Lieser’s brief review situates Hennig’s study within the uneven history of transport liberalism:
Der Gedanke der „Freien Ströme“, des Verkehrsliberalismus, konnte sich nicht in der gleichen Weise durchsetzen wie der Gedanke des mare liberum.
English translation: The idea of “free rivers,” of transport liberalism, could not prevail in the same way as the idea of mare liberum.
The review moves from expanding navigational and flag freedoms since the Congress of Vienna to their reversal through war and the peace treaties. Its conceptual hinge is “internationalization”: Lieser presents Versailles’s introduction of the term as undermining legal certainty. Hennig’s international-law inquiry consequently leaves an adequate definition dependent on future agreements.
Eine solche Vereinbarung, die auch viele andere dringende, praktische Fragen zu lösen hätte, wäre zwar wünschenswert, ist aber für die nächste Zeit auf Grund der gegebenen Machtverhältnisse wohl kaum zu erwarten.
English translation: Such an agreement, which would also have to resolve many other urgent practical questions, would indeed be desirable, but, given the existing balance of power, can scarcely be expected in the near future.
This closing reservation makes power politics the limit of legal clarification. The review’s significance lies in connecting freedom of river navigation with the instability of postwar legal terminology.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian