1 The Soviet publication “War and the Working Class” was reported to have made the following comment in discussing the Soviet Union's insistence on a unanimous vote of the Great Powers for dealing with any alleged case of aggression: “ It is difficult to forget that the League of Nations did not find it necessary to expel Poland for seizing Vilna or Italy for invading Ethiopia, but voted for expulsion of the Soviet Union when it deprived Germany of a springboard prepared for invasion.” See dispatch from Moscow in The New York Times, October 20, 1944, p. 6.

2 League Doc.C.197.M.106.1938.

3 This provision was included in substance in Art. 6 of the Rules of Procedure of the Council adopted at Rome on May 17,1920: Hudson, M. O., International Legislation , Washington, 1931- Vol. I, p. 127.Google Scholar

4 This addition to the Rules of 1920 has apparently been overlooked by Riches, Cromwell A., Majority Rule in International Organization , Baltimore, 1940, p. 23, note 53.Google Scholar

5 Miller, D. H., The Drafting of the Covenant , New York, 1928, Vol. I, p. 285:Google Scholar “ It was at first suggested to leave out the words ‘at the meeting,’ but after some consideration it was thought that they had better remain so as to prevent one State from stopping the holding of a meeting, or to cover the case when one Member might not find it possible to be represented.”

6 Schücking, W., and Wehberg, H., Die Satzung des Völkerbundes , Berlin, 1931 (3d ed.), Vol. I, p. 521;Google Scholar same, 1924 (2d ed.), p. 637. Sir John Fischer Williams, “The League of Nations and Unanimity,” in this Journal, Vol. 19 (1925), p. 486, argues that this exception depends “not only on the language of the Covenant but also on the general principles that no one is a judge in his own cause.” See also the Treaty of Lausanne Case, Permanent Court of International Justice, Publications, Series B, No. 12, p. 32.

7 Schücking and Wehberg, work cited, Vol. I, p. 510: Bei der AusscMiessung eines Mitgliedes wegen Verletzung der Bundespflichten müssen gemäss Article 16, Abs. 4, der Satzung alle im Bate veiirelenen Bundesmitglieder (mit Ausnahme des Auszuschliessenden) sich an der Abstimmung beteiligen. Es genugt hier alio kein Beschluss des Rates, wenn in dessen Sitzung nicht alle Mitglieder (mit Ausnahme des Auszuschliessenderi) vertreten sind. See also second edition, p. 637; Riches, Cromwell A., The Unanimity Rule and the League of Nations , Baltimore, 1933, p. 49:Google Scholar “In one case the Covenant clearly requires that more than a majority of the members be present for taking a decision… . It would seem, therefore, that, to exclude a member from the League, all members of the Council except the representatives of the state to be excluded would have to be present and cast affirmative votes while in all other cases the Council could act with only a majority present.” Georges—Tibère Éles, Le Principe de I'unanimité dans la Société des Nations et les Exceptions à ce Principe,” Paris, 1935, p. 188: Une telle exclusion ne pent être prononcée que par le vote de tous les Membres de la Société, autres que lÉtat à exclure, représentés au Conseil. Une réunion qui prononcerait I'exclusion d'un Membre devrait done être au complet. D'autre part, comme le texts exige expressément “ le vote de tous les autres Membres” etc., il semble difficile d'appliquer, dans ce cas, la rkgle d'après laquelle les abstentions n'empèchent pas lunanimité. Also Ray, J., Commentaire du Pacts de la Société des Nations , Paris, 1930, p. 536.Google Scholar

8 Julius Stone, “The Rule of Unanimity: the Practice of the Council and Assembly of the League of Nations,” in 14 British Year Book of International Law (1933), p. 31.

9 Same.

10 Committee on the Composition of the Council. Part I. Report on the Work of the First Session. Doc.C.299.M.139.1926.V, p. 26. The words quoted above were spoken by M. Motta, Chairman of the Committee. Similar views were expressed by other Members of the Committee, in particular by M. Scialoja. Same, p. 26.

11 League of Nations, Official Journal 1926, p. 888. See same, p. 890, for the views of M. Scialoja and M. Paul-Boncour.

12 Miller, work cited, Vol. II, Docs. 28 and 30, pp. 658 and 672.

13 Changes made by Drafting Committee,” Memorandum of Mr. Baker intended to show the changes made by the Drafting Committee in the English Text before them (in Doc. 656). D. H. Miller, My Diary at the Conference of Paris, n.p., n.d., Vol. VII, Doc. 678, p. 404; see also same, Doc. 679, p. 409.

14 Same, Doc. 679, p. 406, note a and Doc. 681, p. 413, note a; see also text of the Diary, Vol. I, p. 219, note b.

15 “Note by the British Delegation on the Redraft submitted by the Drafting Committee'': Miller, Drafting of the Covenant, Vol. I, p. 417. See also Jenks, C. W., “Expulsion from the League of Nations,” in British Year Book of International Law , 1935, p. 156;Google Scholar Message from the Federal Council of Switzerland to the Federal Assembly of Switzerland concerning the Question of the Accession of Switzerland to the League of Nations, August 4,1919, Cambridge, England, 1919, p. 130.

16 Miller, Diary, Vol. XIX, p. 30.

17 “The Covenant of the League of Nations with a Commentary Thereon,” in British Parliamentary Papers, Misc. No. 3 (1919), Cmd. 151, p. 17.

