390 ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 



the right of visit Dot exisiting in time of peace, even in the case of a 

 slaver. 



The forcible visitation of vessels upon the ocean is prohibited by the law of nations, 

 in time of peace, and this exemption from foreign jurisdiction is now recognised by 

 Great Britain, and, it is believed, by all other commercial Powers, even if the exer- 

 cise of a right of visit were essential to the suppression of the slave trade. Whether 

 such a right should be conceded by one nation to its co-states of the world is a ques- 

 tion for its own consideration, involving very serious consequences, but which is 

 little likely to encounter any prejudiced feelings in favour of the slave trade in its 

 solution, nor to be influenced hj them. 



Then President Grant, in the case of the "Virginins", — a ship flying 

 the United States flag, seized on the high seas near Cuba, and the crew in 

 a very high-handed way, shot — says in his Fifth Annual Message in 1873. 



It is a well-established principle, asserted by the United States from the 

 1188 beginning of their national independence, recognised by Great P)ritain and 

 other maritime Powers, aud stated by the Senate in a resolution p;issed unani- 

 mously on 16th .June, 1858, that American vessels on the high seas in time of peace, 

 bearing the American flag, remain under the jurisdiction of the country to which 

 they belong; and therefore any visitation, molestation, or detention of such vessels 

 by iforce, or by the exhibition of force, on the part of a foreign Power, is in deroga- 

 tion of the sovereignty of the United States. 



Finally, Mr. Evarts, to whom I have already allu-ded, a lawyer of great 

 eminence, in reference to the seizure of United States ships by Span- 

 ish gunboats in non-territorial waters near Cuba, — I think there was a 

 protest also on the part of Great Britain in reference to this matter; it 

 was in relation to an assertion on the part of the Spanish Authorities 

 extending 6 miles from the territory, — writes this : 



It needs no argument to show that the exercise of any such asserted right [visita- 

 tion and search] upon commercial vessels, on the high seas, in time of peace, is 

 inconsistent with the m;iintenance of even the most ordinary semblance of friendly 

 relations between the nation which thus conducts itself and that whose merchant 

 vessels are exposed to systematic detention and search by armed force. 



This Government never has recognized, and never will recognize, any pretence or 

 exercise of sovereignty on the part of Spain beyond the belt of a league from' the 

 Cuban coast over the commerce of this country in time of peace. This rule of the 

 law of nations we consider too firmly established to be drawn into debate, and any 

 dominion over the sea outside of this limit will be resisted with the same fixmuess 

 as if such dominion were asserted in mid-ocean. 



But the distinction between dominion over the sea, carrying a right of visit and 

 search of all vessels found within such dominion, and fiscal or revenue regulations 

 of commerce, vessels, and cargoes engaged in trade as allowed with our ports to a 

 reasonable range of approach to such ports, needs only to be pointed out to be fully 

 appreciated. 



Every nation has full jurisdiction of commerce with itself, until by treaty stipula- 

 tions it has parted with some portions of ■ihis full control. 



In this jurisdiction is easily included a requirement that vessels seeking our ports, 

 in trade, shall be subject to such visitation and inspection as the exigencies of our 

 trade may demand, in the judgment of this Government, for the protection of the 

 revenues and the adequate administration of the customs service. 



This is not dominion over the sea where these vessels are visited, but dominion 

 over this commerce with us, its vehicles and cargoes, even while at sea. It carries 

 no assertion of dominion, territorial and in invititm, but over voluntary trade in 

 progress aud by its own election, submissive to our regulations of it, even in its 

 approaches to our coasts and while still outside our territorial dominion. 



That is rather an ingenious suggestion in defence of the revenue 

 jurisdiction upon another ground, namely that although the ship has 

 not come into your actual territory, yet she is submitting to your regu- 

 lations, even in her approach to the coast and while still out of terri- 

 torial jurisdiction. I do not stop to defend it. I cite the passage for a 

 different purpose. 



