ACTS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ORGAN 31 
The Bases of Discussion of the Preparatory Committee divide this sub- 
ject into two parts: one dealing with contractual relations impaired by the 
action of the legislative organ; and the other, with contractual relations 
impaired by executive action. The first question involves legislative enact- 
ments that are inconsistent with the terms of concessions granted to foreign 
subjects, or of contracts made with them; or other laws which might ob- 
struct the execution of such contracts or concessions. Not all of the 
replies of the various governments affirm the responsibility of the State on 
this point. The Austrian Government states that the rule of the Law of 
Nations requiring the States to fulfil such contracts made with aliens in like 
manner as they are required to discharge international obligations, does not 
seem to be generally recognized. The responsibility of the State should not 
be involved except in cases where the joint demeanor of the administrative 
and legislative authorities should be characterized by bad faith towards an 
alien, or which, due to other reasons, may differ from the usual conduct 
observed by civilized nations. The Belgian Government remarks that the 
question at bar cannot be replied in definite terms. There would be cases in 
which certain laws might be an obstacle to the execution of a concession 
granted to an alien, and yet not entail responsibility. The Danish Govern- 
ment believes that, excluding exceptional cases, this matter does not come 
within the range of public international law, but within the general doctrine 
covering the protection of acquired rights. The Government of Poland sets 
out that, a priori, it could not be affirmed in general that it would constitute 
an international offence to enact laws inconsistent with the obligations of the 
State in respect of aliens, under covenants made with, or concessions granted 
to, them. The Swiss Government also considers it very difficult to set 
forth definite rules on this subject. The amendment of concessions granted 
to foreigners, or of contracts made with them, by legislative enactment, 
could not be accomplished except for reasons of public policy and on condi- 
tion that the principle of legal equality of nationals and aliens alike should 
be duly applied. 
The other issue propounded by the Preparatory Committee is the repu- 
diation of debts by legislative action. The Government of Austria avers 
that the leading doctrine of the Law of Nations does not appear to consider 
the refusal of the State to pay its debts as a breach of its international obli- 
gations, and that it would not recognize any right on the part of the State 
whose nationals have sustained loss through repudiation to intercede on their 
behalf. It must be admitted that the risk involved in the acquisition of 
securities of a State whose financial status is uncertain has been, in the 
majority of cases, taken care of when fixing the subscription price or the 
rate of interest, The Belgian Government calls attention to internal loan 
securities acquired by foreigners, and points out that foreign holders should