Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

external sovereignty are temporarily or permanently impaired. Its rights and obligations are defined by the common law of nations, and may be known by those who take the trouble to inquire.

A state may
exercise power
over territory as
(b) a protectorate.

§ 102.

With regard to protectorates there is much more complexity. They have lately been proclaimed in abundance over territories occupied by savage or semi-barbarous tribes. Generally the inhabitants have some political organization of their own, capable of performing the rudimentary functions of government. In that case the protecting power exercises full control over all external affairs, and leaves internal matters in a greater or less degree to the native administration. But, as Hall well points out, its exercise of the powers of external sovereignty involves it in responsibilities to other civilized states. If any wrongs are committed upon their subjects by the people of the protectorate, they must not seek redress direct from the native rulers or exact it by force; but it is their duty to apply to the government of the protecting state. That government must, therefore, have some authority in internal matters, sufficient at the least to enable it to protect the subjects of other civilized powers from wanton injury to persons or property. It is true, that the West African Conference of 1884-1885 declined to extend to protectorates the obligation to keep reasonable order within the territory which it imposed upon its members in respect of their future occupations on the coast of Africa.2 But the hard facts of international intercourse cannot be altered by protocols; and it is as certain as anything can be that if, for instance, a German subject were injured and despoiled in the British protectorate of Zanzibar, Germany would apply to Great Britain for redress. Indeed one of the first acts performed by Great Britain, when 1 International Law, § 38*.

2 British State Papers, Africa, No. 4 (1885), pp. 215, 312.

she acquired a protectorate over the neighboring territory of Witu, in consequence of her agreement with Germany in the summer of 1890,1 was to send a ship of war to bombard the place in chastisement for an attack on a German trading party and the slaughter of some of its members. Moreover, it sometimes happens that a civilized state, partly from the desire of acquiring full authority and partly from a laudable wish to educate the natives in civilization, takes care to obtain the right to exercise very considerable powers of internal sovereignty within a territory it receives under its protecto

Thus Great Britain levies a hut-tax in Zululand, and provides for the administration of justice, and she patrols the protected portion of Bechuanaland by a force of border police.2 These instances show that it is impossible to define a protectorate as a political arrangement, whereby the powers of external sovereignty are assumed by the protecting state, while the protected community retains the powers of internal sovereignty. There may be a few protectorates of which this account is true, though it is difficult to see how the separation of the functions of government into two well-defined classes can be made compatible with the responsibilities of the protecting power to other states. But in the great majority of cases domestic affairs are placed to some extent under the control of the authority which deals with external relations. How far that control shall extend, and how much power should be left in the hands of the native governments, are matters which vary from instance to instance and from time to time. The protecting state requires of other members of the family of nations abstention from any direct political dealings with the inhabitants of the protectorate, and holds them bound not to make any attempt to acquire the protected territory. On the other hand, it is under an obligation to restrain those whom it protects from committing injuries upon the subjects of other states or performing hostile acts against 1 British State Papers, Africa, No. 6 (1890), p. 10. 2 Statesman's Year Book (1894), pp. 168, 202.

neighboring peoples; and for these purposes it must have larger powers of control than are contained in the management of foreign relations. It may use the native authorities, or it may employ agents of its own; but it must in some way obtain the means necessary for the fulfilment of its international obligations. At present it is almost impossible to say with certainty how far they extend. It is tolerably clear, that if a state were involved in war, its protectorates would be liable to attack from its foes, in the absence of any special agreement to the contrary, such as those contemplated by the Eleventh Article of the Final Act of the West African Conference, which bound the contracting parties to use their good offices, in order that territories and protectorates comprised in the free-trade zone created by the Act, should be exempt from warlike operations when the powers exercising the rights of sovereignty or protection over them were engaged in hostilities. It is hardly too much to say that there is a tendency to regard the peoples of protected districts as subjects of the protecting state for international purposes; but time alone can show whether a rule to this effect will be embodied in International Law. Should it be adopted, a protectorate would for international purposes differ in no respect from an ordinary province or colony.

