$ 50.

Interference on the score of humanity or of religion can be justified only by the extreme circumstances of the 5. Interference on case. In the age which succeeded the reforma- the score of religtion, both self-preservation and religious sympa- ity.

thies induced the Protestant states to aid one another against the superior might of the Catholic, and to aid the votaries of their faith within Catholic countries, in order to secure for them freedom of worship. Elizabeth of England sent aid to the revolted Hollanders on religious grounds, and Cromwell's threats slackened the persecution of the Waldenses by the Duke of Savoy. In modern times, the interference of Great Britain, France, and Russia, on behalf of the Greeks, in 1827, was avowedly dictated by motives of humanity. The Greeks, after a bloody contest, had so far achieved their independence, that the Sultan could not reduce them. Accordingly his vassal, Mehemed Ali, of Egypt, was allured to send an army of subjugation into the Morea, and the atrocious scenes of fanatical war were renewed. The Greeks applied to France and England for help or mediation. At length, in consequence of the battle of Navarino, Oct. 20th, 1827, and the French occupation of the Morea, the Peninsula was evacuated by Mohammedan troops, and finally the independence of Greece was acknowledged. Dr. Wheaton says of these events* that the Christian powers were eminently justified in their interference "to rescue a whole nation not merely from religious persecution, but from the cruel alternative of being transported from their native land into Egyptian bondage, or exterminated by their merciless oppressors. The rights of human naturewantonly outraged by this cruel warfare-were but tardily and imperfectly vindicated by this measure, but its principle was fully justified by the great paramount law of self-preservation. 'Whatever a nation may lawfully defend for itself, it may defend for another if called on to interpose.' The interference of the Christian powers to put an end to this bloody contest,

* Elements, Part II., Chapter 1, § 10.

might therefore have been safely rested on this ground alone, without appealing to the interests of commerce and of the repose of Europe, which, as well as the interests of humanity, are alluded to in the treaty, (for the pacification of Greece, July 6th, 1827,) as the determining motives of the high contracting parties."

Equality.

Rank of nations.

EQUALITY OF SOVEREIGN STATES.

§ 51.

We have already explained equality to denote equality of rights. All sovereign states stand on the same level in this respect,-the old and the new, large and small, monarchies and republics,-for the conception of a state to be applied to all is the same, and their sovereignty is the same. This, however, is not incompatible with special privileges of a commercial nature granted to one nation before another, or to superior rank in the ceremonial of courts. Formerly the most punctilious rules of etiquette were observed at most of the courts of Europe. Gustavus Adolphus, who said that all crowned heads were equal, was one of the first to despise pretensions of superiority. Rules are necessary to prevent ambassadors and their wives. from contending for precedence, or feeling that an insult has been offered to them or their country. But with all the nicety of court etiquette, such quarrels have frequently taken place. Among the most noted of these disputes, was one of long continuance between the ambassadors of France and Spain.* The place of France, until the sixteenth century, according to the ceremonial of the Romish See, had been next to that of the German emperor, but, as Charles V. was both emperor and king of Spain, his successor on the Spanish throne claimed precedence of other kings, and thus brought on a collision. At the Council of Trent the dispute rose to such a point

* See Ward's Hist., II. 272, seq. (Dublin Ed.)

that the French declared that they would renounce obedience to the Pope, if deprived of their place, and it was only settled by allowing the Frenchman to continue in his seat next to the Legate who presided, and the Spaniard to occupy a seat of eminence opposite to him. The most serious outbreak, however, of this rivalry occurred at London in 1661, when, according to the usage of the time, the ambassadors went in procession to meet a newly arrived ambassador from Sweden. The ministers of both nations appeared with an armed retinue. As the Frenchman attempted to put his carriage next to that of the English king, the Spaniards raised a shout, scared the horses, and occupied the place. The French then fired upon them, and received back their fire, so that eight were killed and forty wounded in the encounter; but the Spaniards, having during the melée cut the hamstrings of the French horses, were able to secure the coveted precedence. Louis XIV. threatened war for this outrage, and thus forced the Spaniards into a declaration that their ambassador should never be present at ceremonies where a contest for rank could arise between them and the French.

