Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T00:25:12.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Authority of Vattel II

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Charles G. Fenwick
Affiliation:
Washington, D. C.

Extract

In a previous paper the attempt was made to state Vattel's system of municipal and international jurisprudence, and to show in a general way the authority attributed to his treatise on international law. It remains for us to consider the technical rules of international law proposed by Vattel and thus to lay the basis for a critical estimate of the position to which his treatise is entitled among the classics of international law.

The rules of conduct which nations have voluntarily adopted for themselves, and which therefore constitute the law between them, may be divided, with regard to their intrinsic character, into two general classes: first, rules which define certain principles of moral conduct or which embody the recognition of certain fundamental rights of states, and secondly, rules which define the concrete application of principles to the practical relations of states. Chief of the rules defining principles of moral conduct is the rule of good faith between nations, which in its many applications pervades the whole field of international law. This rule of good faith is not merely an a priori conception deduced from the analogy between sovereign states as members of an international community and private persons as members of society; it is a rule of positive international law, accepted by nations as properly controlling their conduct, and appealed to by them in their diplomatic relations.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1914

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The American Political Science Review, August, 1913.

2 Book II, §1.

3 Ibid., Preliminaries, §4.

4 Ibid., §18.

5 See Lawrence, T. J., International Law, 4th edition, pp. 119120.Google Scholar

6 Op. cit., Book II, §44, note.

7 Ibid., Book II, §50.

8 Oppenheim, , International Law, 2d edition, I, 186.Google Scholar

9 Op. cit., Book III, §133.

10 Op. cit., Book III, §44.

11 Ibid., §49.

12 Ibid., Preliminaries, §22.

13 Ibid., Book II, §4.

14 Ibid., Book II, §56.

15 Book II, §62.

16 Book II, §§73, 74.

17 Ibid., §76.

18 Book I, §212.

19 Ibid., §220.

20 Ibid., §223.

21 Ibid., §225.

22 Book II, §§94, 100.

23 Book II, §§229–231.

24 Book I, §208.

25 Book I, §266.

26 3 C. Rob., 338–340.

27 Book II, §123.

28 Book II, §127.

29 Book I, §104.

30 Book II, §162.

31 Book II, §196.

32 Book II, §168.

33 Book III, §40.

34 Book III, §104.

35 Book III, §105.

36 Book III, §110.

38 Book III, §45.

39 History of the Law of Nations, 182.

40 Traité de droit international, i, 211, 212.

41 Le droit international, 34.

42 Le droit international, 449–450.

43 Le droit international, i, 256.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.