Woolsey. Sec. 2. The di visions of the subject. The necessary law. The voluntary law. Sec. 3. tions and modifications as may be established by general consent.' "International law, in a wide and abstract sense, would embrace those rules of intercourse between nations which are deduced from their rights and moral claims; or, in other words, it is the expression of the jural and moral relations of States to one another. "According to this definition, if we could once find out what are the rights and obligations, the moral claims and duties of nations as such, by mere deduction, the principles of this science would be settled. But such an abstract form of the science, commanding general assent, has neither appeared, nor is likely to appear."t Text-writers have, for convenience, made certain divisions of international law, such as necessary, voluntary, conventional and customary law, according to the source whence the rules of conduct have been derived. "We call that the Necessary Law of Nations which consists in the application of the law of nature to nations. It is necessary because nations are absolutely bound to observe it. Several writers term it the Natural Law of Nations."‡ The voluntary law of nations is based upon treaties and obligations voluntarily entered into by States, and upon the customs adopted by them in their intercourse. Hence the subdivision of the voluntary law into conventional law, or that depending upon the express consent of nations, and customary law, or that depending upon their tacit consent.§ "Perhaps a division like the following may have something to commend it, which separates the rights and obligations known to this science into, (1) those which are deducible from natural jus, which no sovereignty began or can terminate; (2) those deducible from the idea of a State; (3) those which are begun and can be ended by compact, expressed or tacit."|| "The peculiar subjects of international law are nations and national law. those political societies of men called States."¶ "Nations, or sovereign States, are to be considered as so many free persons living together in the state of nature."** *Lawrence's Wheaton, p. 26. † Woolsey, Sec. 3. ? Vattel, p. lxvi; Wheaton, p. 14. ¶ Lawrence's Wheaton, p. 31. **Vattel, p. lv. "A sovereign State is generally defined to be any nation or people, whatever may be the form of its internal constitution, which governs itself independently of foreign powers. Sec. 4. Definition of a State. "This definition, unless taken with great qualifications, cannot be admitted as entirely accurate. Some States are completely sovereign and independent, acknowledging no superior but the Supreme Ruler and Governor of the Universe. The sovereignty of other States is limited and qualified in various degrees."* "All sovereign States are equal in the eye of international Sec. 5. Equality law, whatever be their relative power."† of States. sovereign States. The independent action of States, and consequently their Sec. 6. Semi. complete sovereignty, may be limited and modified by treaty obligations. States thus dependent upon other powers for the exercise of certain rights of sovereignty have been termed semi-sovereign States. ereignty of a State. "Sovereignty is the supreme power by which any State is Sec. 7. The sovgoverned. This supreme power may be exercised either internally or externally. "Internal sovereignty is that which is inherent in the people of any State, or vested in its rulers, by its municipal constitution or fundamental laws. "External sovereignty consists in the independence of one political society, in respect to all other political societies. It is by the exercise of this branch of sovereignty that the international relations of one political society are maintained, in peace and in war, with all other political societies. The law by which it is regulated has, therefore, been called external public law, droit public externe, but may more properly be termed international law."§ ereignty is ac Sovereignty is acquired by a State, either at the origin of Sec. 8. How sovthe civil society of which it is composed, or when it separates quired. itself from the community of which it previously formed a part, and on which it was dependent. "The internal sovereignty of a State does not, in any degree, depend upon its recognition by other States. A new State, springing into existence, does not require the other States to confirm its internal sovereignty. recognition of Ibid. pp. 58, 59. Sec. 9. The identity of of the State de facto is sufficient, in this respect, to establish its sovereignty de jure. It is a State because it exists. "The external sovereignty of any State, on the other hand, may require recognition by other States in order to render it perfect and complete. So long, indeed, as the new State confines its actions to its own citizens, and to the limits of its own territory, it may well dispense with such recognition. But if it desires to enter into that great society of nations, all the members of which recognize rights to which they are mutually entitled, and duties which they may be called upon reciprocally to fulfil, such recognition becomes essentially necessary to the complete participation of the new State in all the advantages of this society. Every other State is at liberty to grant, or refuse, this recognition, subject to the consequences of its own conduct in this respect; and until such recognition becomes universal on the part of the other States, the new State becomes entitled to the exercise of its external sovereignty as to those States only by whom its sovereignty has been recognized."