Professors Arias and Errera deal respectively with the economic and geographic aspects of Italian nationality. They show that Italy is both a natural unity and an economic unity. The Italian school does not limit nationality to the narrow sense of the character of the people, but considers natural boundaries and economic areas as implied in the term.

An historical chapter by Professor Leicht deals with the struggle since the middle ages between Italy and Austria over the "unredeemed territory." The actual conditions in this region with reference to the present character of the people is described by Professor Bianchi. The effect of suppression of the Italian language, the frequency of proItalian demonstrations in the Trentino, the Austrian repressive measures, even amounting to censorship of mails going into Italy, are pictured.

Professors Solmi and Revelli also treat historical and political relations of Italy in the Mediterranean and the Near East. They regard as inevitable the Italian conflicts with Turkey in 1911 and again in 1915. The recent increasing subserviency of Turkey to Pan-Germanism was regarded as a menace to Italian commercial interests in the Eastern Mediterranean, a region whose shores have been extensively colonized by Italians.

The closing chapter by Professor Albini attempts to interpret Italian character, and Italy's place in world civilization, contrasting Italian and Germanic art and ideals, dreading the regimentation which Germany might impose on the world, and which military efficiency makes necessary. Yet he hopes there is a brighter side, and that the war may lead to a new idealism and artistic regeneration, especially in Italy.

While, as might be expected, the book has the usual faults of special pleading, it undoubtedly gives a good clue to the point of view of educated Italians, and is an excellent summary of different phases of modern Italian political thought, and its Italian idealism and tendency to subordinate the practical to the philosophical is a hopeful and striking contrast to many recent volumes.

GEORGE GRAFTON WILSON.

Des Requisitions en Matière de Droit International Public. By Georges Ferrand. 2d ed., Paris: A. Pedone. 1917. pp. xx, 490.

This is a revised and enlarged edition of a doctor's thesis originally published in 1892. It contains prefaces by Professor Renault and the

Intendant General Thoumazou, a bibliography of the literature relating to requisitions and contributions, and a number of "annexes" containing the texts of various official and other documents. Professor Renault, in his preface, after adverting to German practice in respect to the levying of contributions and requisitions contrary to the international conventions and established usages, expresses the hope that the time will come when belligerents will respect the rules of international law in a manner to reconcile military exigencies with consideration of justice.

M. Ferrand's treatise is probably the most elaborate study of the subject of contributions and requisitions that has been made. It is almost encyclopædic in its scope and character, containing as it does a vast amount of information in regard to the practice in the past, the views enunciated at the Brussels and Hague Conferences and the conclusions reached, the discussions in the Institute of International Law, the rules laid down in the military manuals of the more important states, and the opinions of the jurists, text writers, and military authorities.

His analyses of the proces verbaux of the commissions of the Hague Conferences which considered the subject are especially full and detailed. He considers, in turn, the general principles governing the law and practice, the various kinds of requisitions, the objects that may be requisitioned, the purposes for which supplies may be taken and contributions levied, the procedure to be followed, the duty to furnish receipts, the question of payment, the duty of the state to indemnify its nationals for supplies taken without payment, the rights of neutral persons and property, sanctions for failure to comply with the demands of the requisitioning belligerent, etc. He readily admits that the right of a belligerent to requisition supplies and to levy pecuniary contributions is unanimously recognized, although the exercise of the right is subject to certain well-established limitations which he examines in turn. Concerning the requisition of personal services which the Germans have resorted to on so large a scale during the present war, M. Ferrand very properly contends that they have exceeded their lawful rights in compelling the enemy to dig trenches, work in munition and barbed wire factories, stone quarries, to construct roads for strategic purposes, and to operate railway trains for the transportation of troops and military supplies.

Regarding the much controverted question of the right to requisi

tion guides from the enemy population, M. Ferrand concludes, from a detailed study of the views expressed at the Hague Conferences and from an examination of the text of the convention, that it was the intention of the convention to forbid requisitions of this kind. This view is reënforced by the interpretation of the great majority of text writers and the conclusions of the Institute of International Law, to say nothing of the considerations of justice and public policy. He recognizes the right of a belligerent to take possession of the railways and use them for military or other purposes in accordance with the well-established rules of usufruct; but he, very properly it would seem, denies the right of a belligerent to tear up the tracks and transport the rails, cross ties, and rolling stock to his own country, as the Germans recently did in the case of certain Belgian railways which were torn up and carried away for the construction of new lines in Poland. This is not permissible, among other reasons, because the duty imposed by international law on the occupying belligerent to restore the railway, at the conclusion of peace, is practically impossible of fulfillment. He reaches the same conclusion regarding the German practice of requisitioning Belgian horses and transporting them to Germany, not for the "needs of the army" but for the use of German farmers and stock raisers in their own country; and for the same reason he condemns the German practice of seizing and removing to Germany the machinery and equipment of Belgian factories and manufacturing establishments for use by their own manufacturers at home. The theory laid down by Von Moltke in his letter to Bluntschli and by the Kriegsbrauch im Landkriege that a belligerent is not bound to take into consideration the resources of the country but may requisition everything that the army needs, M. Ferrand very justly attacks as not only harsh but contrary to the plain language of the Hague Convention.

