203 



tion of neulriility and tlie so-called 'Hovering Acts' and acts relating 

 to the customs." 



I have not understood counsel to question the validity, under the 

 law of nations, of the statntes of either England or the United States, 

 commonly 'known as hovering acts, by which those countries assume 

 to exert their authority (if need be, employing force) beyond the line of 

 territorial waters, when that becomes necessary for the protection of 

 her revenue against those who intend to violate their customs laws 

 and regulations. This is done, to repeat the words of Lord 

 Chief Justice Cockburu, in the exercise of "the right of a state 

 to take all necessary measures for the protection of its territory and 

 rights and the prevention of any breach of its revenue laws." Suppose 

 individuals should organize in England a plan for smuggling goods 

 into the United States in violation of its revenue law, and to that end 

 should load a vessel at Liverpool with the goods thus intended to be 

 introduced clandestinely into the United States aiul sail from one of the 

 ports of that country in direct execution of their illegal scheme. Would 

 any one doubt the right of the United States, if the circumstances 

 made that course necessary, to authorize the seizure of the goods in 

 mid ocean and confiscate them? Must the United States, in such a 

 case, forbear to take any steps whatever for the protection of its rights 

 and its revenue until the vessel gets near to its coasts'? Ui)on what 

 pririciple can the right to cause such seizure outside of territorial waters 

 and within the distance from the shore fixed by hovering acts, be any 

 gi-eater than that of seizing, under the circumstances stated, in mid- 

 ocean ? 



Supi)0se, again, that a vessel laden with rags infected with yellow 

 fever were on its way to one of the ports of the United States. Can any 

 one doubt that the government of that country would be entitled, under 

 the law of nations, to cause the seizure of the infected rags in mid ocean 

 and their destruction, if that mode of proceeding were, under all the cir- 

 cumstances, necessary to protect its people against the danger of yellow 

 fever ? 



It seems to me that the question as to the extent to which a nation 

 may go in protecting its rights depends entirely on the circumstances of 

 each particular case. If the rights assailed are such as the nation may 

 defend and preserve against the wrongful acts of others, then it may 

 employ, ft^ the iilace of attach, from tvhich the injury proceeds, certainly, if 

 that place he notioithin the exclusive jurisdiction of another poiver, all the 



