its exist- 
 ence, and in appropriate cases enforce it, so that for the Amer- 
 ican student or practitioner international is domestic or muni- 
 cipal law. 
 
 The constitutions of certain Latin-American States ex- 
 pressly lay down the principle of Anglo-American law that 
 international law is part of the law of the land. Thus, Article 
 106 of the constitution of the Dominican Republic and Arti- 
 cle 125 of the constitution of Venezuela, which admits the prin- 
 ciple with certain limitations. The constitution of Colombia 
 of 1863 expressly declared that “The law of nations forms 
 part of the national legislation,’ and an eminent American 
 publicist specially versed in such matters states that “the au- 
 thorities of the country are understood, in their treatment of 
 neutrality and other questions, to have acknowledged the con- 
 tinuing force of the principle.” In other constitutions of the 
 American Republics the principle is not stated in express 
 terms. It is, however, recognized implicitly or for specific 
 cases; for example, Articles 31, 100, and 101 of the constitu- 
 tion of Argentina; Articles 59, 60, and 61 of the constitution 
 of Brazil; Article 73 of the constitution of Chile; Article 107 
 of the constitution of Honduras; Article 96 of the constitution 
 of Uruguay, etc., etc. 
 
 The laws of Latin-American countries—notably those re- 
 lating to judicial procedure or to the organization of judicial 
 
15 
 
 authority—recognize, expressly or implicitly, the principle in 
 question. In all the American countries the rules of inter- 
 national law have been treated as in force in their proclama- 
 tions of neutrality in the great European war. 
 
 In future it must be expressly admitted as the basis of 
 the public law of the New World that international law is part 
 of the national legislation of every country. This is not only 
 a principle of justice but one that is necessary to facilitate and 
 to strengthen the friendly relations of all States. 
 
 The following impressive language of an eminent citizen of 
 the American continent, Daniel Webster, to be found in an 
 official instruction written when he was Secretary of State of 
 the United States of America, may be quoted as a statement 
 in summary form of the rights and duties of nations, especially 
 of the American Republics: 
 
 Every nation, on being received, at her own request, 
 into the circle of civilized governments, must understand 
 that she not only attains rights of sovereignty and the 
 dignity of national character, but that she binds herself to 
 the strict and faithful observance of all those princi- 
 ples, laws, and usages which have obtained currency 
 among civilized states, and which have for their object 
 the mitigation of the miseries of war. 
 
CONSTITUTION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE 
 OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 
 
 ARTICLE I. Name 
 
 An association is founded to be known as the American 
 Institute of International Law. 
 
 ARTICLE II. Object 
 
 The American Institute of International Law is an unof- 
 ficial scientific association. 
 
 It proposes: 
 
 1. To give precision to the general principles of interna- 
 tional law as they now exist, or to formulate new ones, in 
 conformity with the solidarity which unites the members of 
 the society of civilized nations, in order to strengthen these 
 bonds and, especially, the bonds between the American peoples; 
 
 2. To study questions of international law, particularly 
 questions of an American character, and to endeavor to 
 solve them, either in conformity with generally accepted prin- 
 ciples, or by extending and developing them, or by creating 
 new principles adapted to the special needs of the American 
 Continent ; 
 
 3. To discover a method of codifying the general or special 
 principles of international law, and to elaborate projects of 
 codification on matters which lend themselves thereto; 
 
 4. To aid in bringing about the triumph of the principles 
 of justice and of humanity which should govern the relations 
 between peoples, considered as nations, through more exten- 
 sive instruction in international law, particularly in American 
 universities, through lectures and addresses, as well as through 
 publications and all other means; 
 
 5. To organize the study of international law along truly 
 scientific and practical lines in a way that meets the needs of 
 modern life, and taking into account the problems of our hem- 
 isphere and American doctrines; 
 
17 
 
 6. To contribute, within the limits of its competence and 
 _the means at its disposal, toward the maintenance of peace, 
 or toward the observance of the laws of war and the mitiga- 
 tion of the evils thereof; 
 
 7. To increase the sentiment of fraternity among the Re- 
 publics of the American Continent, so as to strengthen friend- 
 ship and mutual confidence among the citizens of the coun- 
 tries of the New World. 
 
