tion, to collect and disseminate information bearing upon air navigation, to publish air maps, and to give an opinion on questions submitted to it for examination.1 (g) Amendments to the Convention While the International Air Commission can, by the requisite majority, itself amend the annexes, it cannot do more than recommend an amendment of the convention. Every proposed amendment must, however, be considered by it, and cannot be recommended for adoption unless it receives at least two-thirds of all the votes which could be cast if all the States were represented. Even if so carried, it cannot become effective unless formally adopted by the parties to the convention.2 (h) Disputes Disagreements as to the interpretation of the convention are to be referred to the Permanent Court of International Justice, and, pending its establishment, to arbitration. But disputes as to a regulation in any of the annexes are to be decided by the International Air Commission, acting by a majority.1 (i) Coming into Force, Accession and Withdrawal The convention is to come into force for each signatory State, in respect of other States which have already ratified, forty days from the deposit of its ratification. States neutral in the World War may accede without restriction; other States only upon the terms of Article 42. Any State may withdraw from it by denunciation, but no such denunciation may be made before January 1, 1922. Denunciation is not to take effect until at least a year after it has been given." 1 Article 34. 2 Article 34. See below, § 476b. 4 Article 37. "The British self-governing Dom. inions and India are deemed to be States for the purposes of this Convention: Article 40. 6 Articles 40-43. Natural and Arti ficial Boundaries. X BOUNDARIES OF STATE TERRITORY Grotius, ii. c. 3, §§ 16-18-Vattel, i. § 266-Hall, § 38-Westlake, i. pp. 144145-Twiss, i. §§ 147-148-Taylor, § 251-Moore, i. §§ 154-162-Hershey, Nos. 162-165-Bluntschli, §§ 296-302-Hartmann, § 59-Heffter, § 66— Holtzendorff in Holtzendorff, ii. pp. 232-239-Gareis, § 19-Liszt, § 9— Ullmann, § 91-Bonfils, Nos. 486-489-Despagnet, No. 377-PradierFodéré, ii. Nos. 759-777-Mérignhac, ii. p. 358-Nys, i. pp. 446-472— Rivier, i. § 11-Calvo, i. § 342-Fiore, ii. Nos. 799-806, and Code, Nos. 1045-1054-Martens, i. § 89-Lord Curzon of Kedleston, Frontiers (Romanes lecture of 1907)-Holdich, Political Frontiers and Boundary Making (1915)—Schulthess, Das internationale Wasserrecht (1915)— Fawcett, Frontiers (1918). § 198. Boundaries of State territory are the imaginary lines on the surface of the earth which separate the territory of one State from that of another, or from unappropriated territory, or from the open sea. The course of the boundary lines may or may not be indicated by boundary signs. These signs may be natural or artificial, and one speaks, therefore, of natural in contradistinction to artificial boundaries. Natural boundaries may consist of water, a range of rocks or mountains, deserts, forests, and the like. Artificial boundaries are such signs as have been purposely. put up to indicate the way of the imaginary boundary line. They may consist of posts, stones, bars, walls,1 trenches, roads, canals, buoys in water, and the like. It must, however, be borne in mind that the distinction between artificial and natural boundaries is not sharp, in so far as some natural boundaries can be artificially created. Thus a forest may be planted, and a desert may be created, as was the frequent practice of the Romans of antiquity, for the purpose of marking the frontier.2 1 The Romans of antiquity very often constructed boundary walls, and the Chinese Wall may also be cited as an example. 2 The usual practice adopted by the Peace Conference in 1919 with regard to boundaries was to specify them in words, so far as was practicable, Waters. § 199. Natural boundaries consisting of water must Boundary be specially discussed on account of the different kinds of boundary waters. Such kinds are rivers, lakes, landlocked seas, and the maritime belt. 1 (1) Boundary rivers 1 are such rivers as separate two different States from each other.2 If such river is not navigable, the imaginary boundary line as a rule runs down the middle of the river, following all turnings of the border line of both banks of the river. If navigable, the boundary line as a rule runs through the middle of the so-called Thalweg, that is, the mid-channel of the river, and this general rule was adopted by the Treaties of Peace, except in special cases. But it is possible that the boundary line is the border line of the river, so that the whole bed belongs to one of the riparian States only. This is an exceptional case created by immemorial possession, by treaty, or by the fact that a State has occupied the lands on one side of a river at a time prior to the occupation of the lands on the other side by some other State. And it must be remembered that, since a river sometimes changes its course more or less, the boundary line is thereby also altered. In case a bridge is built over a boundary river, the boundary line runs, failing and leave the actual delimitation to Boundary Commissions, which were to fix the frontier line on the spot in conformity with the provisions of the treaties. Maps were used to illustrate the boundaries; but in case of a discrepancy between the text of a treaty and a map, the text was to prevail. 