Ors American Society of International Law Origin of the Term International Orgenizetion Author(): Pitman B. Potter Source: The American Journel of International Law, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Oct., 1945), pp. 803-806 Published by: American Society of International Law Stable URL: hiipsfwww jstororg/sieble/2193427 Accessed: 05/01/2014 19:47 ‘Your use ofthe JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance ofthe Terms & Conditions of Use, availabe sn stor ergpagelnga/sbouvpoices/erss JSTOR isa notfor- profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use. and build wpon a wide ange of content in trasted digital archive. We ue information technology’ and tals to increase productivity and faivate new forms of feholaship. For more information bout ISTOR, plesse contact suppont@jstor. oc. American Society of international Law i collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend accesso The American Journal of fnternational Law. Sens. Inpsjtorargcunnex? wores 803 intervened for the amelioration of the lot of Christian people in Turkey; no such intervention was made by the League of Nations against the oppres- sions of the Nazi regime; at the San Franciseo Conference the Fronch Dele gation had proposed to insort in the new Charter an exact definition of the rights of the individual and of the right of intervention in the domestic jurisdiction of the States where the treatment of the individuals was likely to endanger international peace. Mr. Harvey Moore said that the lawyers should take the lead in creating a new order; “we should not give these tasks ‘to the executive, but to great judges.” Rowan K. Kurarowskt ‘ORIGIN OF THE TERM INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION When thinking out tbe application of the general prineiplos of political science and the art of government to the international field in the years 1914-20, and composing general text on the subject, the present writer employed the phrase “international organization” without any Imowledge ‘whether that phrase had been employed previously or not! It certainly was aot in current sm « “he years 1918-1990 and the present writer did not know of any previous use of it. He consulted the card-oatalogue of the Library of Congress in the winter of 1918-1919 and was surprized not to find any such rubric in use there. “International cobperation”” was used but the idea of institutionalized eobporation or of international organization was unknown, In view of the position now attained by the term both in common usage atid official parlanca it may he interesting to explore ita origins and history briefly. Corrections ur amplifivutions are invited.* In his pioneering work entitled Public Inlernational Unions, published in 1911, Professor Paul 8, Reinsch, of the University of Wisconsia, spoke of “eosmopolitanism” and “world organization” and then added, ““Yot the realm of internstional organization is en accomplished fact,”* For a long time the waiter, who discovered this use of the term in the late twenties, regarded it se the fist use of the phrase. The two older terms had been quite familiar before Reinseh’s time but signified quite different ideas or factual situations from those designated by “intemational organisation”; by this term Reinsch intended, es indicated by the context, to refer to some- thing more concrete and speeffic than had been meant by tho other more in his Introduction to ta Study of International Organization, pubised in 1922, the rltersaid (G8) thatthe now pres bad come into common speech athe preceding twenty five year, ‘This was somenbt of ex exagzeration although the use grow apy fa the years 1920-1972 and immediatly thereafter. + Mr. Georgo A. Hine, tor inehiof ofthis Joona, haa pointed out that he employed the category in question in preparing in 1016-1020, tho Analytial Index for Vol. 114 (21007-1920) (eee p, 151 thereof); he is unaware of having drawn on any parteuareource. ‘The Recommendations of Habana Concerning International Orpansetion, of 1017, re alo to ‘be noted: this Toomsat, Vol. 1¢ (1920, p. 301, ‘*Redaseh, BS, Publc International Unions, 10H, pp. 2 and 4, rewn ec ot ea ede808 (THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW fomiliar terms. “Cosmopolitenism”” referred to a eulture-pattern, as we might say today, aot a formal organization, while “world organisation” meant merely some kind of organisation of the world, leaving the question of what kind of organization entirely uncertain; a possible meaning of the lattor term, namely unitary world organization, or a world state, lay still further