 ARTICLE III. Membership 
 
 The American Institute of International Law is composed 
 of committees or delegates of the national societies of inter- 
 national law established in the different American Republics, 
 which are affiliated therewith and of which it is the permanent 
 representative. 
 
 It comprises : 
 
 1. Charter members; 
 
 2. Titular members; 
 
 3. Ex officio members; 
 
 4. Corresponding members. 
 
 The charter members are those who accepted this designa- 
 tion by signing, in 1912, the draft which has now become the 
 present Constitution. 
 
 The titular members, chosen exclusively from among the 
 publicists of the different Republics of the American Conti- 
 nent, are elected by the Institute, in conformity with the next 
 article. No Republic may have more than five such members 
 at one and the same time. 
 
 If the secretary general of the national society of inter- 
 national law in any one of the American Republics is not 
 personally a member of the Institute, he becomes of right a 
 member ex officio, that is to say, by virtue of and for the 
 term of his office. Ex officio members have, as such, the same 
 rights as titular members. 
 
18 
 
 Jurists of non-American nationality, who, through their 
 writings or their activity, shall have contributed to the prog- 
 ress of international law, may be elected corresponding 
 members. 
 
 Corresponding members are invited to attend all the ses- 
 sions of the Institute, with the same rights and privileges as 
 American members. They have not, however, the right to 
 vote either on administrative or scientific questions. 
 
 They are called upon to give their opinion on questions sub- 
 mitted to the consideration of the Institute, and they are 
 active collaborators thereof. 
 
 They are exempt from the entrance fee and annual dues. 
 
 No one State can have more than three such members. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. National Societies 
 
 The national societies organized in each American Republic 
 tor the study and popularization of international law, whose 
 members are jurists versed in international law, may affiliate 
 with the American Institute. The members of these societies 
 are entitled to attend the sessions of the Institute, but they may 
 not take part in its deliberations nor may they vote. 
 
 The affiliated national societies propose duly qualified per- 
 sons from among their nationals, for election as titular mem- 
 bers by the Institute. | 
 
 The members of the national societies, who are members of 
 the Institute, constitute, in their country, a governing com- 
 mittee of the said society, which committee is the intellectual 
 bond between the national society and the Institute. 
 
 The committee communicates, either directly, or through 
 the secretary general of the national society, with the sec- 
 retary general of the Institute, and sends him all the trans- 
 actions and projects of the said society or informs him of the 
 progress that has been made upon them. 
 
 The secretary general of the Institute transmits these trans- 
 actions and projects in full, in part, or a synopsis thereof to 
 the different national societies. 
 
19 
 
 ARTICLE V. Officers 
 
 The officers of the Institute are an honorary president, a 
 president, a secretary general, and a treasurer. 
 
 Before the close of each session there is an election of an 
 honorary president and a president, who remain in office until 
 the election of their successors at the following session. 
 
 The application of the foregoing second paragraph is pro- 
 visionally suspended until the Institute shall have decided 
 otherwise. 
 
 In the elections individual ballots are cast, and only the 
 members present are permitted to vote. Nevertheless, absent 
 members are allowed to send their votes in writing, in sealed 
 envelopes. Candidates must receive a majority of the votes 
 of the members present, as well as a majority of all the votes 
 validly cast, in order to be elected. 
 
 ArtiIcLe VI. Executive Council 
 
 An Executive Council is the governing body of the In- 
 stitute. 
 
 It meets at Washington, the seat of the Institute. 
 
 lt is composed of the president, the secretary general, and 
 the treasurer, who are members ex officio, and of two other 
 members elected at the beginning of each session. They are 
 eligible for re-election. 
 
