waters of another State, because pirates are the enemies of the human race, at war with all mankind.”* ment for piracy. "The punishment of piracy depends on the municipal law of Sec. 7. Punishthe State where the offence is tried: the established penalty is death." Piratical vessels captured and sent into ports of the United States are to be condemned and sold, the proceeds to be distributed at the discretion of the court having jurisdiction in the case. "Piracy is an offence within the criminal jurisdiction of Acquittal. nations. It is against all and punished by all; and the plea of autrefois acquit, resting on a prosecution instituted in the courts of any civilized State, would be a good plea in any other civilized State."S by pirates. "As pirates acquire no title to what they take, on recapture Sec. 8. Captures it reverts to the proprietor without application of the rule of postliminy."|| "The owner has merely been deprived of his possession, to which he is restored by the recapture. For the service thus rendered to him the recaptor is entitled to a remuneration in the nature of salvage."¶ "A body of pirates may be organized under law, but it is no State, being associated for temporary purposes, and designed to act unjustly by its very existence. A State might arise out of a nest of pirates, but it would not begin to be a State until it had laid aside its piratical character. Thus it has been doubted whether the Barbary powers were anything more than associations of pirates. But having grown in the course of time more just and civilized, they are taken into the community of nations."** Sec. 9. Can pi rates form a state? tion at peace. "The officers and crew of an armed vessel, commissioned Sec. 10. Depredating on a naagainst one nation and depredating upon another, are not liable to be treated as pirates in thus exceeding their authority. The State by whom the commission is granted, being responsible to other nations for what is done by its commissioned cruisers, has the exclusive jurisdiction to try and punish all offences committed under color of its authority."†† * Woolsey, Sec. 195. **Woolsey, Sec. 36. † Ibid. Sec. 137. § Kent, Vol. I, p. 197. Dana's Wheaton, p. 456. Sec. 11. The slave trade. . The Act of Congress of May 15, 1820, makes engaging in the African slave trade by any citizen of the United States. either on board of an American vessel or one under any foreign flag, piracy, punishable by death.* The African slave trade is made piracy by the laws of Great Britain, and by treaties between Great Britain and Austria, Prussia, and Russia, but is not piracy by the law of nations.† Brightley's Digest, p. 842. † Lawrence's Wheaton, p. 256. PART XI. NEUTRAL RIGHTS AND DUTIES. tions. "The rights of neutrals have grown up to be an important Sec. 1. Definipart of international law in modern times. The ancients put the rights of war foremost, and the neutral stood chiefly in the passive relation of non-interference. This was owing, in part, to the fact that a system of confederations united the States of antiquity together in war, so that few prominent powers stood aloof from the struggles in which their neighbors were engaged, and in part to the small importance of neutral interests. Things have put on a new shape with the growth of wide intercourse, especially by sea; and with the spread of one code of public law over so many powerful States of the world, who, when they have stood aloof from war, have created for themselves rights, or secured the acknowledgment of existing ones. Now, when a war arises between two States, the interests of all neutrals are more affected than formerly; or, in other words, neutral power has increased more than war power, and the tendency is more and more towards such alterations of the code of war as will favor neutral commerce."* "Neutral nations are those who, in time of war, do not take Vattel. any part in the contest, but remain common friends to both parties, without favoring the arms of the one to the prejudice of the other. As long as a neutral nation wishes securely to enjoy the advantages of her neutrality, she must in all things show a strict impartiality towards the belligerent powers; for, should she favor one of the parties to the prejudice of the other, she cannot complain of being treated by him as an adherent and confederate of his enemy. Her neutrality would be a fraudulent neutrality, of which no nation will consent to be the dupe. It is sometimes suffered to pass unnoticed, merely for want of ability to resent it; we choose to connive at it rather than excite a more powerful opposition against us."+ Divisions. Perfect neutrality. Right of neutrality. "There are two species of neutrality recognized by international law. There are, 1st. Natural or perfect neutrality; and 2d. Imperfect, qualified, or conventional neutrality. "1. Natural or perfect neutrality is that which every sovereign State has a right, independent of positive compact, to observe in respect to the wars in which other States may be engaged. "The right of every independent State to remain at peace whilst other States are engaged in war, is an incontestable attribute of sovereignty. It is, however, obviously impossible that neutral nations should be wholly unaffected by the existence of war between those communities with whom they continue to maintain their accustomed relations of friendship and commerce. The rights of neutrality are connected with correspondent duties. Among these duties is that of impartiality between the contending parties. The neutral is the common friend of both parties, and consequently is not at liberty to favor one party to the detriment of the other. 'A neutral has nothing to do with the justice or injustice of the war; it is not for him to sit as judge between his friends who are at war with each other, and to grant or refuse more or less to the one or the other as he thinks that their cause is more or less just or unjust.' Imperfect "2. Imperfect, qualified, or conventional neutrality is that neutrality. which is modified by special compact. The public law of Europe affords several examples of this species of neutrality."* Permanent "The permanent neutrality of Switzerland, Belgium, and neutrality. Cracow has thus been solemnly recognized as a part of the public law of Europe. But the conventional neutrality thus created differs essentially from that natural or perfect neutrality which every State has a right to observe, independent of special compact, in respect to wars in which other States may be engaged. The consequences of the latter species of neutrality only arise in case of hostilities. It does not exist in time of peace, during which the State is at liberty to contract any eventual engagements it thinks fit as to political relations with other States. A permanently neutral State, on the other hand, by accepting this condition of its political existence, is bound to avoid in time of peace every engagement which might prevent its observing the duties of neutrality in time of war. As an independent State it may lawfully exercise, in its inter *Lawrence's Wheaton, pp. 697-9. course with other States, all the attributes of external sovereignty. It may form treaties of amity, and even of alliance with other States; provided it does not thereby incur obligations which, though perfectly lawful in time of peace, would prevent its fulfilling the duties of neutrality in time of war. Under this distinction treaties of offensive alliance, applicable to a specific case of war between any two or more powers, or guaranteeing their possessions, are of course interdicted to the permanently neutral State. But this interdiction does not extend to defensive alliances formed with other neutral States for the maintenance of the neutrality of the contracting parties against any power by which it might be threatened with violation."* neutrality "Imperfect neutrality may be of two kinds: it may be Qualified impartial, inasmuch as both belligerents have equal liberty to pursue the operations of war, or certain operations, such as transit of troops, purchase of military stores, enlistment of soldiers or seamen, within the neutral's territory; or qualified by an anterior engagement to one of the parties, as by a covenant to furnish a contingent of troops, or to place a certain number of ships at his disposal. It is manifest that agreements like these partake of the nature of alliance. The other belligerent then is free to decide whether he will regard such a State as neutral or as an ally of his enemy. If the assistance to be rendered is trifling, and has no reference to a particular case or a war with a particular nation, it will probably be overlooked; otherwise it will expose the nation furnishing the assistance to the hostility of the other. Such was the agreement of Denmark, put into effect in 1788, in a war between Sweden and Russia, to furnish certain limited succors to the latter. Such, also, are the exclusive privileges, which may have been granted beforehand, of admitting the armed vessels and prizes of one of the belligerents into the neutral's ports."† Wheaton says of the case referred to above: "The abstract right of the Danish court to remain neutral, except so far as regarded the stipulated succors, was scarcely contested by Sweden and the allied mediating powers. But it is evident, from the history of these transactions, that if the war had continued, the neutrality of Denmark would not have been tolerated by these powers unless she had withheld from her ally the *Lawrence's Wheaton, p. 708. † Woolsey, Sec. 155. |