The Failure of Constitutional Emergency Powers under the German Republic

1940 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 572
Author(s):  
Frederick L. Schuman ◽  
Frederick Mundell Watkins
1940 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 551
Author(s):  
Heinz H. F. Eulau ◽  
Frederick M. Watkins ◽  
Karl Loewenstein

1964 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 242-243
Author(s):  
John K. Zeender
Keyword(s):  
The West ◽  

1985 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 835-862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Hiley

Modern British counter-espionage effectively began in April 1907, when a joint conference of naval and military officials, formed the previous year to consider ‘the Powers Possessed by the Executive in Time of Emergency’, recommended both an immediate strengthening of the laws against espionage, and a War is Office investigation of ‘the question of police surveillance and control of aliens’. These recommendations were to prove an important initiative, and did much to determine the course of British counter-espionage before 1914, yet at the time they probably seemed little more than an airing of old grievances unlikely to find new support, for they were among the last remnants n. of the abortive ‘Emergency Powers Bill’ which the War Office intelligence department had been advocating to strengthen home defence ever since the invasion scare of 1888. The 1906 joint conference had in fact hoped to further the cause of this great legislative package, with its radically new powers of access, requisition and seizure but, faced with the Liberal administration's commitment to the ‘continuous principle’ that a full-scale landing was impossible, had been forced instead to confine itself to the purely naval and military aspects of home defence. As its report confessed in April 1907, in the prevailing climate of opinion the only hope for the great ‘Emergency Powers Bill’ was as a series of ‘small and independent measures’.


1985 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-80
Author(s):  
A. N. Cockcroft

Traffic separation schemes and other routing measures have now been established in the coastal waters of many countries and new schemes are being introduced each year. Traffic separation was originally intended to reduce the risk of collision between ships proceeding in opposite directions but this paper explains how routing measures are now being used mainly for coastal protection. Improvements in navigational aids may lead to more extensive routing schemes in the future with increasing restriction on the movement of shipping.The first traffic separation schemes adopted by IMCO (now IMO) in 1965 and 1968 were based on proposals made by the Institutes of Navigation of France, the Federal German Republic and the United Kingdom. In the report submitted to the Organisation by the Institutes in 1964 it was stated that ‘the object of any form of routing is to ease the congestion and lessen the likelihood of end-on encounters by separating opposing streams of traffic …’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document