Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

grant of recognition to communities of men who established civilized rule in uncivilized districts is to be found in the history of the Republic of Liberia, originally founded, like the Congo Free State, by a voluntary association of individuals leagued together for philanthropic purposes. In this case the association was The American Colonization Society for the Establishment of free men of color of the United States. In 1821 it obtained from the native chiefs the cession of a tract of territory on the coast of Upper Guinea, and sent thither a number of emancipated negroes. Liberally assisted with funds by the American Association, this community grew into an organized state which in a few years declared itself independent, and in 1847 assumed the title of the Republic of Liberia. Great Britain was the first power to recognize the new state, which she did by negotiating a formal treaty with it in 1848. Since that time other countries have followed her example, and the negro Republic is an undoubted member of the family of nations.1

§ 59.

States whose Inrecognized in

dependence is

consequence of a

successful revolt.

The last and most frequent case of admission into the society formed by civilized states occurs when a political community which has cut itself adrift from the body politic to which it formerly belonged and started a separate national existence of its own receives Recognition of Independence from other states. The community thus recognized must, of course, possess a fixed territory, within which an organized government rules in civilized fashion, commanding the obedience of its citizens and speaking with authority on their behalf in its dealings with other states. The act of Recognition is a normal act, quite compatible with the maintenance of peaceful intercourse with the mother country, if it is not performed till the contest is either actually or virtually over in favor of 1 Twiss, Law of Nations, Preface to 2d ed.

the new community. Thus the Recognition of the Independence of the United States by those powers who accorded it after Great Britain had herself recognized them as independent by the Preliminaries of 1782 was no unfriendly act towards her; but their Recognition by France in 1778, when the contest was at its height and the event exceedingly doubtful, was an act of intervention which the parent state had a right to resent, as she did, by war. Again, when the Independence of the revolted Spanish-American colonies was recognized by Great Britain, Spain had no cause to complain of any breach of international right, because no Recognition was accorded in any case till she had ceased from serious efforts to restore her supremacy, though on paper she still asserted her claims. Recognition was given first to Buenos Ayres in 1824, and at that time the contest had lasted for twenty years and the colony had been free from Spanish rule for fourteen years. The case of Texas and its Recognition by the United States is somewhat similar. In 1836 the revolted Texans not only defeated the Mexican army at San Jacinto, but took the Mexican President prisoner. The further attempts of Mexico to regain her authority were absolutely impotent, and the contest was over when the United States recognized the Texan Republic in 1837.1

The various methods of Recog

§ 60.

Recognition may take place in various ways. Sometimes a formal declaration of Recognition is made in a separate and independent document, and it was in this nition of Indepen- Way that the United States recognized the Congo Free State in 1884.2 Sometimes such a declaration is embodied in a treaty which deals with other matters also, as was done when Germany recognized the same state

dence.

1 Historicus, Three Letters on Recognition; Wharton, International Law of the United States, § 70.

2 British State Papers, Africa, No. 4 (1885), pp. 262–263.

in the same year.1 Occasionally the Recognition is made conditional, as when the Independence of Roumania, Servia, and Montenegro was recognized in the Treaty of Berlin of 1878, on the condition that they imposed no religious disabilities on any of their subjects. Recognition may be effected, without the use of words directly according it, by entering into such relations with the recognized community as are held to subsist between independent states alone. Thus there is no formal statement of Recognition in the Treaty of Amity and Commerce between France and the United States in 1778; but the independence of the revolted colonies is taken for granted in every article, and they covenant again and again to do what can only be done by Sovereign States. The sending of a duly accredited diplomatic representative, as was done by the United States in the case of Texas, has the same effect as the negotiation of a treaty. Both are acts of sovereignty, and to perform them towards an aspirant for admission into the family of nations implies that, as far as the state which does them is concerned, its desire is granted. Recognition by one state in no way binds others. But the example, once set, must soon be followed, unless the newly recognized community loses almost immediately its de facto independence, or is so small and unimportant as to be neglected with impunity. The quickness or slowness of Recognition is often determined by political sympathies; but no power can continue for an indefinite time to shut its eyes to accomplished facts. When a province or colony has won a real Independence, recognition of it must come sooner or later, even from the parent state. The lead in these matters is usually taken by the government of some influential country. Sometimes the Great Powers of Europe acting together in concert agree upon a Recognition, as when they admitted Turkey to participate in the advantages of

1 British State Papers, Africa, No. 4 (1885), pp. 263–264.

2 Holland, European Concert in the Eastern Question, pp. 293–303.
3 Treaties of the United States, pp. 296-305.

public law, or gratified the national aspirations of the Balkan States on condition of abstinence from anything that savored of religious persecution. In cases such as these the smaller states almost invariably follow the example of their more powerful neighbors. Indeed, the Concert of Europe, which means the agreement of the six Great Powers, may be said to represent the whole of Europe and speak on its behalf.

CHAPTER V.

THE SOURCES AND DIVISIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.

§ 61.

Meaning of the phrase, The sources of Inter

national Law.

By the sources of International Law we mean the places where its rules are first found.1 An inquiry into them is therefore historical in its nature. It has nothing to do with the reason why the rules were originally invented or accepted. Whether those who first set them forth or obeyed them did so because of their conformity with a supposed Law of Nature or because of their obvious utility, whether they were actuated by motives of benevolence or by motives of self-interest, are questions foreign to the present inquiry. Doubtless considerations of very various degrees of respectability have presided over the making of the complex mass of rules we call International Law. But our object here is to trace the process of formation, not to enter into the mental and moral predilections of those who took part in it. We must also remember that no rule can have authority as law unless it has been generally accepted by civilized states. Its source does not give it validity. Custom is, as it were, the filter-bed through which all that comes from the fountains must pass before it reaches the main stream. We have to take the rules we find in operation to-day and trace them back to the places where they have their origin. In doing so we shall find that the sources of International Law may be resolved into five, which we will proceed to describe in the order of their importance.

1 Austin, Jurisprudence, II., 526-528.

« PredošláPokračovať »