Nature and Origin.—A savage meeting in the forest a person whom he has never seen before is apt to look upon him as a foe. As civilization increases, danger to one's personal rights decreases, and stranger ceases to mean enemy. It has gradually come about that the confidence and courtesy shown to one another by men in their individual relations have extended to the relations of states. Morality, reason, and custom have established among the nations certain rules of conduct with respect to one another. The rules constitute what is called international law.

As might be guessed, international law is a matter of comparatively recent origin, and exists only among the most highly civilized nations. Not being the enactment of any general legislative body, having no courts competent to pass upon it nor executive to enforce its provisions, this law must be framed by agreement, and its carrying out must rest upon national good faith.

PEACE RELATIONS.

The great purpose of international law being to preserve peace by removing the causes of war, we shall first consider some of the arrangements operative in times of peace.

Non-interference.—Among individuals it is found that, as a rule, it is best for each person to mind his own business. Similarly, among nations non-interference by one with the internal affairs of another is a cardinal principle. It is, therefore, a general rule that a people may adopt such form of government as they choose, and that whenever they wish they may amend or entirely alter it. [Footnote: A change in the form of government does not release the nation from prior obligations.] And the government formed has a right to operate without dictation from other powers. Nor has any foreign nation a right to inquire how the government has come into being; sufficient that it is the government.

This right of a nation to manage its own affairs is called sovereignty.
It belongs to a small independent nation as completely as to a large one.
The act of one government in acknowledging the validity and sovereignty of
another is called recognizing it. (See page 349, last paragraph.)

It is sometimes a delicate question to determine whether to recognize a community as a nation or not. Thus, if a dependency is seeking to become independent, our personal sympathies are naturally with it, and yet it might be contrary to the law of nations, an "unfriendly act" to the sovereign power, for our government to recognize its independence. During the struggle of the Spanish-American colonies for separate political existence, John Quincy Adams, then (1822) secretary of state, formulated the proper rule of action thus: "In every question relating to the independence of a nation two principles are involved, one of right and the other of fact, the former exclusively depending upon the determination of the nation itself, and the latter resulting from the successful execution of that determination … The government of the United States yielded to an obligation of duty of the highest order by recognizing as independent states nations which, after deliberately asserting their right to that character, have maintained and established it against all the resistance which had been or could be brought to oppose it. This recognition is … the mere acknowledgment of existing facts." [Footnote: Wharton's International Law Digest, Volume I., page 162.]

Although sovereignty implies the right of a government to enter freely into such relations with any other nation as may be mutually agreeable, the nations of Europe feel at liberty in self-defense to interfere with any arrangements that threaten the "balance of power." Thus France would feel justified in opposing a very close alliance between Prussia and Spain.

It is our good fortune not to have any dangerous neighbors. We are reasonably sure of peace so long as we act in accordance with the counsel of Washington, "Friendly relations with all, entangling alliances with none."

Jurisdiction.—It is clear that the authority of a nation properly extends over the land within its borders and over its inland waters. It is equally clear that no nation should have exclusive jurisdiction over the ocean. It is generally understood that a nation's authority extends out into the sea a marine league from shore. But difficulty is encountered in determining a rule of jurisdiction over bays, straits, wide-mouthed rivers and other coast-waters. Shall the United States of right freely navigate the St. Lawrence to its mouth, and the British the Yukon? Should Denmark receive tribute of ships passing through the sounds to the Baltic, and may Turkey prohibit foreign war vessels from passing through the Bosphorus? Is the mouth of the Amazon part of the "high seas?" Is Hudson's Bay? Is Delaware Bay? The difficulty is to formulate a rule that shall not unnecessarily abridge commercial freedom but shall still have due regard to national defense. The question at large is not settled yet, but it seems to be agreed that in the cases of bays not more than ten miles wide at the mouth, the marine league shall be measured from a straight line joining the headlands.

"The United States cannot purchase a grant of land in, or concession of right of way over, the territories of another nation, as could an individual or a private corporation."

Intercourse.—While as an act of sovereignty a nation may shut out from its borders any or all of the rest of mankind, intercourse is so natural and is usually so mutually profitable that such prohibition is almost unknown among civilized nations. Intercourse is regulated in different nations in various ways. Some limit or control it by a passport system; some by special supervision of strangers; some by a protective tariff; others by giving to one nation commercial privileges not given to another.

Among the general rules that govern intercourse are these: Aliens are entitled to protection from violence for themselves and their property. They are amenable to the laws of the country in which they are sojourning, except in certain oriental and other partly civilized countries. Aliens may expatriate themselves and may become naturalized in the land of their adoption. "The right of emigration is inalienable; only self-imposed or unfulfilled obligations can restrict it." [Footnote: Heffter, quoted, in Woolsey's International Law.]