1 See Huber in Z. V., i. (1906), pp. 29-52 and 159-217; Hyde in A.J., vi. (1912), pp. 901-909, and Schulthess, op. cit., pp. 8-16 and 19-24. 2 This case is not to be confounded with the other, in which a river runs through the lands of two different States. In this latter case the boundary line runs across the river. 7 See Twiss, i. §§ 147 and 148, and Westlake, i. p. 145; Hyde in A.J., § vi. (1912), p. 905, and Schulthess, op. cit., pp. 8-10. Unless it is otherwise provided by treaty (see, for example, Treaty of Peace with Germany, Article 30). Moreover, if a boundary river leaves its old bed and forms a new one, the boundary line remains in its old place. See below, § 235, and State of Arkansas v. State of Tennessee, (1918) 246 U.S. 158. Moun tains. special treaty arrangements,1 through the middle of the bridge.2 (2) Boundary lakes and land-locked seas are such as separate the lands of two or more different States from each other. The boundary line runs through the middle of these lakes and seas, but as a rule special treaties portion off such lakes and seas between riparian States.3 (3) The boundary line of the maritime belt is, according to details given above (§ 186), uncertain, since no unanimity prevails with regard to the width of the belt. It is, however, certain that the boundary line runs not nearer to the shore than three miles, or one marine league, from the low-water mark. (4) In a narrow strait separating the lands of two different States the boundary line runs, either through the middle, or through the mid-channel, unless special treaties make different arrangements. Boundary § 200. Boundary mountains or hills are such natural elevations from the common level of the ground as separate the territories of two or more States from each other. Failing special treaty arrangements, the boundary line runs on the mountain ridge along with the watershed. But it is quite possible that boundary mountains belong wholly to one of the States which they separate.5 Boundary § 201. Boundary lines are, for many reasons, of such Disputes. vital importance, that disputes relating thereto are inevitably very frequent and have often led to war. During the nineteenth century, however, a tendency began to prevail to settle such disputes peaceably. The simplest way in which this can be done is always by 1 For an example where it is otherwise provided, see Treaty of Peace with Germany, Article 66, under which existing bridges across the Rhine within the limits of AlsaceLorraine are to belong to France. 2 As regards the boundary lines running through islands rising in boundary rivers and through the abandoned beds of such rivers, see below, §§ 234 and 235. * See above, § 179, and Schulthess, op. cit., pp. 16-18. See Twiss, i. §§ 183 and 184, and above, § 194. See Fiore, ii. No. 800. a boundary treaty, provided the parties can come to terms.1 In other cases arbitration can settle the matter, as, for instance, in the Alaska Boundary dispute between Great Britain (representing Canada) and the United States, settled in 1903.2 Sometimes International Commissions are specially appointed to settle the boundary lines. In this way the boundary lines between Turkey, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro, and Roumania were settled after the Berlin Congress of 1878. After the World War Boundary Commissions were constituted by the Treaties of Peace to settle many frontiers.3 It sometimes happens that the States concerned, instead of settling the boundary line, keep a strip of land between their territories under their joint tenure and administration, so that a so-called condominium comes into existence, as was done in the case of Moresnet (Kelmis) on the Prusso-Belgian frontier prior to the World War.4 daries politico. § 202. Whereas the term 'natural boundaries' in the Natural theory and practice of the Law of Nations means natural Bounsigns which indicate the course of boundary lines, the sensu same term is used politically 5 in various different meanings. Thus the French often speak of the river Rhine as their 'natural' boundary, as the Italians do of the Alps. Thus, further, the zones within which the language of a nation is spoken are frequently termed that nation's 'natural' boundary. Again, the line enclosing such parts of the land as afford great facilities for defence against an attack is often called the 'natural' boundary of a State, whether or not these parts belong a A good example of such boundary treaty is that between Great Britain and the United States of America respecting the demarcation of the international boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada, signed at Washington on April 11, 1908. See Martens, N. R. G., 3rd Ser. iv. p. 191. 2 See Balch, The Alaska Frontier 3 See above, §, 198, n. 2. See Rivier, i. p. 166. |