At the moment, alien seamen present problems due to a variety of factors: The inability of Norwegian, Greek, Yugoslav, Dutch, Belgian, and other friendly vessels to return to their home ports under German occupation to replenish their crews with nationals; the dislocation throughout Europe of arrangements for hiring, paying, and attending to the welfare of seamen; the inability of American immigration authorities to force the repatriation of Norwegian, Greek, etc., seamen who overstay their leave in our ports; the wage and other labor difficulties arising from the freedom of seamen to accept or reject any offered job, to quit their jobs and seek better ones; and the operation of our Asiatic exclusion laws upon increasing numbers of Chinese and Lascar seamen.

The traditional system of international law is based on the distinction between the law of peace and the law of war. In the formative period of international law, thinkers were fully aware of the problems hidden behind this classification. Positivist writers took over these conceptions, framed against the background of a philosophical vista of society. Yet in their hands these terms lost their original significance. It is the purpose of this investigation to throw light on this process and to consider the relevance of this dichotomy into peace and war for the positivist and sociological approaches to international law.