Retorsion. -- Bluntschli, Art. 505; Bonfils or 1 (3 Pt.) Fauchille, Nos. 972-74; Bulmerincq, in 4 Holtzendorff, 59-71; 3 Calvo, § 1807. Despagnet (2d ed.), Nos. 490-91; Fenwick, 420-21; 2 Fiore, Nos; 1226-27, and Int. Law Cod. Nos. 1391-95; Hall (8th ed.,) p. 433; * Heffter, §§ 27, 112; * 2 Hyde, § 588; * Kamarowsky, Le tribunal int. ( 1887), 18-22; Liszt, § 55; 3 F. de Martens, § 105; 2 G. de Martens, § 254; * 7 Moore, Digest, § 1096; * 2 Oppenheim, §§ 29-32; 3 Phillimore, §§ 7-8; 2 Piédelièvre, Nos. 760-63; 6 P.-Fodéré, Nos. 2634-36; Rapisardi-Mirabelli, in 46 (2d ser. 16) R. D. I. ( 1914), 223-44, and La retorsione ( 1919); * 2 Rivier, 189-91; Taylor, § 435; 2 Twiss, § 10; Ullmann, § 159; Vattel, liv. II, § 341; * 2 Westlake, p. 6; Wharton, Com. on Am. Law ( 1884), § 206.
Reprisals and Hostile Embargo. -- Bluntschli, Arts. 500-04; Bonfils or 1 (3 Pt.) Fauchille, Nos. 975-85; Bulmerincq, in 4 Holtzendorff, 72-116; * 3 Calvo, §§ 1808-31; 1 Cobbett (4th ed.), 347-53; Dana, notes 151 and 152 to Wheaton, 370-73; Despagnet (2d ed.), Nos. 492-500; Ducrocq, Représailles ( 1901); Fenwick, 421-24; 2 Fiore, Nos. 1228-30, and Int. Law Cod., Nos. 1396-1404; Funck-Brentano et Sorel, 229-30; Grotius, liv. III, cap. 2; * Hall, § 120; * 1 Halleck 3d ed.), 471-85; Heffter (Geffcken), §§ 110-11; * 2 Hyde, §§ 589-91, 593-94; Kamarowski, op. cit., 22-38; Lafargue, Les représailles ( 1898); Lawrence, §§ 136-37; Liszt, § 55; 2 J. de Louter, § 41; 3 F. de Martens, § 105; 2 G. de Martens, § 255; * 7 Moore, Digest, §§ 1095-96, 1098; McNair, in 11 Grot. Soc. ( 1926), 29 ff.; * 2 Oppenheim, §§ 33-43; 1 Ortolan, Règles int. et dip. de la mer ( 1894), 346 ff.; * 3 Phillimore, §§ 8-24; 2 Piédelièvre, Nos. 764-74; 6 P.-Fodéré, Nos. 2637-47; * 2 Rivier, 191-98; * Scott, Cases, 514-21; Snow, Cases, 243-51, and Int. Law, § 35; Taylor, §§ 436-40; * 2 Twiss, §§ 11-21; Ullmann, §§ 160-61; Vattell, liv. II, §§ 342-54; Walker, Manual, 94-95; 2 Westlake, 7-11, and in 25 Law Quar. Rev. ( 1909), 127-37 or Collected Papers, 590-606; * Wheaton, §§ 291-93; Wilson, §§ 90-91; Woolsey, § 118.
Pacific Blockade. -- Barclay, in 29 R. D. I. ( 1897), 474 ff.; Barès, Le blocus pacific ( 1898); Basdevant, in 11 R. D. I. P. ( 1904), 362 ff.; Baty, in 30 R. D. I. ( 1898), 606 ff.: Bluntschli, Arts. 506-07; Bonfils or 1 (3 Pt.) Fauchille (for references, see p. 703), Nos. 986-94; Bulmerincq, in 4 Holtzendorff, 116-27; * 3 Calvo, §§ 1832-49; 2 Cauchy,
____________________Within recent years the economic boycott has also been resorted to as a means of pressure or reprisal to secure redress of grievances. The first instance of its application seems to have been by China against the United States in 1905. But thus far the boycott has been instituted by private individuals and corporations, and does not appear to have had public, official or direct governmental sanction. It has, however, been adopted as one of the sanctions of the League of Nations. See Art. 16 of the Covenant. Cf. supra, pp. 516-18. On the boycott see, 1 (3 Pt.) Fauchille, No. 9851-5 and references on p. 698.
-542-
