페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

LONDON : PRINTED BY

SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE

AND PARLLAMENT STREET

tu

COMMENTARIES

UPON

[blocks in formation]

Legum denique idcirco omnes servi sumus, ut liberi esso possumus.'-CICERO
pro A. Cluunt. $ 53.

'Il y a dans la sainteté du droit méconnu une force immortelle qui appuie
mystérieusement et invinciblement à la longue les revendications pacifiques et
les protestations solennelles de la conscience humaine. Et, grâce en soit rendue
au Dieu qui nous a faits! c'est l'honneur de l'humanité que la forca brutale ne
décide pas toujours tout ici-bas."-Jgr. DUPANL UP dans l'Assemblie Nationale,
22 Juillet 1871.

* The rarious Transactions and Concorda's between Socereigns and the Sce of
Rome ;-a succinct and impartial history of them is wanting : the papal arrange-
ments with Bonaparte wonld not be the least curious part of such a worki'-
Hore Juridicuc Subsecirue, by CHARLES BUTLER (1801), p. 118.

VOL. II.

Third Edition.

LONDON:

BUTTERWORTHS, 7 FLEET STREET,

Law Publishers to the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty.
HODGES, FOSTER, & CO., GRAFTON STREET, DUBLIN.

[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors]

PREFACE.

THE SECOND EDITION of this volume was published in 1871. Since that date various matters have arisen, connected with the practice and history of International Law, which have been considered in the present volume.

Whilst, however, this edition was passing through the press, the following events, which otherwise would have been noticed in the body of the work, have happened.

The Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, A.D. 1850 (referred to in vol. i. pp. 52, 309), between Great Britain and the United States, respecting the future communication by ship-canal between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, by way of San Juan de Nicaragua, has under

. The correspondence between the American Secretary of State (Mr. Blaine) and the English Secretary for Foreign Affairs (Earl Granville), in which suggestions were made by the former for the abrogation or modification of the treaty in question, will be found in the papers respecting the “projected Panama “ canal,” presented to Parliament by command of her Majesty, 1882. Earl Granville, in his despatch to Mr. West, the British Minister at Washington,

gone discussion.

states the following conclusions at which the British Government had arrived in this matter :

“1. That the differences which arose between the two Governments in regard to the Treaty, and 6 which occasioned at one time considerable irritation, “ but which have long since been happily disposed

of, did not relate to the general principles to be “ observed in regard to the means of interoccanic " communication across the isthmus, but had their

origin in a stipulation which Mr. Blaine still proposes in great part to maintain. He wishes every

part of the Treaty in which Great Britain and the “ United States agree to make no acquisition of terri

tory in Central America to remain in full force, “ while he desires to cancel those portions of the

Treaty which forbid the United States fortifying "the canal, and holding the political control of it “in conjunction with the country in which it is 66 located.

" 2. That the declarations of the United States' " Government during the controversy were distinctly " at variance with any such proposal as that just “ stated. They disclaimed any desire to obtain an

exclusive or preferential control over the canal. “ Their sole contention was, that Great Britain was “ bound by the Treaty to abandon those positions on “ the mainland or adjacent islands, which, in their

opinion, were calculated to give her the means of 6 such a control. Nor did they in any way seek to “ limit the application of the principles laid down in " the Treaty so as to exclude Columbian or Mexican

territory, as Mr. Blaine now suggests, nor urge " that such application would be inconsistent with " the Convention between the United States and

« 이전계속 »