¹ See, in addition to the work of the Harvard Research, his articles on “Foreign Diplomats and the Prohibition Laws,” 30 Mich. L. Rev. 333 (1932)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Capacity for Legation and the Theoretical Basis of Diplomatic Immunities,” 10 N.Y.U.L.Q.R. 170 (1932).Google Scholar

² See, in particular, “Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities of Agents Invested with Functions of an International Interest,” 25 A.J.I.L. 694 (1931)Google Scholar; “The International Organizations Immunities Act,” 40 ibid. 332 (1946)Google Scholar; “Immunity of Officers and Employees of the United Nations for Official Acts: The Ranollo Case,” 41 ibid. 555 (1947).Google Scholar

³ “The Dispute between Denmark and Norway over the Sovereignty of East Greenland,” 26 A.J.I.L. 469 (1932)Google Scholar; also in Oslo Aftenposten, Sept. 24, 1932.

⁴ “La répression des crimes et delits contre la sûreté des états étrangers,” 40 Rev. Gén de Droit Int. Pub. 606 (1933).

⁵ “International Responsibility for Hostile Propaganda against Foreign States,” 28 A.J.I.L. 649 (1934).Google Scholar

⁶ “La théorie raciale et la doctrine politique du national-socialisme,” 41 Rev. Gén. de Droit Int. Pub. 661 (1934)Google Scholar; “Racial Theory and National Socialist Political Thought,” 15 S.W. Soc. Sci. Q. 1 (1934)Google Scholar; “Germanic Law versus Roman Law in National Socialist Legal Theory,” 16 J. Comp. Leg. & Int. Law 269 (1934)Google Scholar; “Position of Aliens in National Socialist Penal Law Reform,” 29 A.J.I.L. 206 (1935)Google Scholar; “National Socialist Conceptions of International Law,” 29 Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 594 (1935)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; “Punishment by Analogy in National Socialist Penal Law,” 26 J. Crim. Law & Criminology 847 (1936).Google Scholar

⁷ “International Law and Deprivation of Nationality,” 23 Georgetown L.J. 250 (1935)Google Scholar; “La dénationalisation imposée pour des motifs politiques,” 4 Rev. int. française du droit des gens 10, 241 (1937)Google Scholar; “Denaturalization on the Ground of Disloyalty,” 36 Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 701 (1942).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ In addition to contributions to the Annual Digest, see “Jurisprudence américaine en matière de droit international (1933–1935),” 43 Rev. gén. de droit int. pub. 589 (1936); 44 ibid. 561 (1937).

⁹ “Jurisprudence américaine relative à la reconnaissance de l'U.R.S.S. par les États-Unis (1933–1935),” 44 Rev. g&n de droit int. pub. 199 (1937).

¹⁰ “Protection of Foreign Diplomatic and Consular Premises against Picketing,” 31 A.J.I.L. 705 (1937).Google Scholar

¹¹ “State Immunity and the Requisition of Ships during the Spanish Civil War,” 35 A.J.I.L. 263 (1941)Google Scholar; and 36 ibid. 37 (.1942).

¹² Some Effects of Governmental Controls on Neutral Duties,” Proceedings, American Society of International Law, 1937, p. 108; “Die Vereinigten Staaten und der spanische Bürgerkrieg,” 4 Völkerbund and Völkerrecht 627 (1938)Google Scholar; “The Concepts of Neutrality and Non-Belligerency,” 218 Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. & Soc. Sci. 97 (1941).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹³ In addition to his work on the Harvard Research in this field, and the article cited in footnote 4 above, see “International Law and German Legislation on Political Crime,” 20 Grotius Society Transactions 85 (1935)Google Scholar; “Kidnaping of Fugitives from Justice on Foreign Territory,” 29 A.J.I.L. 502 (1935)Google Scholar; “Der Umfang der Strafgewalt nach amerikanischer Rechtsauffassung,” 5 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht u. Völkerrecht 239 (1935)Google Scholar; “La non-extradition des nationaux dans les relations francoaméricaines,” 3 Rev. int. françhise du droit des gens 159, 244 (1937)Google Scholar; “American Conception of Jurisdiction with respect to Conflicts of Law on Crime,” 30 Grotius Society Transactions 184 (1944).Google Scholar

¹⁴ “International Law in the Constitutions of the Länder in the American Zone,” 41 A.J.I.L. 888 (1947)Google Scholar; “The Relation of International Law to Internal Law in the French Constitutional System,” 44 ibid. 641 (1950).Google Scholar Concerning this latter article, one may well agree with the reviewer who described it as “a model of learning and judicious interpretation,” adding that “It is a matter for regret that we do not more frequently have the opportunity of seeing products of his work, which has exerted a weighty influence in favour of the acceptance of the overriding authority of international law.” 28 British Year Book of Int. Law 415 (1951).Google ScholarPubMed

¹⁵ “The Execution of Treaty Obligations through Internal Law,” Proceedings, American Society of International Law, 1951, p. 82; “On Amending the Treaty-Making Power: A Comparative Study of the Problem of Self-Executing Treaties,” 51 Mich. Law Rev. 1117 (1953).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁶ Such as “International Law and the Individual,” 46 Mich. Alum. Quart. Rev. 1 (1939)Google Scholar; “The International Court of Justice and the Problem of Compulsory Jurisdiction,” 13 Dept. of State Bulletin 471 (1945)Google Scholar; “The International Court of Justice, the Senate, and Matters of Domestic Jurisdiction,” 40 A.J.I.L. 720 (1946)Google Scholar; “Consular Immunities: The Kasenkina Case (U.S.–U.S.S.R.),” 43 ibid. 37 (1949)Google Scholar; “Some Aspects of the Human Rights Provisions of the Charter and their Execution in the United States,” 46 ibid. 289 (1952).Google Scholar