* "A State, as to the individual members of which it is coma State, posed, is a fluctuating body; but in respect to the society, it is one and the same body, of which the existence is perpetually kept up by a constant succession of new members. This existence continues until it is interrupted by some change affecting the being of the State."+ Sec. 10. The obligations of a State. The obligations of a State are unchanged by any modification in its form of government. Treaties with other powers still remain in force, and the public debts are held inviolable. The State is responsible for injuries done the citizens or the government of another State, notwithstanding such injuries were committed during an interruption in its form of government. "As soon as a nation has assumed the obligations of international law, they become a portion of the law of the land, to govern the decisions of courts, the conduct of the rulers and that of the people. A nation is bound to protect this part of law by statute and penalty as much as that part which controls the jural relations or in other ways affects the actions of individuals. Otherwise it is a dead letter; there is a want of *Lawrence's Wheaton, pp. 36, 39. Vattel, p. 205; Wheaton, p. 57. \ Ibid. p. 39. faith towards foreign powers, and there is a danger of quarrel ending in war."* tional law "As being a part of the common law of England, the law of Sec. 11. Internanations is adopted by our own law also; for it is well settled that adopted by the United States. the common law of England, so far as it may be consistent with the constitution of this country, and remains unaltered by statute, is an essential part of American jurisprudence."+ Many of the principles of international law have received the express sanction of the Constitution and statutes of the United States, and they are made to control the actions of citizens by the infliction of penalties for any violations of them.‡ In order to ascertain what are the accepted principles of international law, we must consult : 1. The various codes of sea-laws which came into use in the early history of commerce in Europe. 2. Treaties made by civilized nations, both with regard to their political relations and the regulation of commerce. In these notes, where any treaties of the United States, now in force, touch upon any points of interest to the naval officer, they will be quoted. 3. The decisions of the courts of civilized nations involving questions of international rights and duties. In questions relating to blockades and contraband of war, the decisions of the British Court of Admiralty and of the United States Prize Courts may be considered as the highest authority. 4. The opinions of the leading statesmen of civilization as given in discussions of international questions. 5. The opinions of text-writers of acknowledged authority on this subject. 6. The history of wars, negotiations, conventions, and other transactions affecting the intercourse of nations. In comparing the sources of information above enumerated, great diversity of opinion and practice will be found, and many propositions have been made for an International Congress to settle authoritatively many points of uncertainty in the law of nations, but, as yet, without success. As there could hardly be a court of adequate jurisdiction to enforce penalties for violations of an international code of law, even were such a code established, no attempt to enact one is likely to succeed. *Woolsey, Sec. 29. Kent, Lect. 1. See "Neutrality," "Piracy," &c. Sec 12. The sources of international law. Sec. 13. The un certainties of international law. Sec. 14. The sanctions of law. The uncertainty connected with this subject leads a recent writer on international law to remark: "The term 'international law' would seem to imply the existence of a regular code, with no more of uncertainty than belongs to any system of national law. Some experiences would lead almost to the opposite conclusion, that there was no system at all. The fact lies between; all nations recognize and practice certain leading principles; such as the right to blockade, and to make prize of violators thereof; prohibition and confiscation of contraband, &c. But they vary widely in the application-in determining what constitutes blockade, and what is contraband."* "As nations are independent of each other, and acknowledge international no superior, there is, unfortunately, no sovereign power among nations to uphold or enforce the international law; no tribunal to which the oppressed can appeal, as of right, against the oppressor; and, consequently, if either nation refuse to give effect to the established principles of international law, the only redress is by resorting to arms, and enforcing the performance of the national obligation; and this is the principle of just war."t To the means of preventing injury, or obtaining redress, afforded by war, there must be added at the present day the force of public opinion, and the municipal laws of civilized nations which confirm the principles of international law in many cases and make violations of those principles penal.‡ It was the force of public opinion, ever growing stronger in favor of right and justice in the intercourse of nations, that rendered possible the Treaty of Washington of 1871, between the United States and Great Britain, and the settlement by arbitration at Geneva of many questions in dispute between those powers that had on several occasions almost resulted in war. In the following pages an endeavor is made to exhibit those leading principles of the science, in regard to which there is such uniformity of practice among civilized nations as places them beyond question, and to show what the present state of international law is, rather than what it has been, or should be. *Dahlgren, p. 115. † Note, Vattel, p. 391. Comp. Woolsey, Sec. 207. |