changed for such a long length of time, as the conditions of the lease, which are to be fixed by a commission of three members on which both Germany and Czecho-Slovakia are represented, are similarly subject to revision every ten years. In connection with these last-mentioned articles which are intended to protect the interests of Czecho-Slovakia, Article 273, permitting the issuance of certificates and documents to vessels of new states, "whether they have a seacoast or not," is of much interest, and as this article is not within the part of the treaty particularly under consideration, it is quoted in full: In the case of vessels of the Allied or Associated Powers, all classes of certificates or documents relating to the vessel, which were recognized as valid by Germany before the war, or which may hereafter be recognized as valid by the principal maritime states, shall be recognized by Germany as valid and as equivalent to the corresponding certificates issued to German vessels. A similar recognition shall be accorded to the certificates and documents issued to their vessels by the governments of new states, whether they have a sea-coast or not, provided that such certificates and documents shall be issued in conformity with the general practice observed in the principal maritime states. The High Contracting Parties agree to recognize the flag flown by the vessels of an Allied or Associated Power having no sea-coast which are registered at some one specified place situated in its territory; such place shall serve as the port of registry of such vessels. While the provisions giving rights to Czecho-Slovakia in the ports of Hamburg and Stettin have been called novel, the convention between Greece and Serbia of May 10, 1914, and the four protocols thereto of the same date, relating to transit by Salonica may well be regarded as foreshadowing provisions for access to the sea of an inland state. It may particularly be noticed that this convention, the workings and advantages of which were explained to the Commission on Ports, Waterways and Railways by the learned Mr. Coromilas (the Greek representative), very early in the proceedings of the Commission, was by its terms to continue for fifty years. In view of the existence of Austria, Hungary and Czecho-Slovakia, all of which are land-locked states, the convention mentioned may now be regarded as of more than local interest and importance, and a translation thereof is printed in the Supplement to this issue (p. 441). The principles and rules of international law applicable to international rivers have been the subject of discussion from an early period, particularly during the last century and a half. The river systems of Europe and the canal systems which complete or connect them are of an importance in the commercial life of European countries and of their peoples which can hardly be underestimated. The principle of freedom of international rivers has been contended for at least since 1792, but it may justly be said that that principle was never fully recognized until the adoption of the Treaty of Peace with Germany. The basic principle of what must now be regarded as the public law of Europe in this regard is declared in Article 332 of the treaty, the first paragraph of which reads as follows: On the waterways declared to be international in the preceding article, the nationals, property and flags of all Powers shall be treated on a footing of perfect equality, no distinction being made to the detriment of the nationals, property or flag of any Power between them and the nationals, property or flag of the riparian state itself or of the most favored nation. Side by side with this declaration of principle may well be placed the declaration of the French Provisional Executive Council in its decree of September 20, 1792, which has thus waited one hundred and twenty-seven years for complete realization of its ideal of freedom, now extended to all states, riparian and non-riparian. Que le cours des fleuves est la propriété commune et inaliénable de toutes les contrées arrosées par leurs eaux; qu'une nation ne saurait sans injustice prétendre au droit d'occuper exclusivement le canal d'une rivière et d'empêcher que les peuples voisins qui bordent les rivages supérieurs, ne jouissent du même advantage; qu'un tel droit est un reste des servitudes féodales ou du moins un monopole odieux qui n'a pu être établi que par la force, ni consenti que par l'impuissance, qu'il est conséquemment révocable dans tous les moments et malgré toutes les conventions, parce que la nature ne reconnaît pas plus de peuples que d'individus privilégiés et que les droits de l'hommes sont à jamais imprescriptibles. It should be here stated, however, that the provisions of Article 332 are specifically within the terms of Article 378, permitting re vision by the Council of the League of Nations at any time after five years, or such extended period as may be fixed, and providing further that after this period the benefit of the provisions can only be claimed by a state which extends reciprocity in that regard. By the general clauses of Chapter 3, Section 2 (Articles 331 to 339) four rivers are declared to be international-namely: The Elbe (Labe), from its confluence with the Vltava and this international status is extended to "all navigable parts of these river systems which naturally provide more than one state with access to the sea, with or without transshipment from one vessel to another; together with lateral canals and channels constructed either to duplicate or to improve naturally navigable sections of the specified