The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1851-02-13

tuuately had no better protection to their rights
and interests than civil law. The mobiles and
belligerant clergy in view Of their exalted posi-
ton claimed and exercised the right Of avenging
private injuries by a resort to arms. This was
held to be the most sacred of personal rights
which, in no possible contingency, could properly
be yielded up, by making any reference In dis
putes to umpires, or any appeal to magistrates Tor
n peaceful decision So at the present time, II is
considered highly proper indeed, that those ma
tons which are too weGk 10 defend Themselves by0Tn'
should rely upon treaty, negotiation, arbitrament,
or international legislation but independent States
| cannot be expected 30 far to relinquish their
highest prerogatives as to voluntarily place them
selves under the jurisdiction Of any power, or i'm
plicitly submit 10 the decision of any umpire
And as general principles were Of necessity fixed
upon and tscitly adopted by most of the feudal
barons and ecclesiastes for the management OF
their private animosities, so provision is made, in
the code under review, for nations that wish,
without losing character for chivalrous devotion
TO the principles of international etiquette, to
subvert the order OF nature, and stop the march
of civilization by mutually destroying each other
| To SUN up all then, in few words, we are au-
| thorized to conclude that the term idr is In no
strict or appropriate sense applicable to the exist
ing body of international msxims, for the follow
ing reasons:
| First. Because the idea of law is that of rule
established and prescribed by a supreme power
which power cannot co-exst with the unlimited
! iadependtnce assumed and exercised by the exist
ing States of the world As there can be no mu.
nicipal law where members Of the community
acknowledge not the supremacy of a civil power,
so there can be no international law where there
are such organizations as separately Independent
! States.
Second. Because, in human affairs, where
| there is law there must also be judge to decide
and an Executive to perform; whereas the men,
bers of the community Of nations, from the ma
ture of their constitution, do not recognise the
existence Of any such powers
Third. Because rules, without penalties an
nexed, are mere maxims, and not laws. They
are equally impotent in affording protection to
the weak, and imposing restraints upon the pow
erful
Fourth Because even laws, when they conflict
with each other, become null and void The prin-
cples of this code, as laid down by different wri-
tiers, and interpreted by different jurists, do thus
conflict.
Fifth. Because this body of maxims has in
variaby failed to operate law. Through
long succession of years, in which its existence
has been recognised, it has failed to preserve the
tranquility Of the world-the principal end for
which international law should exist
Thus do nations exist, in community, indie
pendent of each other and Of all created tribunals
having no rule of action, except such precepts as
nature forty centuries ago, imposed upon man in
o savage state or these precepts, public opinion,
often corrupt through prejudice and ignorance, is
the only embodiment, and the only sanction
TO BE CONTINUED