eral criminal law. The traffic in women and children is a dark page in international history. But a moral violation in Peoria, Illinois, by two Americans is rightly dealt with under state or federal law. An indirect and incidental interference with domestic jurisdiction may not affect the validity of a treaty which deals primarily with subjects truly international. But some treaties now proposed present more than a mere incidental and unsubstantial interference with domestic jurisdiction. Under the guise of protecting human rights, they set about to regulate internal affairs of the nationals of ratifying states directly and substantially.

The Charter of the United Nations now makes sweeping private and individual rights matters of international concern. In that sense the field of international law has been extended to include subjects formerly considered domestic. But Article 2 par. 7 of the Charter withholds authority to intervene in the domestic affairs of any nation and thus declares that there are wide areas of domestic life upon which the world organization cannot intrude.

Article 2 par. 7 of the United Nations Charter, which reserves to the nations control of their domestic affairs, cannot be considered meaningless. History shows that independence of nations is essential to ' world peace and that men will fight against great odds to maintain this independence. The first inter

national organization, the Delian Confederacy, 477 B.C., between Athens, the Greek cities, and the Great Islands of the Aegean, fell, not because Athens overcharged her allies. The contributions of men, money, and ships exacted from members were set up by Aristides the Just, and historians consider them reasonable. But the Greek allies could not endure the domination of Athens. They resented the fact that the important lawsuits from the Aegean Islands and the Greek cities were tried at Athens and they insisted that they should control their local governments. So the first international league failed and was destroyed.

When the Dutch resisted the Spanish for one hundred years so stubbornly that Alva suggested to Philip II that he would have to exterminate the people, it was because the Dutch were determined to control their own lives. The Boston Tea Party and the Declaration of Independence arose from the same human reactions and, in truth, the desperate resistance movements of World War II show that the spirit of independence still lives in the heart of mankind.

As a matter of fact, independence is not only vital to the countries which cherish it, but its maintenance in every nation is essential to the peace of the world. In so far as treaties, conventions, and international regulations directly and substantially encroach upon the inherently domestic jurisdiction and attempt to regulate rights and obligations, employment, hours

of labor, rates of pay, and relationships of persons permanently within the borders of any country whose activities are performed within that country, they are not wisely calculated to reduce international tension, for they interfere with what man has fought for and will fight for through the centuries-freedom and independence.

E. ARTICLES AGAINST THE GENOCIDE CONVENTION

THE GENOCIDE CONVENTION--ITS EFFECT ON OUR LEGAL SYSTEM By Orie L. Phillips*

On June 16, 1949, the President transmitted to the Senate the Convention on Genocide with the request that. the Senate give its advice and consent to its ratification.

By this Treaty the contracting parties confirm that genocide is, "A crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and punish."

Article II and III of the Convention read:

*Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.

"ARTICLE II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following nets committed with Intent to destroy, in whole or in part, n untional, ethnical, racial or religions group, as such :

(n) Killing members of the group;

́ ́(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(e) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

"ARTICLE III

"The following acts shall be punishable:

' (a) Genocide;

́ ́ (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

Article V obligates the contracting parties to ennet the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the Convention and to provide effective penaltles "for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other nets enumerated in Article III."

Article VI provides that 'persons charged with genocide or any of the other ncts enumerated in Article 11 shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the state' in which the act was committed, or by 'such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to such contracting parties which shall have nccepted its jurisdiction.'

Article IX provides that disputes between the contracting parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfillment of the present convention,' shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any party to the dispute.

Thus, it will be seen that it is proposed by the aetion of the President, consented to by two-thirds of the Senators present' when Senate action is taken, to define certain acts, which have traditionally been regarded as domestic crimes, as International crimes and to obligate the United States to provide for their punishment and for the trial of persons accused thereof either in our domestic courts or in an international tribunal.

"Treaty-making power is reviewed

"It would seem appropriate, therefore, to review the treaty-making power. Section 2 of Article 11 of the United States Constitution authorizes the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.

The power is not one granted by the states. Neither did the powers of external sovereignty depend on the affirmative grants of the Constitution. If they had not been mentioned in the Constitution, they would have vested in the Federal Government as necessary concomitants of nationality. They embrace all the powers of government necessary to maintain an effective control of international relations.'

44... the external powers of the United States are to be exercised without regard to state laws or policies."

14.. the field which affects international relations is the one aspect of our government that from the first has been most generally conceded Imperatively to demand broad national authority,"a

The trenty-making power is not limited by any express provision in the Con stitution. But it does not authorize what the Constitution forbids nud Its exeréise must not be inconsistent with the unture of our Government and the relation between the states and the United States."

1 See Art. 11, § 2 United States Constitution,

• United States v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., 209 11.8. 304, 315-318

• United States v. Belmont, 301 (1.8, 324, 331.

• United States v. Pink, 315 U.S. 203, 232.

Asakura v. Seattle, 285 11.8, 332, 341; Holden v. Joy, AL ILS

211, 213; Acufrom V.