river systems or to connect two naturally navigable sections of the same river." Under the last quoted general terms the upper navigable part of a river may not be international, although its lower courses are; for the upper navigable portion, if and so far as it is wholly within one state, provides that state only with access to the sea. The general regulations applicable to these rivers may be summed up as follows: (1) Charges (if not precluded by an existing connection) which may vary on different sections of the river, are limited to those sufficient to maintain an improvement to the river or to meet expenditures in the interest of navigation. (2) Charges are to be collected so that detailed examinations of cargoes are to be unnecessary. (3) Customs and consumption duties are not affected. (4) The general provisions regarding transit, above alluded to and contained in Articles 321 to 326, are applicable. (5) Special provisions regarding transit are provided both in the case when the two banks of the rivers are within the same state and in the case when the river forms a frontier. (6) Each riparian state must remove any obstacle or danger to navigation and insure the maintenance of proper conditions of navigation, and for failure to fulfil this duty complaint may be made to a tribunal which the League of Nations shall institute. Special notice should be given to Article 337 regarding the construction of works which might impede navigation. So far as dangers to navigation are concerned, the interests of all are alike, or substantially alike, but in the case of works to be constructed, the interests of the constructing state may conflict with the interests of other riparian states, or of non-riparian states. The same tribunal, to be instituted by the League of Nations, is given jurisdiction in all such matters, but it is provided that appeal to the tribunal mentioned does not require the suspension of such works, and, further, that allowance shall be made for national interests, including specifically irrigation, water-power, and fisheries. These national interests, indeed, are to be given priority when such priority receives the consent of all the riparian states or of the states represented on the International Commission, if such commission exists. It is to be pointed out that later articles provide for international commissions for the four river systems mentioned, except the Niemen. As to this river system, the International Commission is to be constituted upon the request of any riparian state. The treaty contemplates a general convention to supersede the stipulations of the Treaty of Peace, applicable not only to the four river systems mentioned, but to others which that general convention may recognize as international. The purpose of the Treaty of Peace primarily, of course, was necessary to impose terms upon Germany, and it is obvious that a general convention relating to international rivers would cover a subject in which neutral states would be deeply interested. For this reason the preparation of such a convention was not attempted at the Conference of Paris, although it is not to be doubted that the provisions of the Treaty of Peace will be adopted in substance in any general convention hereafter drawn up, as they embody advanced and enlightened principles of equality. The treaty provides that while this general convention is to be drawn up by the principal Allied and Associated Powers, it must have the approval of the League of Nations; the approval of Germany, which would be essential, is assured in advance. Article 339, the final Article of the general clauses comprising Chapter 3 of Section 2, requires the cession by Germany of a portion of the tugs and vessels registered in the ports of the four river systems mentioned and of the appurtenant material. For this cession Germany is to receive credit on account of the sums due from her, and the details of vessels and material ceded and of the amounts of credit therefor are to be determined by arbitrators nominated by the United States. Equitable principles are laid down for determining the quantity of vessels to be given up by Germany. It will perhaps be generally agreed that such provisions are an essential part of the Treaty of Peace. It would be a vain thing to declare these river systems international and at the same time not to provide the riparian states with the means of using them. True, these means might be constructed, but the necessity of now restoring the economic life of Europe renders any such delay impossible. River traffic under the commercial control, not of one riparian state but of all, must commence at once. The necessity of this could be doubted by no one who had seen even in a limited degree the extent of the breakdown of the transport system of Europe caused by the war. As has been mentioned, international commissions are set up for the Elbe and the Oder comprising representatives of riparian and in each case of four non-riparian states. The representation of the non-riparian states is intended to protect the general interest of navigation. The well-known precedent is the European Commission of the Danube, the traffic on which in the past has been largely carried on under the flags of non-riparian states. The two international commissions provided for the Elbe and the Oder are to draw up projects for the revision of existing agreements and regulations, subject to the general convention above mentioned, if it exists, or otherwise in conformity with the general clauses of the Treaty of Peace. In the meantime and subject, however, to the gen |