While M. Ferrand's work does not purport to deal with requisitions at municipal law, he nevertheless devotes a chapter to the consideration of the right of the inhabitants to reimbursement by their own government for supplies taken by the enemy and for which no payment has been made, and he gives a resumé of French law and practice in respect to this matter, both during the War of 1870-71 and during the present

war.

One chapter of the present work is devoted to a review of German policy in respect to the levying of contributions and requisitions (but not collective fines) during the present war, but in view of the large

scale on which the Germans have resorted to this method of raising money and supplies, and in view of the protests which it has provoked on the ground of illegality, it seems to the reviewer that the subject is inadequately treated. In reality the chapter consists mainly of quotations from the reports of the Belgian and French official commissions of inquiry and contains little information beyond what is found in those reports. The facts are, of course, difficult to obtain at present, but if they are ever available, as it is to be hoped they will be, they will afford materials for a valuable chapter in the history of international law which is yet to be written.

JAMES W. GARNER.

Belgium's Case; A Juridical Enquiry. By Ch. de Visscher. Translated from the French by E. F. Jourdain, with a preface by J. Van Den Heuvel, Minister of State, London, New York and Toronto: Hodder and Stoughton. 1916. pp. xxiv, 163.

On August 4, 1914, the German Chancellor announced to the Reichstag, to quote the author, that

Our troops have occupied Luxembourg and perhaps are already on Belgian soil. Gentlemen, that is contrary to the dictates of international law. . . . Necessity knows no law. We were compelled to override the just protest of the Luxembourg and Belgian Governments. This wrong-I speak frankly we will endeavor to make good as soon as our military goal has been reached. Anybody who is threatened as we are, and is fighting for his highest good, can only have one thought how he is to hack his way through.

This statement coming from such a source at such a time attained at once a significance that all the neutral world was quick to perceive. It rendered difficult the task of German apologists who sought to convince neutral opinion that the invasion of Belgium was not without justification. A number of such individuals assumed that task, however, and made vigorous, earnest, and elaborate effort to accomplish it. Their labor suggests the picture drawn by Carlyle, in his Essay on Burns, of a dwarf vainly struggling to hew down mountains with a pickax. Lest, however, some uninformed or prejudiced individual, however pure in heart, might be unbalanced by the torrent of pamphlets and articles from the pens of men of reputed learning, Professor Charles de Visscher, of the University of Ghent, has undertaken to put the case of Belgium in its true light.

He calls his work a Juridical Enquiry. He adverts to the basis of

Belgian neutrality and its characteristics, calling attention to the origin and character of the permanent neutrality of Belgium, and the force of international agreements purporting to protect the rights of neutral states. He deals carefully with the German plea of necessity and with the distinction drawn between the right of self-defense (notwehr) and the alleged right which a so-called state of necessity may induce (notrecht). He denies the existence of evidence in support of the allegation that the conduct of France excused the German occupation of Belgium on grounds of self-defense.

The most interesting portion of the book is the treatment of the German plea of necessity as expressed by the term notrecht, and formally relied upon in German diplomatic intercourse. This plea asserts that a state has a right for strategic reasons to invade the territory of a neutral and blameless state, if by so doing a decisive blow may be struck by the most easy and rapid way against the enemy. It is essentially opposed to law. In fact, as Professor Kohler of Berlin (as quoted by the author) has declared, "where the ordinary rules of juridical organization suggest no way of resolving the problem, law must bow before fact and side with the conquerer: factum valet." In response, Professor de Visscher takes the stand that there is no place for notrecht in international law, apart from the special cases in which it is implied in, and co-extensive with, the exercise of self-defense; and his American readers will not be disposed to disagree with him.

No small service has been rendered by this author in marshaling the views of German writers, and in revealing their philosophy. It is important that intelligent opinion in the United States should be enlightened respecting the place which the principles of international obligations occupy in the minds of Teutonic authors of academic distinction.

The author treats at length of the treaties of 1831 and 1839 in relation to Belgian neutralization, and discusses skillfully the subject of their interpretation in the light of German argument. The application of the Fifth Hague Convention is touched upon. Vigorous denial is made of the charge that Belgium violated any obligations of its permanent neutralization, and the German contentions that it did so are examined and weighed.

The author concludes that Germany has been ill-served by those to whom she committed her cause, and that "the propaganda of her jurists, neither discreet nor dexterous in treatment, has alienated from