 It has the right to increase its membership and itself elects 
 additional members, if it deems it necessary. 
 
 ArTIcLE VII. Secretary General 
 
 The secretary general is elected by the Institute for three | 
 sessions. He is eligible for re-election. 
 
 He has in his charge the drafting of the minutes of each 
 meeting, all the publications of the Institute, its routine work, 
 its correspondence, and the execution of its decisions, unless 
 the Institute provides otherwise. He is keeper of its seal and 
 
20 
 
 of its archives. At the beginning of each session he presents 
 a summary of the work of the preceding session. 
 
 ARTICLE VIII. Assistant Secretaries 
 
 On the proposal of the secretary general, the Institute may 
 appoint one or more assistant secretaries, to aid him in the 
 performance of his duties or to represent him in his absence. 
 
 ARTICLE IX. Treasurer 
 
 The treasurer is elected for three sessions. He is eligible 
 for re-election. 
 
 He has in his charge the financial affairs of the Institute, 
 under the control of the Executive Council. He presents a 
 detailed report at each session. 
 
 Two members are designated at the first meeting as audi- 
 tors, and present, during the session, a report on the result of 
 their examination of the treasurer’s accounts. 
 
 ARTICLE X._ Reporters 
 
 The Executive Council submits questions for examination 
 and study to the affiliated national societies, or appoints re- 
 porters from among its members, or organizes committees for 
 the preparatory study of questions that are to be submitted to 
 the deliberations of the Institute. 
 
 In urgent cases, the secretary general himself prepares the 
 reports. | 
 
 ARTICLE XI. Sessions 
 
 There shall be at least one session of the Institute every two 
 years; but the Executive Council may, during this interval, 
 call an extra session of the Institute. 
 
 At each session the Institute designates the place and the 
 time of the following session. It may leave this designation 
 to the Executive Council. 
 
ARTICLE XII. Languages 
 
 French, the language of the /nstitut de droit international 
 and of the Peace Conferences, is likewise the language of the 
 Institute. 
 
 Nevertheless the use of Spanish, Portuguese, and English, 
 as national languages, is permitted as of right. 
 
 Every official document that is to be published is translated 
 into the language or languages selected by the officers. 
 
 ARTICLE XIII. Publication of Proceedings 
 
 After each session, the Institute publishes an account of 
 its proceedings. 
 
 ARTICLE XIV. Dues and Funds 
 
 The expenses of the Institute are covered: 
 
 1. By the dues of its members, as well as by an entrance fee. 
 
 The dues are, unless the by-laws provide to the contrary, 
 an entrance fee of ten dollars and annual dues of five dollars. 
 The dues are payable from and including the year of election. 
 They entitle the member to all the publications of the Insti- 
 tute. An unjustifiable delay of more than three years in the 
 payment of dues may be considered as equivalent to a resig- 
 nation. 
 
 2. By foundations and other gifts. 
 
 It is proposed that a fund be gradually formed, the in- 
 come from which shall be devoted to the expenses of the 
 sessions, of the publications, of the secretariat, and of other 
 routine matters. 
 
 ARTICLE XV. Amendments. 
 
 The present constitution may be revised or amended, in 
 whole or in part, at a regular session, on the request of a 
 majority of the members present and voting. 
 
BY-LAWS OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF 
 INTERNATIONAL LAW 
 
 PARTY 
 Members 
 ARTICLE [| 
 
 The titular members of the Institute are elected by it from 
 the list of names presented by the affiliated national society. 
 
 ARTICLE I] 
 
 Where no affiliated national society exists or where the 
 existing society neglects to present candidates, the Institute 
 provides for nominations or vacancies as it sees fit. 
 
 ARTICLE III 
 
 Corresponding members are elected by the Institute on the 
 proposal of the Executive Council, at the meeting devoted 
 to the election of titular members. 
 
