language for the intention of the legislator. Even the internal
legislation of states suffers under this difficulty in so far as the
art of legislation is still very clumsy and undeveloped. For
_international_ legislation there is in addition the further difficulty
that different groups of peoples employ very different methods in
drafting their laws. If we were to give to an Englishman, a Frenchman,
and a German the task of drafting a law upon the same topic, and if they
were provided with the point of view from which the regulation of
individual points was to proceed, so that the intention of the draftsmen
would be the same, three very different drafts would nevertheless
emerge. The English draft would deal in the most concrete manner
possible with the situations to which it meant to apply; it would adduce
as many particular cases as possible, and so would run the risk of
forgetting some series of cases altogether. The German draft would be as
abstract as is possible, and would entirely disregard individual cases,
except such as required a special treatment; and so it would expose
itself to the danger that in practice cases would be brought within the
enactment which were outside the intention of the legislator. The French
draft would attach more weight to principles than to individual points,
enunciating principles in a legislative manner and leaving it to
practice to construct out of these principles the rule for the
particular case. Now, seeing that French is the language of
international legislation, and so in the editing of drafts at the Hague
Conferences the lion's share will naturally fall to French jurists
attending the Conference, it will scarcely be possible to prevent the
French method of legislation from obtaining great influence over
international legislation. But there is no need for this mode of
legislation to become dominant. The jurist representatives of other
states must see to it that the French method is perfected by their own;
the English and the Germans must make it their business to bring the
drafts into a more concrete form, and to split up principles into more
abstract rules. In this way, it may in time be possible by means of
common international labour to make essential advance in the art of
legislation.
[Sidenote: These difficulties distinct from those due to carelessness.]
35. But the difficulties inherent in the legislative method must not be
confused with those which come from a care
|