A state may exercise power over territory as (c) a sphere of influence.

§ 103.

A sphere of influence is a new thing in formal international relations. The phrase was not heard of till a few years ago, and it can hardly be said to possess a clear and generally recognized technical meaning even yet. Nevertheless, the facts it denotes are not so difficult to understand as those we have attempted to analyze in our explanation of the meaning of a protectorate. Over territory included in the sphere of influence of a state it does not necessarily exercise any direct control, either in external or in internal affairs; but it claims that other states 1 British State Papers, Africa, No. 4 (1885), p. 307.

shall not acquire dominion or establish protectorates therein, whereas it is free to do so if it chooses. The territories actually reserved up to the present as spheres of influence are, in the main, unoccupied; but they contain many settlements made by traders and missionaries, several protectorates, and a few districts already annexed to the dominions of the state in whose sphere they are placed. With regard to these last and to the protectorates, the exclusive rights of the possessory or protecting power exist independently of any agreement as to the area within which it may operate without hindrance. They rest upon the common law of nations, and are not made stronger by treaty stipulations. But the rest of the areas contained in modern spheres of influence are reserved by agreement, and by agreement only. When Great Britain and Germany covenanted with each other, that "one power will not in the sphere of the other make acquisitions, conclude treaties, accept sovereign rights or protectorates, nor hinder the extension of influence of the other," 1 each contracted itself out of its common law right of occupying any unappropriated and uncivilized territory it desired to take, and received in return the assurance that within the limits assigned to it the expansive activity of the other would not be exercised. Such an agreement cannot bind the civilized world unless it is specially recognized by the other members of the family of nations. Its immediate legal effect is confined to the powers which signed it. It is, however, hardly likely that any government would venture to risk the certain hostility of one, and perhaps both of them, by attempting to extend its dominions within the sphere of either. Should war break out on other grounds, doubtless a belligerent would strike at its adversary, there as well as elsewhere, if opportunity offered; but there is little fear that the territories reserved to one another in Africa by Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy and Portugal will be the cause of war in the immediate future. Each power will have enough to do for many years, if it attempts to reduce 1 British State Papers, Africa, No. 6 (1890), p. 8.

into effective possession the vast tracts assigned to it. Often the first step in the process of acquisition is the establishment of a protectorate. This being accomplished, the authority of the protecting power over the protected district tends constantly to increase, till at last nothing but the shadow of internal sovereignty is left to the native rulers. When such a point is reached, annexation cannot be far off; and as soon as it takes place the territory has become part of the colonial dominions of the annexing country. Protectorates over savage or semi-barbarous races are, as a rule, but temporary resting-places on the road to complete incorporation.1

Chartered

spheres of

influence.

§ 104.

Great Britain and Germany have adopted the policy of allowing chartered companies to do pioneer work in territories which they have not taken by occupation, but companies and which have been included in their spheres of influence. Often the chartered company began its work before the diplomatists stepped in to delimit the territories reserved for their respective countries. We have already endeavored to fix the position of these companies in International Law.2 It will be sufficient to add here that the control exercised over them by the mother-country can hardly be very real or very continuous; and that in her effort to escape responsibility by throwing it upon the shoulders of an association, she may often involve herself in transactions more dubious in character and more burdensome in execution than would have been possible had her control been direct. For instance, when in 1889 the natives of the German sphere of influence in East Africa attacked the stations of the German East Africa Company, the Imperial Government sent ships and men to assist in putting down the outbreak.3 It could not look calmly on, while its subjects were slaughtered by the natives; yet, had the administration of the district 1 See Appendix, § III., for a discussion of the position of a state which leased territory from another state.

2 See § 54.

3 Annual Register (1889), pp. 301-304.

« PredošláPokračovať »