 PART iI 
 Preliminary Work between Sessions 
 ARTICLE IV 
 
 By article X of the Constitution the Executive Council 
 presents the questions for study, either by laying them before 
 the national societies, or by designating two reporters, or one 
 reporter and a committee of study for each question. 
 
 In the former case, the subject, with or without a ques- 
 tionnaire, is submitted to each national society. 
 
 If two reporters are appointed, each of them prepares a 
 memorandum, after which one of them or a third reporter des- 
 ignated by the Executive Council prepares a report on the basis 
 of and with the assistance of the memoranda presented. 
 
 If a reporter and a committee of study are designated, the 
 reporter must get into communication with the members of the 
 
ok 
 
 committee before the 3lst of December of the year of his 
 appointment, and submit his ideas to them and learn their 
 views. 
 
 Every member, who signifies his desire to that effect, has 
 the right to be a member of such of the committees of study as 
 he shall indicate to the secretary general. 
 
 ARTICLE V 
 
 The national societies and the reporters must transmit their 
 studies or reports to the secretary general in ample time for 
 their publication and distribution before the session at which 
 they are to be discussed. 
 
 The secretary general does not provide for the printing or 
 distribution of other reports or documents prepared by the 
 reporters or by members of committees or of the Institute. 
 Such works are published only in exceptional cases and by 
 virtue of an express decision on the part of the Institute or 
 the Executive Council. 
 
 PART tif 
 Sessions 
 ARTICLE VI 
 
 There may be no more than one session each year. The in- 
 terval between two sessions must not exceed two years. 
 
 At each session the Institute designates the place and time 
 of the next session. This designation may be left to the 
 Executive Council (Constitution, Article XI). In this case, 
 the secretary general informs the national societies affiliated 
 with the Institute, at least four months in advance, of the 
 place and date determined upon. 
 
 ARTICLE VII 
 
 The program of the session is drawn up by the Executive 
 Council, and the secretary general brings it to the attention 
 of the national societies as soon as possible. 
 
24 
 
 The program must be accompanied by the summary of the 
 progress made on the preparatory work, as well as by all other 
 information that may facilitate the labors of the members 
 taking part in the session. 
 
 ARTICLE VIII 
 
 Members who desire to propose new questions for study are 
 invited to lay them before the Executive Council at the be- 
 ginning of the session. This invitation must be extended by 
 the president at the opening of the sessions. 
 
 ARTICLE [X 
 
 The president, after consultation with the Executive Coun- 
 cil and the reporters, determines the order in which the sub- 
 jects should be treated; but the program is in all cases under 
 the control of the Assembly itself. 
 
 PART IV 
 Meetings 
 ARTICLE X 
 
 The meetings are devoted to scientific work. 
 
 The titular members and the corresponding members take 
 part in them. The former have the right to vote; the latter 
 have the right merely to take part in the discussions. 
 
 The meetings are not public. The Executive Council may, 
 however, permit the attendance of the local authorities and 
 press, as well as of persons who request to be admitted. 
 
 ARTICLE XI 
 
 Unless otherwise resolved by a special decision of the Exec- 
 utive Council, the president delivers an address immediately 
 after the opening of the first meeting. 
 
 The secretary general presents a summary of the work of 
 the last session and makes known the names of the assistant 
 
ga 
 
 secretaries or editors whom he has appointed to aid him in 
 drawing up the minutes of the session. 
 The assistant secretaries or editors hold office only during 
 
 the session. 
 ARTICLE XII 
 
 The treasurer is then requested to present his accounts to 
 the Institute, and two auditors are thereupon elected to exam- 
 ine the accounts of the treasurer. The auditors present their 
 report in the course of the session (Constitution, Art. 1X). 
 
 ARTICLE XIII 
 
 Each meeting is opened by the reading of the minutes of 
 the preceding meeting. 
 
 Separate minutes are drawn up for each meeting, even 
 when there are more than one on the same day; but the 
 minutes of the morning meeting are read only at the opening 
 of the next day’s meeting. 
 
