servations.

to regulate its own government, and administer its own Introductory oblaws, as it may deem expedient. Any foreign interference with the exercise of these privileges, where the policy of one state does not seriously endanger the safety and welfare of another, is at all times questionable, though there are exceptional cases in which interference may find a justification.

ence.

In cases of revolt, interposition by foreign powers in Foreign interferfavour of one of the contending parties may sometimes be exercised with propriety, but should never be resorted to without great caution. Succour is seldom afforded to the revolting parties, unless in extreme cases, until they have so far established their independence as to give a fair guarantee of permanent stability. In cases of civil war, where the nation is divided into conflicting armies and opposing camps, the two parties may be dealt with as distinct communities, and foreign assistance rendered to either side as in a war between separate and independent nations. The framers of the 7th section of the Foreign Enlistment Act of this country might have had special regard to this proposition, inasmuch as the words applicable to persons exercising or assuming to exercise the powers of government Application of Foreign Enlistover any province or part of any province or people are ment Act. peculiarly adapted to this view of the case, and exhibit a marked distinction between the language of the corresponding or 3rd section of the Act of Congress or United States Foreign Equipment Act of 20th April, 1818, and that of the British Act, which was passed in the following year. But the reason usually assigned for it is, that as the law against enlistment and equipment only pointed to acknowledged states, it was expedient to give the prohibition a distinct application to non-recognized belligerent powers.

Introductory ob

How far one friendly state is entitled to invoke for servations. its own advantage, at the expense of another friendly state, the exercise by a neutral country of the provisions of a purely domestic act of this nature, will be a fair subject for discussion in its proper place.

Pending contest and its incidents.

Apt time for elucidating Law of Nations.

Many circumstances arising out of, or incident to, the pending struggle in the United States, are necessarily fraught with deep interest to a great maritime and commercial people. Seizures have been made, and ships have been carried into prize courts for adjudication, under circumstances which materially affect the honour of the British Flag, or the rights of British merchants in their intercourse, not only with the blockaded Southern ports at their own risk, but with other neutral countries; whilst the recent seizure and prosecution of the "Alexandra" at Liverpool under the Foreign Enlistment Act before referred to, and the abortive attempts which have been made, at the instance of the United States, to frustrate the departure of other British-built ships, have raised questions of grave importance to the merchants and ship-builders of this country.

The war still continues, and our relations with the belligerent parties remain the same. It would seem

therefore that at no time could a condensation of the broad principles of international law, and an elucidation of the provisions of the municipal statutes affecting the question, be more acceptable than at this conjuncture. The object of the present treatise is to furnish this desideratum in a popular form, so as to render it of some value to the commercial community, as well as to the student of international law. This it is proposed to accomplish without entering into any disquisition on the merits or demerits of the conflict now raging

servations.

beyond the waters of the broad Atlantic, or the motives Introductory obby which the respective combatants are influenced, but as far as practicable, calmly and dispassionately to set forth the law, more especially with reference to its bearing on the maritime and mercantile interests of this country.

It is obvious that the British Government has hitherto British regard for neutrality! sought, by the observance of a strict and impartial neutrality, to avoid any direct or dangerous interference in the quarrels of the contending parties. It has, however, not only taken the precautionary step of guarding the subject against any infringement of that neutrality, by the issue of a warning proclamation, in which attention has been carefully drawn to the restrictive provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act, but has resorted to active measures by its interference with ships and vessels suspected of infractions of the municipal law. How far these measures were legally justifiable is a grave question, which is for the time being adversely determined by the recent judgment of the Lord Chief Baron, whose ruling, however, has been questioned and appealed against on the part of the Questionable use Crown. This will probably become the subject of ela- Enlist. Act. borate argument, and final decision in the ensuing

term.

In the mean time, independently of the fair right of discussion of the grave questions involved in the late trial, there are various doctrines of international law, affecting the rights of neutral subjects, of which they ought not to be ignorant, and which cannot be devoid of interest, particularly to a great commercial and maritime community.

These are to be found only by diligent research amongst other matter in the voluminous treatises, law

of the Foreign

Introductory ob- reports, and other works, usually accessible only to a

servations.

work.

particular class.

Obiect of this The most convenient course that suggests itself, appears to be to set forth, as succinctly as due regard to perspicuity will admit, the leading features of international law so far as they affect the privileges and disabilities of neutrals in general, without confining the inquiry exclusively to those laws, rules, and maxims which bear upon the peculiar question of the day which it is intended more especially to discuss.

CHAPTER II.

JURISDICTION OVER SEAS AND NAVIGABLE RIVERS, AND

MATTERS INCIDENT TO A STATE OF WAR.

seas, &c.

THE open sea is free to the whole world, nor can the Jurisdiction over progress of vessels sailing upon it be arrested or retarded, unless in time of war, or when the right of visitation and search has been conceded by treaty. On the ocean a nation can only exercise a legal jurisdiction over its own ships.

With respect to dominion over narrow seas, the Narrow seas. generally adopted rule is that national occupancy extends only so far as it is established by prior possession or treaty.* As regards water approaching the land, the jurisdiction according to ancient doctrine is limited to the range of a cannon shot, or with greater certainty, in these days of powerful projectiles, to a league seaward; beyond which distance, says Sir William Scott, "universal use is presumed in like manner as common use in rivers flowing through co-terminous "states is presumed." (The Twee Gebroeders, 3 Rob. Adm. Rep., 336.)

66

rivers.

The right to navigable rivers may be thus briefly Navigable summed up: When a navigable river is bounded on both sides by the same territory for its entire length, it is the property of the state through which it flows, and may be closed or opened to foreign navigation and commerce at the discretion of its proprietors; but when each bank is the boundary of a distinct state, each has *Kent's Com., i. 29. Kent's Com., i. 31.