18 “French Text of April 7, 1919,” Miller, Drafting, Vol. II, Doc. 36, p. 768.

19 Same, Doc. 37, p. 783, where the Lapradelle Text is printed in the left and the Larnaude Text in the right column.

20 Same, Doc. 38, p. 797.

21 Sir John Fischer Williams, “The League of Nations and Unanimity,” in this Journal, Vol. 19 (1925), p. 483, note 28.

22 Miller, Drafting, Doc. 39, p. 810.

23 Same, Doc. 40, p. 826.

24 Same, Vol. I, p. 522.

25 Same, p. 523.

26 Committee on the Composition of the Council. Part I. Report on the Work of the First Session. C.299.M.139.1926.V, p. 15.

27 ''Report of the Subcommittee of the Committee on Amendments to the Covenant presented to the Plenary Committee,” Doc.A.C.13.1921. See also “Legal Position of States which do not pay their Contribution to the League,” Report by the Secretary-General submitted to the Council on March 9, 1927: Doc.C.36.1927.V. League of Nations OJ., 1927, p. 505. Ray, work cited, p. 273, 535.

28 League of Nations, O.J., 1934, p. 511.

29 Ray, p. 536; Schücking-Wehberg, 2nd ed., p. 636; Göppert, Otto, Organisation und Tätigkeit des Völkerbundes, Stuttgart, 1938, pp. 95, 198.

30 Precisely with a view to avoiding the difficulty indicated above the Assembly adopted the following amendment to Article 16 of the Covenant on October 4, 1921: “ It is for the Council to give an opinion whether or not a breach of the Covenant has taken place. In deliberations on this question in the Council the votes of Members of the League alleged to have resorted to war and of Members against whom such action was directed shall not be counted.” On the other hand it was pointed out by M. de Brouckère in his Report on Point 1 (b) of the Proposal laid before the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference by the French Delegation, that “if Article 16 is only resorted to in cases to which it properly applies, the amendment proposed in 1921 with regard to the calculation of unanimity loses much of its importance. In cases where a state has shown its definite intention to disturb the peace, to defy the whole of the League, and, furthermore, to break the most solemn of undertakings which it has given to its fellow Members, expulsion, as contemplated in Article 16, seems inevitable and the votes which it will no longer be called upon to cast are surely not a matter of great concern. But the difficulty pointed out in 1921 may recur in a fresh form when Article 11 of the Covenant comes to be applied.” “Reports and Resolutions on the Subject of Article 16 of the Covenant.” Doc.A.14.1927.V, pp. 42, 70, 71.

31 The relevant documents will be found in League of Nations O.J., 1939, p. 509.

32 On December 11, 1939, the Assembly, having heard the statement of the Delegate of Finland, decided to set up a Special Committee to study the appeal of the Finnish Government. Records of the Twentieth Ordinary Session of the Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 11.The Committee had referred to it a number of written and verbal proposals and declarations including that of the Argentine delegation at the plenary meeting on December 13th. The delegate of the Argentine in his address of December 13, 1939, stated that the Soviet Union had “placed itself outside the Covenant” and, demanding “the expulsion of the Soviet Union from the League of Nations,” he concluded by voicing his “Government's unalterable decision, that the Argentine Republic can no longer consider itself a Member of the League of Nations as long as the Soviet Union is able to claim that title.” Same, pp. 14, 16, 17. The Report of the Special Committee, dated December 13, 1939, DocA.46.1939.VTI, will be found in League of Nations O.J., 1939, pp. 531-541.

33 Records of the Twentieth Ordinary Session of the Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 53.

34 Paragraph 5 of Rule 19 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly provides: “For the purpose of this Rule, representatives who abstain from voting shall be considered as not present.” Rules, Revised edition, April 1937. Doc.C.144.M.92.1937.

35 League of Nations O.J., 1939, p. 506.

36 League of Nations O.J., 1939, p. 508. Before submitting for the Council's approval the draft resolution the President reminded the delegates of the provision of Article 16, paragraph 4. Having quoted verbatim the text of that paragraph, he then said: “Article 16, paragraph 4, of the Covenant, which I have just read to you, provides for a vote by the Members of the League represented on the Council.” Same, p. 506.

37 The Delegate of China declared that in the absence of final instructions from his Government he would abstain from the vote to be taken on the resolution before the Council. Same, p. 508.

38 Peru withdrew from the League on April 9, 1941, having given notice of withdrawal on April 8, 1939, in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Covenant. League of Nations O.J., 1939, p. 204.

39 Records of the Twentieth Ordinary Session of the Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 35.

40 Göppert, p. 94.

41 The Rules and Procedure Governing Admission to and Loss of Membership in the League of Nations. Report of the Special Committee set up to study the Application of the Principles of the Covenant. Doc.A.7.1938.VII, p. 59.

42 Oppenheim, L., International Law, Vol. II, London, 1940 (6th ed., by Lauterpacht), p. 137, note 2.

43 Above, p. 38. Mr. Jenks expresses the view that “it may well become one of the constitutional traditions of the League never to have recourse to the clause except in the type of case for which it was originally intended“; work cited, p. 157.

44 Doc.C.375.M.288.1939.VII. League of Nations O.J., 1939, p. 512.

45 Same, p. 532.