 The members present approve or revise the minutes. Re- 
 vision can be requested only in the matter of wording, of 
 errors, or of omissions. A decision cannot be changed in the 
 minutes. 
 
 The minutes of the last meeting of a session are approved 
 by the president. 
 
 ARTICLE XIV 
 
 If the Executive Council deems it advisable to consider a 
 matter as urgent, it may propose the immediate discussion 
 thereof, and, if the majority of the members present agree, 
 the matter may be put to vote in the course of this session; 
 otherwise the proposition is of right postponed until the fol- 
 lowing session. 
 
 ARTICLE XV 
 
 Committees may be appointed during a meeting for the 
 examination of certain questions. These committees may, in 
 turn, appoint sub-committees. 
 
26 
 
 ARTICLE XVI 
 
 The propositions of the reporters and of the committees 
 form the basis of the deliberations in the meetings. 
 
 The members of committees have the right to complete and 
 develop their individual opinions. 
 
 ARTICLE XVII 
 
 The discussion is then opened. It takes place in the lan- 
 guages indicated in Article XII of the constitution.. 
 
 At the request of the members, the discussion may be 
 summed up in French. 
 
 ARTICLE XVIII 
 
 No one may speak without having been previously recog- 
 nized by the president. 
 
 The latter notes the names of the members who request 
 the floor and recognizes them in the order of their requests. 
 
 The reporters, however, when the question on which they 
 have made a report is under discussion, are not subject to the 
 rule of speaking in turn. The same is true of the president 
 of the committee. 
 
 ARTICLE XIX 
 The reading of an address is forbidden, unless specially 
 authorized by the president. 
 ARTICLE XX 
 
 If a speaker digresses too far from the subject under con- 
 sideration, the president calls his attention to the fact and re- 
 quests him to speak to the question. 
 
 ARTICLE XXI 
 
 All propositions and all amendments are submitted, in writ- 
 ing, to the president. 
 
27 
 
 ARTICLE XXII 
 
 If a point of order is raised during a deliberation, the dis- 
 cussion of the main question is suspended until the assembly 
 passes upon the point of order. 
 
 ARTICLE XXIII 
 
 The closing of the discussion may be proposed. The discus- 
 sion may not, however, be declared closed, unless a two-thirds 
 majority of the assembly so votes. 
 
 If no one demands the floor or if it has been resolved 
 to close the discussion, the president declares the discussion 
 closed. Thereafter no one may be given the floor, except, in 
 special cases, the reporter or the president of the committee. 
 
 ARTICLE XXIV 
 
 Before proceeding to a vote, the president submits to the 
 assembly the order in which the questions will be voted upon. 
 
 If there are objections to the order, the assembly passes 
 upon them at once. 
 
 ARTICLE XXV 
 
 Amendments to amendments are put to vote before amend- 
 ments, and the latter before the main question. Proposals 
 purely and simply to reject the question are not considered 
 amendments. 
 
 Where there are more than two alternate main propositions, 
 they are all put to vote, one after the other, and every member 
 may vote for one of them. When a vote has thus been taken 
 on all the propositions, if none of them has obtained a ma- 
 jority, the members decide, by another ballot, which of the two 
 propositions receiving the least number of votes must be elim- 
 inated. The remaining propositions are then voted upon in 
 the same manner until only one is left, upon which a definitive 
 vote may be taken. 
 
28 
 
 ARTICLE XX VI 
 
 The adoption of an amendment to an amendment does not 
 bind a member to vote for the amendment itself; neither does 
 the adoption of an amendment obligate a member to vote in 
 favor of the main proposition. 
 
 ARTICLE XX VII 
 
 When a proposition is capable of being divided, any member 
 may request a vote by division. 
 
 ARTICLE XXVIII 
 
 When the proposition under consideration is drawn up in 
 several articles, the proposition as a whole is first subjected 
 to general discussion. 
 
 After such discussion and the vote on its articles, the propo- 
 sition as a whole is put to vote. Such vote may be postponed 
 until a subsequent meeting. 
 