According to the old rules of Europe, the Pope (whom Protestant nations and Russia regard as only an Italian sovereign) ranked highest in dignity, the German emperor next, monarchies before republics, sovereigns before half-sovereigns, and princes of inferior name closed the list. The following order of rank emanated from the Roman court in 1504: the Roman emperor, king of Rome, king of France, of Spain, Arragon, Portugal, England, Sicily, Scotland, Hungary, Navarre, Cyprus, Bohemia, Poland, Denmark (with which Sweden and Norway were then united), the Venetian republic, the duke of Brittany, Burgundy, Electors of Bavaria, Saxony, Brandenburg, archduke of Austria, duke of Savoy, grand duke of Florence, dukes of Milan, Bavaria, Lorraine, etc.*

The rules now acted upon in regard to the rank of different states and of their sovereigns are, according Existing rules of to Heffter, the following:

rank.

* Heffter, § 28, p. 49. Comp. Suppl. to Dumont V. 202,

1. States to which, for themselves or for their sovereigns, royal honors pertain, have an external rank before those tc which these honors do not belong. Such honors are the right of sending ambassadors of the first class, the use of the royal title, crown and corresponding arms, and certain other ceremonial usages. To this rank belong emperors, kings, grand dukes, the elector of Hesse, the Swiss republic, the United States of America, the German confederation.

2. Among states of the same class entire equality of rights obtains, but the rule of precedence, in regard to rank, is settled by treaty and usage. Kings and emperors have a general equality, as is indicated by the fact that the former frequently connect the latter title with that which they are especially known by. A precedence is given to kings and emperors before sovereigns who have inferior titles, and before republics," whose special relation of rank to other states with royal honors is not definitely fixed." There is a certain order of the German states in relation to affairs of the confederation, and to this alone. Half-sovereign and protected states rank after those on which they depend. Treaties by which one state concedes the precedence to another over a third, without its consent, are of no obligation upon the latter, and may contain a violation of the respect which is its due.

The rank which a state has once obtained is usually not lost by a change of constitution.

These distinctions

The tendency of things is, as far as possible, towards entire equality of states. Thus commercial privifading out. leges are fast disappearing, and new treaties to a great extent concede the advantages given to the most favored nations. The precedence of ambassadors of the same rank is determined simply by length of residence at the court. And special tokens of respect to one nation more than to another, like those claimed by England in certain narrow seas, have nearly gone out of use.

* Heffter, § 28, p. 50.

CHAPTER II.

TERRITORIAL RIGHTS OF STATES AND RIGHTS OF PROPERTY. PROPERTY.-STRICT RIGHT RENOUNCED, ESPECIALLY AS TO THE USE OF NAVIGABLE WATERS.

$ 52.

in intern. law,

A NATION is an organized community within a certain territory; or in other words, there must be a place where its sole sovereignty is exercised. It may, also, and Property of states will have property of its own, like individuals and what? associations: it may even hold such property within the borders of other states, may be the creditor of foreign states or individuals, or, unless the law of a state prohibit, may possess land there on the tenure of private ownership. Upon the property of its subjects, again, it has a certain lien, as appears from the power to lay taexs and the power to use private property for public purpose. But the right of eminent domain with which such power over private property is connected, does not imply that such property is absolutely under the control of the state, or that the state was the prior owner, and conveyed it to the individual under conditions; but the right is rather to be considered as one of necessity, without which, at times, public affairs could not move on, nor the rights of many individuals be protected. Now, although the relations of the state to its territory, to its property and to the property of individuals are different, yet as far as other nations are concerned, they may all be included under the term property. "Such property of states," as Heffter well remarks, "has only in relation to other states the same character which property has, namely, the character of exclusiveness and free disposal," that is, of pertaining to the state to the exclusion of all other states, and of being disposed of without restraint on their part upon its will.