te: Necessary to understand foreign juristic methods.]

75. In worse plight than even the employment of foreign literature is
the understanding of foreign juristic methods. And yet without such an
understanding the gates are thrown open for misconceptions, for
unfounded claims, and for mutual recriminations. How great is the
divergence of juristic method can only be appreciated by one who has
practised and been called to the teaching of law in different countries.
Now, just as the outlook of its people is incorporated in the law of
every state, so the specific mode of thought and the logical attitude of
any given people are mirrored in its juristic methods. Historical
tradition, political interdependence, and other accidental influences do
indeed also play a great part therein, but the fundamental factor is the
difference of modes of thought and points of view. Seeing, then, that
the law of nations is one and the same for every member of the community
of states, but that on the other hand the science of every state
elaborates the law of nations on the basis of its national juristic
methods, it is unavoidable that discord should arise if the science of
international law of individual states neglect to acquaint itself with
foreign juristic methods. It is not only in scientific treatises, but
also in judicial decisions, that expression is given to these methods,
and the discordance between judicial decisions on the same issue given
in different states is often traceable simply to the difference of
juristic method. That the law is essentially the same is no guarantee
that in all countries there will be a unanimity of judicial
pronouncement on every point thereof. If ever--and it is not outside the
range of practical possibility--an international agreement, including
all states, were arrived at concerning all the topics of the so-called
international private law and international criminal law, there would,
for the reason under consideration, still continue to be no security
that the same law would in every point receive the same treatment from
the courts of all countries. In order to attain this end there would
have to be an international tribunal erected above the municipal courts
of all states, and its judgments would have to be accepted as binding by
the municipal courts concerned. It is just for this reason that the
proposed International Prize Court and the proposed permanent court for
international disputes will aim in