Argument of Mr. Evarts, One of the Counsel of the United States, Addressed to the Tribunal of Arbitration at Geneva on the 5th and 6th August, 1872, in Reply to the Special Argument of the Counsel of Her Britannic Majesty: Stenographic Report
Chiswick Press, 1872 - 108페이지
다른 사람들의 의견 - 서평 쓰기
서평을 찾을 수 없습니다.
기타 출판본 - 모두 보기
action actual allowed American applied argu arises armament armed asylum authority base base of naval belligerent bring Britain British Government called carry certainly circumstances claims clause coaling conduct consideration considered construction contraband course courts Crown cruisers dealing debate determine discussion doctrine due diligence duty effect eminent Counsel Evarts Executive exercise facts fault force Foreign Enlistment Act furnish given ground hostile act insisted interception jurisdiction law of nations learned Counsel limited maritime matter means measure ment nature naval operations necessary neutral ports neutral territory notice obligation observations offending officers origin parties ports and waters practical prerogative prevent principles proofs proper proposition proscribed question reason reference regard resort respect responsibility Rules second Rule Shenandoah ship Sir Alexander situation sovereign special argument supply supposed territory Three tion transactions Treaty Tribunal United vessel violation whole
17 페이지 - First, to use due diligence to prevent the fitting out, arming, or equipping, within its jurisdiction, of any vessel which it has reasonable ground to believe is intended to cruise or to carry on war against a power with which it is at peace ; and also to use like diligence to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction of any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war as above, such vessel having been specially adapted, in whole or in part, within such jurisdiction, to warlike use.
9 페이지 - Government cannot assent to the foregoing rules as a statement of principles of international law which were in force at the time when the claims mentioned in Article I arose, but that her Majesty's Government, in order to evince its desire of strengthening the friendly relations between the two countries, and of making satisfactory provision for the future, agrees that in deciding the questions between the two countries arising out of those claims the arbitrators should assume that her Majesty's...
65 페이지 - Secondly, not to permit or suffer either belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the. base of naval operations against the other, or for the purpose of the renewal or augmentation of military supplies or arms, or the recruitment of men. Thirdly, to exercise due diligence in its own ports and waters, and, as to all persons within its jurisdiction, to prevent any violation of the foregoing obligations and duties.
78 페이지 - We may have our own opinions about slavery; we may be for or against the South; but there is no doubt that Jefferson Davis and other leaders of the South have made an army; they are making, it appears, a navy; and they have made what is more than either, they have made a nation.4.
63 페이지 - It seems clear, on the principle enunciated in these authorities, that, except on the ground of any proved violation of the Foreign Enlistment Act, Her Majesty's Government cannot interfere with commercial dealings between British subjects and the so- sty led Confederate States, whether the subject of those dealings be money or contraband goods, or even ships adapted for warlike purposes.
13 페이지 - the first general maxim of interpretation is, that it is not allowable to interpret what has no need of interpretation.
89 페이지 - Why then, take no note of him, but let him go ; and presently call the rest of the watch together, and thank God you are rid of a knave.
95 페이지 - ... to prevent" the occurrence of any of the infractions of the law of nations proscribed by the rules. There are two propositions in these rules. Certain things are assigned as violations of the law of nations, and as involving a duty on the part of a neutral Government to prevent them; and besides in and towards preventing them it is its duty to use due diligence.
11 페이지 - ... optional character, while, in the future, the rules were to be authoritative, binding rules of the law of nations? When the United States had given an assent, by convention, to the law that was to govern this Tribunal, was it intended that that law should be construed, as to the past, differently from what it was to be construed in reference to the future? I apprehend that this learned Tribunal will at once dismiss this consideration, with all its important influence upon the whole subsequent...