IT is a commonplace that the World War provided an exacting test of the precepts of international law governing war and neutrality. Many of the traditional rules were found no longer adequate to changed conditions. The law had been outstripped by the growth of the civilization it no longer reflected. This was not a sudden issue; it was only that the war brought the discrepancy to a crux. So, too, the rules governing the ordinary intercourse of states had been vaguely realized to be inadequate, but a direct challenge of these ancient shibboleths was furnished for the first time by the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic. For the first time the principles of Karl Marx found themselves materialized in a state, and a state which, because of its size, geographic position and economic resources, could not be ignored in the councils of the world. However disconcerting the questionings of this infant state--born under auspices so strange as to be incomprehensible to most, and still in a "transition" stage of development--they must be heeded and dealt with in one fashion or another.
Inadequacy of International Law
This realization of the inadequacy of the traditional rules of international law was borne in upon the world at a time when the physical, moral, and economic devastation of the years 1914- 18 had intensified the fundamental longing of humanity for peace. For the effectuation of this great aim international law still appeared to be the only possible system of doctrines. Hence a vigorous, coördinated effort has been made to readapt the old system to the new circumstances, both by discarding outworn rules and by introducing new principles. The establishment of the League of Nations, attempts to codify certain accepted doctrines, the introduction of the idea of the judicial settlement of international disputes are illustrations of the sincere coöperation