New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-04-14

immediate lasting e
of an orderly coexstence OF States results there
from.
Second-When a government. acting entirely
within the limits Of Its prerogatves OF sovereign
~. violates the rights of humanity. whether by
measures contrary TO the interests OF other
States or by excess OF injustice and cruelty
which deeply wounds public morals and cviiza-
ton
The right Of Intervention is legitimate one.
because. however important may be the rights
% sovereignty and independence, there Is one
thing Of still greater Importance. and that Is the
law Of humanity and human society which
ought not TO be outraged.
Between these extremties Of opinion. the DIFF
ferences among the publcists exceedingly
various and irreconcilable Professor Hall. in his
work on International law I'D ed. p. 2SS. note
ID. in considering the opinions OF modern inter-
national jurlsts who touch upon humanitarian
intervention says that the treatment which
the subject receives from them is mostly frag
nentary notice being taken only OF some OF It's
grounds which are usually approved or disap-
proved without very clear reference TO a general
principle"
Vattel div. |. oh. w.. S. so. considers It per-
r9lsslble 70 succor a people oppressed by It's
sovereign. but does not appear TO sanction any
OF In" analogous grounds OF Intervention.
Wheaton elem. pit II. ch. l. 9. 93). Bluntsch
Is. 49,. Mamian -. SO give the right Of aid
ing oppressed race. Heffter Is. 40. while de-
nying the right Of Intervention TO repress tyr
amy, holds that so as a civil war has
broken out foreign State may assist either
party engaged In 1t. Calvo Is. 1860 and Fiore
d4iG) think that States can intervene TO put
end to slaughter Vattel says book II. chap
ter ". top p 800:
| -
sOVercgns. render themselves the scourges and
! horror ~ the human race. they are savage
beasts whom every brave man may Justly exter
inmate from the face OF the earth. All antiquity
has praised Hercules for delivering the world
from Ant1us Busiris end Diomede.
NECESSITY RULES
II these opinions state the correct rule AZ
believ" they do the right OF Intervention by the
United States in tho present instance is IN
dublabe. They are however. controverted by
other pubclsts OF great emnence. II is pos
sibly correct TO say. 10 this conflict Of opln-
ion. that this portion OF International law is
though operative in certain cases in that forma-
tive and progressv. condition OF development
by which many benign principles. though for
merry contested have last become firmly
established
The following reflections OF Mr. Pomeroy upon
this subject Gnt. Law, p PAP. ct seq appear
. 10 be well considered
How FAR the right 81 Intervention legitimately
extends under what circumstances II may be In
vokod. 20 what extent II may be carried.
cussion-QuestiOns that have never been authori-
tatlvcly settled and perhaps never VIII he set
tied Hardly n writer absolutely denies the
/ existence II the right az all. II would to
! be unsafe 20 10 this length on the other
hand. f. seems almost equally unsafe 10 admit
TIC right - exist nj all FOR. as Il Is utterly i'm
D. ftv,,fss
very admission may open the door to vast and
terrible abuses.
While the fact Is. Ms stated. that instance. o,
+ in'e;y cnti0n are and have been constantly
/ curing. I am ~ opinion that the whole sub
/ feet does not 30 much belong to international
/ law TO politics In short. cannot
/ been. or perhaps can be. regulated by the post!
tive international law II must be reegated 10
/ the domain of those high politics those prin-
-'oles - c,ped ,ncy which control the conduct.
both domestic and foreign. q nations.
TWO GREAT POLICIES
The actual condition and policies OF nations
give warrant TO these observations To sustain
repeated Intervention during the present
,ury no law has been invoked They have been
acts - necessity or policy. This statement is
corroborated by the creation and existence OF
two policies one Of Europe. the other OF the
United states each Of which is based distinctly
l
under certain circumstances, We refer to the
principle of the balance OF power ard 10 tho
Monroe Doctrine. Each is distinct and arbi-
trary policy of Intervention. 10 be effected In
certain contingencies In furtherance Of national
policies. and 70 Justify which no canon OF inter
/ national law was ever invoked. The former has
/ profoundly affected the relations OF the Euro
pean States and the Independence OF many OF
those sOvere.gntlcs.
The latter has kept the Powers OF Europe out
OF the American continents ever since II was
prornueated II distinct announcement
that the United States would intervene under
certain expressed circumstances in the affairs OF
every Central American and South American
state The United States did intervene by
threat and show OF force In the affairs Of Mex
co and France and compelled the evacuation
Of that Republic BY European Power. whose
own prior Intervention In Mexican affairs had
oyerthrown a republic and established a mon
archv upon its ruins No pubcist has ever as
serted that either OF these policies is part Of the
law Of nations.
Justification for Intervention is strengthened
I'm such cases as the present. where the oppres-
slons bv n state OF It's subjects have been so In
vetcratc atrocious and sangulnary as TO
oulre Intervention by other nations In the inter
es,s OF humanity and the peace Of the world for
tho purpose OF overthrowng that Government
and establishing or recognizing another in its
place as the only means Of extirpating an other
wise incurable and dangerous evil.
PRECEDENTs IN TURKEY.
The conduct of the European Powers respect
ing Turkey has been pursuant TO the policy
which fmpes one nation to intervene In the
affairs OF another state TO stop cruelty and mas
sacre. and II necessary. to depose 1t from SOW
erelgntv That State became member OF the
commonwealth OF European Powers by the
treaty OF Paris OF 1856. The integrity and SOW
erelgnty Of the Ottoman Empire were guarah-