The principle that crime should be tried and punished where committed stands in the way of the trial of a culprit who has escaped to another country. But for mutual protection most of the civilized nations have treaties for the extradition of criminals. The United States have extradition treaties with over twenty countries. (See How Criminals Are Extradited, page 337.)

Ambassadors and Consuls.—We have considered briefly the rights and duties of individual sojourners in foreign lands. Let us now consider the modes and means of intercourse between the governments themselves.

Formerly when a nation wished to come to an understanding with another it sent a special messenger clothed with necessary authority to act; but for about two hundred years these representatives have, as a rule, taken up their residence at the capitals of the countries to which they are sent.

There are various grades of these ambassadors. Ours in order of rank are ambassadors, envoys-extraordinary and ministers plenipotentiary, ministers resident, envoys, charges d'affaires, and, temporarily, secretaries of legation.

"Ambassadors [including all of the above] always and everywhere have had special immunities and often something of a sacred character … Neither public authority nor private persons can use any force, or do any violence to him, without offending against the law of nations." [Footnote: Except that if necessary for self-defense, passive resistance may be made.] This immunity extends to his house, furniture, and attendants. Except in extreme cases, he is exempt from civil or criminal process.

These diplomatic agents are appointees of the executive. Official communications with the president are made through the secretary of state. "In all negotiations between nations, sovereign should always speak to sovereign and minister to minister."

A country may decline to receive any ambassador from a certain nation; and this may be necessary in case of a civil war in which two parties claim to be the legal authorities, because receiving the ambassador of one party would be equivalent to recognizing it as the legitimate authority. And it may, without offense, decline to receive a particular ambassador, on account of some objection to him personally. It may also decline to treat with a minister who has so deported himself as to become distasteful.

When an ambassador arrives at the capitol of the country to which he is sent, he seeks an interview with the secretary in charge of foreign affairs and delivers to him a copy of his credentials. Afterwards on a day appointed for the purpose, the secretary presents him to the executive (sovereign or president), to whom he delivers the original commission.

Ambassadors of all grades are expected to avoid all interference with political movements in the countries where they are stationed.

Consuls are the commercial agents of a country. They are stationed at the principal ports of the world. Their chief functions are:

1. To furnish their government information that may be of service in the commercial relations of the countries.

2. To settle disputes between masters and crews of merchant vessels in the port sailing under the protection of the flag of the consul's country.

3. To reclaim deserters from vessels, and provide for destitute seamen.

4. In some non-Christian lands to act as judge in cases in which a countryman or other person from a Christian state is a party. (See also page 321.)

Treaties.—Treaties are contracts between nations[1], and in international law much resemble ordinary contracts in municipal law. For instance, they can be made only by certain persons—the constituted authorities of nations, or by persons specially deputed by them for that purpose. A treaty cannot obligate to do an unlawful act. There must be consideration —a treaty which sacrifices the interests of one party is not binding upon that party. Treaties obtained by fraud or force are not binding.

[Footnote 1: This from Woolsey's International Law is too good to be omitted: "A contract is one of the highest acts of human free-will; it is the will binding itself in regard to the future, and surrendering its right to change expressed intention, so that it becomes morally and jurally a wrong to act otherwise; it is the act of two parties in which each or one of the two conveys power over himself to the other in consideration of something; done or to be done by the other. The binding force of contracts is to be deduced from the freedom and foresight of man, which would have almost no sphere in society or power of co-operation, unless trust could be excited. Trust lies at the basis of society; society is essential for the development of the individual; the individual could not develop his free forethought unless an acknowledged obligation made him sure in regard to the actions of others. That nations as well as individuals are bound by contract, will not be doubted when we remember that they have the same properties of free will and foresight; that they can have no safe intercourse otherwise."]

Further similarity between municipal and international law is to be seen. The minister appointed to negotiate the treaty is an agent, and his work is subject to the general law of agency. Thus, if he acts within his instructions, his principal (the nation) is bound by what he does, and the treaty-making power is in honor bound to ratify the treaty. From this it will properly be inferred that there is an implied understanding that the sovereign, or other power intrusted with the making of treaties, reserves the right to accept or reject the work of the agent. (See sample treaty, page 360.)

Remedy.—In municipal law, remedy for a wrong is obtained through the courts, if personal influence fails. Among nations there is no general court having jurisdiction. If redress cannot be obtained by remonstrance, arbitration, or other peaceful means, it may be sought through retaliation or finally in war.

WAR RELATIONS.

"International law assumes that there must be wars and fightings among nations, and endeavors to lay down rules by which they shall be brought within the limits of justice and humanity."

Causes.—A nation may wage war to defend any right which as a state it is bound to protect, to redress wrong, or to prevent injury; for instance, to defend its own sovereignty; to protect a citizen in his rights; to obtain satisfaction for insults to its flag, its ambassadors, or its good name; for the violation of treaty rights; to prevent injury, as by checking the onward march of some "conquering hero." War for conquest is not now recognized as legitimate.

