Washington sentinel., 1899-11-04
SUR FOR EIoN NEW s
translated and Selected Cy0Ss leading
EUROPEAN 6aosvSEOY Ehs SENTINEL
ENGLAND.
THE EUROPEAN Powers AND THE
BOERS.
81 IameS'S Gazette.

~ JoWfc9 , CN<cafcs
A question ofconsIdeTable importance
to this country will speedily arise for
decision. Will the European powers
and the United States recognize Beers
as belIigerents or will they regard the
war as one between a Sovereign State
and its rebelliouS subjects? In the latter
case there would be no necessity for the
powers to take any formal notice that
war was going on, an obvious advantage
to Great Britain, for it would enable US
to continue the purchase OF mules in
Spain and America, OF timed provisions
in the United States, and Of warlike
stores generally wherever we found a
market. It would also allow the
Beers to continue the importation Of
arms via Delagoa Bay, providing, of
course. that the carGoes were not inter
cepted by BTi ish men OF wsr 1t is
doubtful whether we should have the
right to stop any steamers carving such
cargoes, as they would all be flying the
flag OF some friendly State. The Beers,
too. could go on enlisting recruits in
Holland and Belgium, as they have
begun to do. These recruits would be
able to land at Lourenco Marques, and
reach the Transvaal unmolested. Such
at least is the contention of Boer sym
pathizers, but a more weIghty opinion
is that friendly powers-and al, nations
come technically into that category
would be at liberty to allow Great
Britain TO purchase war supplies and to
make use Of their harbors, whilst denying
such rights TO "rebellious vassals
| Neither he continental powers nor the
United States OF America ever have
recognized the claim Of the TranSvaal
to be ian independent sovereign State"
In aOstaining from such recognition they
are acting on a principle on which there
is no difference OF opinion among jurists.
That principal is LAID down in "HalI's
International Law" as follows:
ga State IN its peri CT form has, in
virtue Of its independence, complete
| liberty OF action. subject TO law, in ITS
relations with other States.
But so soon as
as compacts are entered INTO. which are
not intended to be revocable. or are not
| likely by the nature Of their provisions
to be susceptible OF unilateral revocation
and which. at the same time, sub.
| ject the external action OF a State 10
| direction b, will other than its own, it
| ceases within the sphere of these com.
parts TO be independent, and conse-
quentlY to be person in international
/ law"
1t is perfectly clear from this that the
| Transvaal is, as Professor Westlake
himself admits, a dependent" State.
| The exact international status Of such a
| dependent State ia time Of war has never
yet been determined. Obviously the
power apart from the combdtauts) most
interested in this question is Portugal,
| Tor upon the decision arrived at depends
the privileges accorded to Beers or
British at Delagoa Bay. In the present
nebulous state of international law.
authorities could be found to support
any course Portugal chose to adopt.
| There IS the precedent she herself set in
1896 when British troops were allowed
to land at Beira and march through to
Mashonaland. IT. however, Portugal
| were 10 allow the BritlSn 10 use IJelaROa
Bay as a base Tor operations against the
Transvaal there can be no doubt that
the Beers would, # able, make repusals
in which case a virtual, II not a declared,
state Of war would exist between POrtu.
gal and the South African Republic,
The action of the Orange Free State
IN throwing in its lot with the Transvaal
som swhat complicates the legal posi-
ton. The Free State is, in law, a
sovereign international State, though in
practice its position OF ofdependency upon
England is marked by the fact that all
correspondence with it is carried on,
not by the Foreign Office, but by the
High Commissioner and the Colonia
Office. The alliance OF the two BOer