Page images
PDF
EPUB

As this power devolves from the Public Law of the State (§§ 37 & 38), international agreements are called public treaties or conventions (pactum gentium publicum), in contra-distinction from private contracts, which the Government of a State sometimes enter into with private individuals or corporations, whether native or foreign, with regard to loans, or concessions of territories for agricultural, colonization, mining or any other industrial purposes. It is evident that only public treaties or conventions, as being agreements between States, belong to the domain of International Law. *

tional contracts.

There is no formula adopted as a standard for Different names international agreements in general. The consent given to internaof contracting parties can be given expressly or tacitly. In the first case it is given verbally or in writing. Written consent can be given by way of a formal document, signed by the contracting agents of parties, or by declaration and contradeclaration in the form of letters, despatches or notes exchanged between the parties concerned or their agents. Verbal agreements, called pourparlers, must, as soon as practicable, be reduced to writing in order to avoid subsequent misunderstanding and contestation. Tacit consent of an agreement is inferred from undisputed facts of execution or the beginning of execution of the agreement.

Roman juris-consults divided international contracts into three classes, 1°. pactiones, 2°. sponsiones, and 3o. fœdera.

The fædera were regarded as the most solemn Treaty or agreement, regulating general principles of intercourse, and are now termed treaties or conven

Convention.

* VATTEL. Dr. des Gens. Liv. II. Chapt. 12. MARTENS. Précis des Droits des Gens Moderns. § 47. KLUBER. p. 141. ORTOLAN, Dipl. de la Mer. Vol. I. Chapt. V.

tions; such as treaties of peace, of offensive or defensive alliance, of commerce and navigation, for the extradition of criminals and deserters, for the mutual protection of literary, artistic or industrial properties, for uniformity in the monetary system, weights and measures, postal and telegraphic, fishery and railroad conventions, Consular conventions, etc. The term declaration is used for supplementary agreements with regard to the interpretation of a treaty or convention.

The pactiones are what we now call transitory conventions (conventions transitoires), being agreements to be settled or accomplished within a certain given time or locality, having for their object some special mutual interest in a particular direction.

The sponsiones are provisional or temporary agreements, concluded by agents not expressly qualified by special powers to treat, but who, through their actual position in the exercise of their general functions as officials of rank of the respective Government, are accidentally placed in a position to treat in the name of their respective Governments, on subjects directly or indirectly confided to their discretion. These agreements are invariably subjected to the conditio sine qua non of the consent of the respective Governments, when they are contracted without authorisation and when they exceed the authority of one or more of the contracting agents. Such agreements are per se, null and void if the consent of the respective power is withheld. If, however, any of the contracting powers has acted in good faith on the supposition that the other party was duly represented, then indemnification is due to that party and restoration to its previous condition. * XIX

Sponsions.

* GROTIUS. De Jure belli ac pacis. Liv. III. chap. XXII. §§ 6 & 8. VATTEL. Dr. des Gens. Liv. II. chap. XIV. §§ 209-212. RUTHERFORTH. Instit. Book II. Chap. IX. § 21. WHEATON. Elem. of Int. Law. Part III. Chap. II.

the suspension

(armistices).

§ 131. There is a special sort of convention; Conventions for which is the official agreement made between of hostilities generals or admirals of belligerent powers when, by mutual consent, active hostilities are limited or suspended by land or at sea within the sphere of the respective commands of the contracting authorities. Such suspension of hostilities, called armistice, can be arranged temporarily as for the exchange of prisoners (cartel d'échange de prisonniers), for the removal of the sick or wounded, permission for special commerce under certain conditions ;-or indefinitely, as the capitulation of fortresses, towns or provinces. The armistice preceding peace is always ordered by the respective Governments, this being always the result of a preliminary convention which must pave the way to a treaty of peace. The preliminaries are also always negotiated by duly qualified agents appointed by the respective Governments. These preliminaries, forming the basis of peace, require the utmost skill of diplomacy, combined with explicit statements and information from the theatre of war, frankly and accurately provided by the Commanders to their respective diplomatic agent, at the preliminary conference. This is indispensable in order to establish, punctually and with all precision, the status quo to be observed during the armistice.

The armistice for the preliminaries of peace having been duly agreed upon by authorized agents of both parties, the conditions of the armistice must at once, be explicitly obeyed and adhered to by the military authorities on both sides, without awaiting any ratification from the respective central Governments. The exchange of places or positions or the capitulations agreed upon, must be faithfully accomplished within the term fixed by the armistice convention, and the

Ratification of
Treaty.

status quo of the armistice must be brought about without unnecessary delay, in strict adherence to the wording of the convention. In case the respective Government does not come to an agreement on the preliminary basis of peace, the revocation of the armistice must be duly notified by the revoking party to the other, and a day named, within a reasonable period of time, on which hostilities may be resumed. Every well directed negotiation for a preliminary armistice invariably contains the necessary provisions with regard to the above stated cases.

§ 132. With the exception of military arrangements, which are of momentary exigence, as stated in the preceeding paragraph, treaties or conventions, in the ordinary sense, do not become binding by the sole signature of the negotiating agents. The confirmation of the agreement, by the executive power of the States concerned, is necessary for the complete validity of the agreements entered into by their agents. This confirmation given to the work of their plenipotentiaries by the contracting States, is called ratification. The reservation of ratification is indispensable in the case of all treaties and conventions concluded in behalf of those Governments which are dependent upon the sanction of their respective legislatures.

As the power to conclude treaties depends of the Public Law or Constitution of each State, the ratification by one party does not alter the right of the other to refuse ratification. With the exception of the case of rejection by the legislature, the Governments never refuse to sanction the agreement of their plenipotentiaries, when these have not exceeded their powers, unless there be exceptional circumstances providing conclusive material reasons for a change of a policy. With regard to the ratification of treaties, Mr. Woolsey makes the following statements.

"Unless some other time is agreed upon, treaties are binding at the time when they are signed by an authorized agent, and their ratification by their sovereign is retroactive. If then an ambassador, in conformity with a full power received from his sovereign, has negotiated and signed a treaty, is the sovereign justified in withholding his ratification? This question has no significance in regard to States, by whose form of government the engagements made by the executive with foreign powers need some further sanction. In other cases, that is, wherever the treaty-making power of the sovereign is final, the older writers held that he was bound by the acts of his agent, if the latter acted within the full power which he had received, even though he had gone contrary to secret instructions. But Bynkershoek defended another opinion which is now the received one among the text-writers, and which Wheaton has advocated at large with great ability." *

"If the minister has conformed at once to his ostensible powers and to his secret instructions, there is no doubt that, in ordinary cases, it would be bad faith in the sovereign not to add ratification. But if the minister disobeys or transcends his instructions, the sovereign may refuse his sanction to the treaty without bad faith or ground of complaint on the other side. But even this violation of secret instructions would be no valid excuse for the sovereign's refusing to accept the treaty, if he should have given public credentials of a minute and specific character to his agent; for the evident intention, in so doing,

* WHEATON'S. Elements. Book III. 2. §5. BYNKERSHOEK Quæst. J. P. II. 7. De MARTENS. § 48.

« PreviousContinue »