Page:Commentaries on American Law vol. I.djvu/36

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
24
OF THE LAW OF NATIONS.
[Part I.

be admitted to create a case of necessity justifying an interference by force; for a nation, under any form of civil policy which it may choose to adopt, is competent to preserve its faith, and to maintain the relations of peace and amity with other powers.

It is sometimes a very grave question, when and how far one nation has a right to assist the subjects of another, who have revolted, and implored that assistance. It is said,[1] that assistance may be afforded consistently with the law of nations, in extreme cases, as when rulers have violated the principles of the social compact, and given just cause to their subjects to consider themselves discharged from their allegiance. Vattel mentions the case of the Prince of Orange as a justifiable interference, because the tyranny of James II. had compelled the English nation to rise in their defence, and to call for his assistance. The right of interposition must depend upon the special circumstances of the case. It is not susceptible of precise limitations, and is extremely delicate in the application. It must be submitted to the guidance of eminent discretion, and controlled by the principles of justice and sound policy. It would clearly be a violation of the law of nations, to invite subjects to revolt who were under actual obedience, however just their complaints; or to endeavor to produce discontents, violence, and rebellion, in neighbouring states, and under colour of a generous assistance, to consummate projects of ambition and dominion. The most unexceptionable precedents are those in which the interference did not take place until the new states had actually been established, and sufficient means and spirit had been displayed to excite a confidence in their stability. The assistance that England gave to the United Netherlands when they were struggling against Spain, and the asssstance that France gave to this country during the war of our revolution, were justifiable acts, founded in wisdom and policy. And it is not to be doubted that

  1. Vattel, b. 2. c. 4. sec. 56. Rutherforth, b. 2. c. 9. See also Grotius, lib. 2. ch. 25. sect. 8. Puff. b. 8. ch. 6. sect. 14.