 ARTICLE XXIX 
 
 The voting is done by raising the hand. 
 
 No one is bound to take part in a vote. If some of the 
 members present abstain, the question is decided by the 
 majority of those voting. 
 
 In case of a tie, the proposition is considered defeated. 
 
 ARTICLE XXX 
 
 The vote may be taken by roll-call, if five members so 
 request. There is always occasion for a roll-call on a scien- 
 tific proposition as a whole. 
 
 The minutes mention the names of the members voting for 
 or against and the names of those who abstain. 
 
29 
 
 ARTICLE XX XI 
 
 The Institute may decide that a second deliberation should 
 take place, either in the course of the session, or during the 
 following session, or that its decisions be referred to a draft- 
 ing committee to be designated by itself or by the Executive 
 Council. 
 
OFFICERS AND MEMBERS OF THE AMERICAN 
 INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 
 
 OFFICERS 
 
 Erinu Root, Honorary President 
 JAMES Brown Scott, President 
 ALEJANDRO ALVAREZ, Secretary General 
 Luis ANDERSON, Treasurer 
 
 EXECUTIVE COUNCIL 
 
 Exinu Root 
 
 James Brown Scott 
 
 ALEJANDRO ALVAREZ 
 
 Luis ANDERSON 
 
 ANTONIO SANCHEZ DE BUSTAMANTE 
 Joaquin D. Casasus 
 
 PERMANENT COMMITTEE FOR THE STUDY OF QUESTIONS 
 RELATING TO NEUTRALITY 
 
 The Executive Council 
 CHARTER MEMBERS 
 
 Argentine Republic: Luis M. Draco 
 Bolivia: ALBERTO GUTIERREZ 
 
 Bragil: Ruy BARBOSA 
 
 Chile: ALEJANDRO ALVAREZ 
 
 Colombia: ANTONIO JOSE URIBE 
 
 Costa Rica: Luis ANDERSON 
 
 Cuba: ANTONIO SANCHEZ DE BUSTAMANTE 
 Dominican Republic: ANDRES J. MONTOLIO 
 Ecuador: RAFAEL ARIZAGA 
 
 Guatemala: ANTONIO BATRES JAUREGUI 
 Haiti: J. N. LEGER 
 
 Honduras: ALBERTO MEMBRENO 
 
 Mexico: Joaguin D. Casasus 
 
31 
 
 Nicaragua: SALVADOR CASTRILLO 
 
 Panama: FEDERICO Boyp 
 
 Paraguay: MANUEL GONDRA 
 
 Peru: RAMON RIBEYRO 
 
 Salvador: RaFaEL S. Lopez (deceased) 
 
 Umited States of America: JAMES Brown ScotrT 
 Uruguay: CarLos M. DE PENA 
 
 Venesuela: Jost Git Fortout 
 
 TITULAR MEMBERS 
 
 Argentine Republic 
 EDUARDO BIpAU 
 CARLOS OcTAVIO BUNGE 
 Luis M. Draco 
 JOAQUIN V. GONZALEZ 
 EDUARDO SARMIENTO LASPIUR 
 
 Bolivia 
 DANIEL SANCHEZ BUSTAMANTE 
 ALBERTO GUTIERREZ 
 ALBERTO DIEZ DE MEDINA 
 
 CLAUDIO PINILLA 
 Victor E. SANJiNES 
 
 Brazil 
 CLovis BEVILAQUA 
 * Lavro MULLER 
 RopDRIGO OcTAVIO 
 MANOEL CICERO PERERGINO DA SILVA 
 EPITACIO PESSOA 
 
 Chile 
 ALEJANDRO ALVAREZ 
 Luis Barros BorcoNo 
 ANTONIO HUNEEUS 
 EpuARDO SUAREZ MUJICA 
 ELIopORO YANES 
 
