e French
Code 30 years. For details it may suffice to refer to the Institutes of
Justinian, II. 4; the Digest, VII. 1; the Code Civil, sects. 573-636;
the new German Civil Code, sects. 1030-1089.

It remains to be seen how the conception of "usufruct" is to be imported
into the relations of sovereign States, and, more especially, what are
to be the relations of the usufructuary to States other than the State
under which he holds. It is, of course, quite possible to adapt the
terms of Roman private law to international use. "Dominium,"
"Possessio," "Occupatio," have long been so adapted, but it has yet to
be proved that "Usufructus" is equally malleable. I can recall no other
use of the term in international discussions than the somewhat
rhetorical statement that an invader should consider himself as merely
the "usufructuary" of the resources of the country which he is invading;
which is no more than to say that he should use them "en bon pere de
famille." It will be a very different matter to put a strict legal
construction upon the grant of the "usufruct" of Port Arthur. By way of
homage to the conception of such a grant, as presumably creating at the
outside a life-interest, Russia seems to have taken it, in the first
instance, only for twenty-five years. One may, however, be pardoned for
sharing, with reference to this transaction, the scruples which were
felt at Rome as to allowing the grant of a usufruct to a
corporation--"periculum enim esse videbatur, ne perpetuus fieret."

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
T. E. HOLLAND.
Oxford, March 30 (1898).

P.S.--It would seem from M. Lehr's _Elements du droit civil Russe_ that
"usufruct" is almost unknown to the law of Russia, though a restricted
form of it figures in the code of the Baltic provinces.

It is certain that, apart from general conventions,
international law imposes no liability on an invader to pay for
requisitioned property or services, or to honour any receipts
which he may have given for them.

The Hague Convention of 1899 made no change in this respect.
Arts. 51 and 52 of the _Reglement_ annexed to the Convention
direct, it is true, that receipts should be given for
contributions ("un recu sera delivre aux contribuables") also
for requisitions in kind, if not paid for ("elles seront
constatees par des recus"), but these receipts were to be
merely evidence that money or goods have been taken, and it was