in ‘the future than international organization and was not then thought of. A little further along * Professor Reinsch cited, in support of his doctrine of 4 reconciliation of nationalism and intemationalism through international assooistion, “the prospectus of the German association for the mutual understanding among nations” signed by Jellinek, Lisst, Nippold, Piloty, Schiicking, and Ullmann, which also suggested that it was “possible to com” bine with the ides of nationalism thet of international organization.” Reinsch gave no indication of the source of this document norits date. The document must obviously date from somo time prior to publication of the work by Reinsch, and his public use of the formula in question; it would seem: to date from around 1910, the end of a decade which had seen so many striking efforts iz the direction of intemational order and progress. On Ue otter hand the formaia would obviously have been med in the meni- weno German and bave to be translated when teeny taken over by Reinseb. As a matter of fact what very probably was the original of the manifesto appears in the May, 1910, number of Die Friedens-Warte, signed by the persons named. But here the document—ealled an Aufruf (call; sammmons) ~does not couitain the phrase in question in the passage quoted by Reinech but uses the term “international idea” (den tnternationalen (Gedanken)— instead. Whether or not an English version of the Aufruf was issued which contained the variant version we do nob know; it is possible that Rainsch himself simply took liberties in the translation. Still more interesting are the facts that the Aufruf did use the phrase “international organization” Inter’ (calling for the further development of beginnings already made in that direction), though it carried in its title merely a mild reference to “international understanding” (internationaler VerelAndigung). Finally it is to be noted that this very phrase had formed the heart of the subtitle of Dig Friedons-Warle thravgh 1908 (Beilschrft far internationale Versiéndi- ung) when (in 1UUy) it hed changed to swteehenstaatliche Organisation (Zeitschrift far), without explanation, and that the Aufruf was preceded, in the May, 1910, issue,*by an article entitled Der Progrese der inlarnationaler Or- ganisation, by Wilhelm Ostwald, not mentioned in the Aufruf, an article based, be it said, on a somewhat strained analogy between the physical seiences and social evolution, and followed * by an article from the pen of the +10, «Die Friaiens-Werte, May, 1910, p. 84, col. 1. For much of the material in this note, specially the reference to Lorimer, below, Tama indebted to my fiend and forme colleague Professor Hens Weiberg, acholariy and indefatigable editor of Priedene-TWarte how since tomy year. "Same, ool 2. #26, 7B. 89. ‘ieee nde er eat Sh DAM “ete encuRRENT NOTES 805 sworn intemationalist, then editor of Die Friedens-Warte, Alfred H. Fried, entitled Der Bismarckienus wider die internationale Organisation. Ta sum, the transition from the vaguer and less conscious terminology of the 1000's was giving way at this time among German and Austrian scholars, to a more specie and deliberate reference to “international organization.” ‘One ofthe leading figures in this transition was Walther Schcking, later a judge on the Permanent Court of International Justice, In fact it is to the ‘writings of Sehiloking in 1907 and 1008—an artiole of 1907 entitled Modernes Wetthurgertun * and another of 1908 and 1909 entitled L’Oroanisation Tnter- nolionale ox Die Organieation der Welt” exabodying ideas expressed in a leo- tare given in Vienna on October 30, 1907,*—that we ean trace the earliest ‘modern use of the pbrase “international organization.” Tt appears repeat- aly in these writings and probably passed over from Schcking to the Fri dens-Warte by the pathe already indicated Todeed it might well eem that Schacking had been more respontie tian anyone else in this ertial period for sisbiliting and launrting mr the wert 4 actsarly thought the concept and verbal formula "istersatwea! organsaetoe however, war nt thr Aw soe tear one formatted aprveared Tingine awed Fraeh at loa 0 Qenernton in both eases from the pes ut the Scotch yunst James Lorimer. This somembat religious and mystical scer, but practical jurist as well, delivered an acddress before the Royal Academy in Edinburgh on May 18, 1867, en- titled: "On the Application of the Principle of Relative, or Proportional, Equality to International Organization.” In 1871 Lorimer published an articls in the Revue de Droit International et de Législation Comparde entitled