Beginning.—"War between independent sovereignties, is and ought to be, an avowed, open way of obtaining justice." Even among the ancients announcements were usually made before war was begun. The Greeks sent a herald to carry the news. "Among the Romans the ceremonies of making known the state of war were very punctilious." But formal declarations of war are now falling into disuse; not from any intention of taking the enemy unawares, but because of the rapidity with which news is now disseminated. Still a state is in honor bound to indicate in some way its changed relation. This is due to the enemy, and just to its own citizens and to neutrals, that they may know how to act. The enemy is usually informed by the peremptory dismissal of its ambassador; the citizens and neutrals by a manifesto of some kind. (See p.354.)

Between whom.—War being an interruption of peaceful relations, commerce between the citizens is at an end—is forbidden. Contracts between them then become either "impossible in their nature" or "unlawful," and therefore void.

The war is not between the individual citizens of the two countries, it is between the governments and is waged by authorized agents—the soldiers and sailors enlisted for the purpose. "The smallest amount of injury consistent with self-defense and the sad necessity of war, is to be inflicted." Passive citizens are not unnecessarily to be molested.

Weapons.—Not "all things are fair in war." Though ingenuity may properly tax itself to produce death-dealing instruments, underhanded means, such as poisoning springs or spreading a plague, are condemned; nor is it now regarded as consistent with right for a civilized nation to employ against another, persons accustomed to an inhuman mode of warfare.

Heralds and Spies.—Heralds bearing flags of truce are inviolable—they must not be molested. Spies, unless in their regimentals, are subject to the death penalty if caught.

Pirates and Privateers.—Pirates, acting under no authority, having no purpose to serve except to enrich themselves at the expense of any one else, are not protected by any nation, and may be put to death by any one capturing them. But privateers, acting as an arm of the government and by its authority, granted by its letters of marque and reprisal, must be treated as prisoners of war.

Prisoners of War.—Prisoners taken in war were formerly the property of their captors, to be used for their pleasure or profit as slaves. Modern usage requires that they be merely detained; that they be fed and sheltered with reasonable comfort, and not treated with any unnecessary harshness. A common practice, worthy of encouragement, is that of exchanging prisoners, thus restoring them to their own side. Sometimes, too, prisoners are released on parole, that is, on their word of honor not to re-enter the army. If a paroled prisoner breaks his word in this respect, upon recapture he is liable to be put to death.

Termination.—Peace comes by treaty. There is usually a preliminary treaty, containing the general statement of conditions to which both parties will consent. When all the details have been arranged, a definitive treaty is concluded. Treaties of peace go into effect as between the parties, when they are signed; as between individuals of the belligerent nations, when they are notified.

RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF NEUTRALS.

When intercourse between the countries of the world was small, owing to lack of facilities, the rights of neutrals were regarded as unimportant. But intercourse has increased so enormously, that no great war can be waged without interfering with the interests of almost all the rest of the world, and the rights of neutrals are assuming more importance in international law.

The great obligation resting upon neutrals is "to allow nothing to the belligerents which either would object to as being adverse to his interests."

What Neutrals may do.—The common instincts of humanity may be complied with. Thus a ship of war in distress may run into a neutral port. Soldiers running into neutral territory may be disarmed and then protected as non-combatants.

Things Contraband.—It is a breach of neutrality to lend money or furnish troops or munitions of war to a belligerent, or to allow ships of war to be built by citizens of the neutral power within its borders, if it knows (or should know) that they are to be armored and used in the service of one of the belligerents.

Citizens of Neutral States.—Members of a neutral state may lend money to a belligerent or may go into the army or navy of a belligerent without breach of the neutrality of their nation. They may sell goods, except materials of war, to either belligerent, Blockade.—A belligerent may, as a war measure, close the ports of the enemy. This is called a blockade. Two things are necessary to make a blockade valid—due notice must be given, and the blockade must be made effective by placing before the ports armed vessels to prevent the entrance of trading vessels. If the conditions have been complied with, neutrals trade with the port at the risk of losing all captured ships and cargoes.

DECLARATION OF WAR—1812.

An act declaring war between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, and the dependencies thereof, and the United States of America
and their territories.[Footnote: Drawn by William Pinckney, Attorney
General of the United States.]

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That war be, and the same is hereby declared to exist between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the dependencies thereof, and the United States of America and their territories; and that the President of the United States is hereby authorized to use the whole land and naval force of the United States to carry the same into effect, and to issue to private armed vessels of the United States commissions, or letters of marque and general reprisal, in such form as he shall think proper, and under the seal of the United States, against the vessels, goods, and effects, of the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the subjects thereof.