 ~ 
 
32 
 
 Colombia 
 NicoLas ESGUERRA 
 ANTONIO JOSE URIBE 
 Francisco Jost URRUTIA 
 ADOLFO URUETA 
 Jos&é Marta GONZALEZ VALENCIA 
 
 Costa Rica 
 Luis ANDERSON 
 RicARDO GIMENES 
 LEONIDAS PACHECO 
 MANUEL CASTRO QUESADA 
 C. GONZALEZ VIQUES 
 
 Cuba 
 
 ANTONIO SANCHEZ DE BUSTAMANTE 
 PaspLo DESVERNINE 
 
 Ocravio GIBERGA 
 
 FERNANDO SANCHEZ DE FUENTES 
 RAFAEL MoNTORO 
 
 Domimcan Republic 
 
 FEDERICO HENRIQUES CARVAJAL 
 MANUEL J. TRONCOSO DE LA CONCHA 
 MANUEL ARTURO MACHADO 
 ANDRES J. MONTOLIO 
 
 ADOLFO ALEJANDRO NOUEL 
 
 Ecuador 
 
 RAFAEL Maria ARIZAGA 
 ALEJANDRO CARDENAS 
 GONZALO S. CORDOVA 
 
 Victor MANUEL PENAHERRERA 
 José Luts TAMAYO 
 
 Guatemala 
 Mariano Cruz 
 ANTONIO BATRES JAUREGUI 
 Jost Matos 
 ALBERTO MENCOS 
 CARLOS SALAZAR 
 
33 
 
 Haiti 
 Louis Borno 
 EDMOND HERAUX 
 PIERRE HuDICOURT 
 Jacques N. LEGER 
 SoLon MENos 
 
 Honduras 
 
 Fausto DaAvILA 
 ALBERTO MEMBRENO 
 ALBERTO UCLES 
 RICARDO DE J. URRUTIA 
 MARIANO VASQUEZ 
 
 Mexico 
 
 FrANcisco L. DE LA BARRA 
 MANUEL CALERO 
 
 Joaguin D. Casasus 
 Victor MANUEL CASTILLO 
 PEDRO LASCURAIN 
 
 Nicaragua 
 
 Mopesto BARRIOS 
 ALEJANDRO CESAR 
 PEDRO GONZALEZ 
 CARLOS CUADRA PASOS 
 Maximo H. ZEPEDA 
 
 Panama 
 
 Ricarpo J. ALFARO 
 HARMODIO ARIAS 
 Eusesio A. MorALES 
 BELISARIO PoRRAS 
 Ramon M. VALDES 
 
 Paraguay 
 
 EusEBIO AYALA 
 CECILIO- BAEZ 
 
 MANUEL GONDRA 
 ANTOLIN IRALA 
 FuLcencio R. Moreno 
 
34 
 
 Peru 
 TsAAc ALZAMORA 
 Victor M. Maurtrua 
 SoLon PoLo 
 RAMON RIBEYRO 
 MANUEL V. VILLARAN 
 Salvador 
 
 SALVADOR GALLEGOS 
 
 Atonso REYES GUERRA 
 VICTOR JEREZ 
 
 MANUEL I. MorALES 
 FRANCISCO MARTINEZ SUAREZ 
 
 United States of America 
 
 RoBERT BAcon 
 ROBERT LANSING 
 Extinu Root 
 
 Leo S. Rowe 
 
 JamMEs Brown Scott 
 
 ‘ Uruquay' 
 
 DANIEL GARCIA ACEVEDO 
 MANUEL ARBELAIZ 
 
 Juan ANToNIo BuERO 
 
 ApDOLFO BERRO GARCIA 
 
 Juan ZORILLA DE SAN MARTIN 
 
 V enezucla 
 Simon BARCELO 
 ARMINIO BorgJAS 
 Jesus Royas FERNANDEZ 
 Jost Git FortTouL 
 F. Arroyo PAREJO 
 
hee ee 
 
 = st, 
 
0112 0 aa 
 
 Cuz }