Proposition d'un Congrés International ba04 aur le Priveipe de facto, in which he agein utlized tho idea and the formula “international organization.” # Ina letter to Thomes Willg Baleh of Hobruary 10, 1874, ho once more em ploys the term. Finally he employed the idea and the term freely in his Inelittes of the Law of Nations, especially in the second volume of that * Dia Zane eited by Masinitan Hardon, Augut 17, 1007, cited in eomenpodenc by Watters. "in Hench in Hens ate de Droit Intemational Pian, Vel. XV (1006), p.2, ann Garam n lotrel ABhoadtunge, Perigo fr Pal Lond, Ting, 18, p85; the Germen verion Sx qoatlyexpkoded In otapateon with tha Frond although tony are chriusymnare oles fk ene per. ' Feriache Bla, pean of the Fcieke Geach su Wien, VoL 28, No. (aor 4 1007), p 821. "Por this elreee La indebted tomy end and forme oleae Profewor Kelso, somotine member of Cho Jerid . " Treoastion of tha Royal Sooty of Edinburgh Vol XXIV (1867, pS, cited in Saco lt Metlen, Dr Glan der Itarationlen Orpen, 3947-100, VoL. PL. 2 207, note 2. On Yorimere poston inthe fld of international aw and orensastion in Emnra no Jens, C. W, ‘Th Significance today of Lerna’s Utimte Probom of Inter non! Suprdenc in Groin Society, venation, Val 8 CMD, p38, "sense de Dre International el da Léon Compare, Vel. 1. (84H), p 1 a pe Thomas Wiling el, International Gout f Attain, 1019 (orth elton, at Semen pet STOR Tn wd Canine806 ‘THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW work, which appoared in 1884." Lorimer acems to have been the inventor of the term “‘internstional orgenization.” Lorimer’s writings were well known on the Continent. His principal ‘work was translated into French by Nye and published in Brussels in 1885," and the section dealing with problems of the future had already eppeared in Breneh in the Revue de Droit International et de Législation Comparée.* It is ceatirely possible and even probable that it was his use of the term which was taken up a generation later by Schttcking and his colleagues in Germany and Austria. A few supplementary questions suggest themselves, Is any importance to be attached to the use of this specific idea and this specifie term? Is it not probable that others had employed the idea and term “international or- gonization”” before Lorimer? Wes the idea not present earlier in aay event? Why did the concept and the phrase, though Iaunched in Great ‘Britain in 1887 and on the Continent in 1871, not “catch on” and make ita way in the world? Why did it enjoy a different fate after 19197 The ax. swer to the first question is found in those which must be given to the other four. Tt does not seem that any of the dozens or score of persons whe a thought about the problem of international order prior to Lorimer asst tt uupon the exact solution thereof or used the precise formula which we are discussing." They had talked about peace and justice, and order and humanity and many other things, ineluding those mentioned at the beginning of this paper, but not the presise and supremely appropriate combination of elements which is “international organization,” although that solution of ‘the international problem now, in view of the selective victory of that eon- cept, seems superbly obvious in retrospect. Even references to a congress of nations or a federation or confederation of the world missed the general dea," Not only was the mugic phrase not present but the exact idea was not present, And the reason was that the world of nations and the nations of the world were not ready for it. So much so that when a precocious seer Isunched the term it failed to take hold, even among scholars. Even when repeated in Germany forty years later it failed to make ite impress and an- other decade and more, end much educational agony, were needed before the solution became clear and was perceived. Indeed it became obvious and admitted then (in the 1920's) only because in the League effort adequate emphasis was placed, beyond sentiments and ideas and principles and rules of law, upon permanent institutions, organization, and the structure, albeit rudimentary, of the international federal state. Perwan B, Portes 2 ha Irutitutes of the Low of Nations, Vol. U, 1884, pp. 190, 216, ots. Under tha tthe Principes de Drot Internationa; published also in Pais. ™ TLorimer’s phrase was frequently used by Constantin Frans in 1878-82 (P&deraienus als . . . Prins far... Internationale Organizilon, 1979): ter Moulen, Vol. I, Pt. 2, p. 18, a correspondance with Dr. Lazlo Lederman, Geneva, * Lorimer even proposed "Taterastional Government”: work eed, p. 279 ose i nents STOR Tem ed et