The section of the Constitution dealing with the treaty-making power was the result of extended discussion and consideration. In the so-called Virginia Plan presented on May 29, 1787, by Edmund Randolph, there is no mention of the subject of treaties, the inference being that he assumed that Congress, as the treaty-making power under the Confederation, would continue to exercise the same powers under the Constitution.

Eastern Carelia is composed of the governments of Kemi, Archangel or the Provinces of Viena, Poventsa, Petroskoi, and the Olonets. It is bounded on the west by the eastern frontier of Finland, on the south by Lake Ladoga and the River Svir, on the east by Lake Onega and the White Sea, and on the north by the Arctic Ocean. It is about 300,000 square kilometers inarea with a population of about 175,000 people. Of these 134,000 are Carelians of the Fenno-Ugrian stock; and the remaining 41,000, who speak Russian to a greater or less degree, are Vepses, Carelians, Finns, Laplanders, and Russians.

Private property of enemies lost its absolute inviolability when at the end of World War I it was subjected to the claims of Allied nationals against Germany. After World War II enemy exterior assets became the object of reparations at the Potsdam Conference between the Governments of the United States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Eepublics, and the United Kingdom. To implement the Potsdam Agreement the Allied Control Council for Germany on October 30, 1945, enacted Law No. 5 which, inter alia, purported to vest in the Council title to German private assets in the neutral countries. In Switzerland this action eventually culminated in the Swiss-Allied Accord of May 25,1946, between France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Switzerland, which provided for the liquidation of German property in Switzerland4 valued at approximately 150 million dollars. The proceeds of liquidation are to go fifty percent to Switzerland and fifty percent to the several governments signatory to the Paris Reparations Agreement of December 21, 1945.

The international law community has heavily criticized the United States’ handling of the Breard case. These criticisms are understandable. Perhaps because of the rush of time, the explanations by the Department of Justice and the Supreme Court for failing to stop Breard’s execution brushed over important issues of domestic and international law. In addition, Virginia’s decision to proceed with the execution, and the federal Government’s decision not to block it, may have reflected insufficient respect for international law and institutions. These decisions may also adversely affect U.S. relations with other nations and weaken consular protection of U.S. citizens abroad. These criticisms, however, tell only part of the story. In particular, they do not consider countervailing considerations grounded in the Constitution’s allocation of authority between the federal and state governments.

On September 20, 1967, the Governments of Denmark, Norway and Sweden instituted an action against Greece before the European Commission of Human Rights. The Netherlands took the same step on September 27, 1967. These proceedings were brought in response to a resolution adopted on June 23, 1967, by the Standing Committee of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe which, on behalf of the Assembly, expressed “the wish that the Governments of the Contracting Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights refer the Greek case, either separately or jointly, to the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 24 of the Convention.”

If the twenty-sixth year of the World Court has not been one of intense activity, it has been marked by events of some significance for the future. The single session held by the Court during the year was devoted to administrative questions, largely to those growing out of the reorganization of the previous year. One proceeding was instituted before the Court, the first since its reorganization, and the Court was seized of one request for an advisory opinion emanating from the General Assembly. Some progresswas made in the extension of the Court’s jurisdiction, and a series of resolutions concerning the Court was adopted by the General Assembly on November 14, 1947.

In these days of wars which have engulfed almost all Europe it is a satisfaction to recall that thirteen nations sent their delegates to an international conference relating to safety of life at sea, no longer ago than December, 1913, and that they signed on the 20th of January, 1914, a convention which has been adopted by many of the nations and which was transmitted to the Senate of the United States by the President on the 17th of March. All the resources of human skill and science are now being used to destroy life. It is a pleasure to reflect that man has at one time been engaged in a more humane and, shall we not add, a more Christian undertaking.