[s. E. DAWSON] THE LINES OF DEMARCATION 473 



" quisition of property in a valuable object which, could be covered by 

 '' the hand." 



Modern diplomacy is not in a position to regard as "comical" or 

 "ridiculous" the attempt of the Pope, in 1493, to draw a line of de- 

 marcation through the ocean in the interests of peace between the only 

 powers which were then concerning themselves with discovery and 

 extension, for, translated into the very latest diplomatic form of speech, 

 it was nothing else than the delimitation of "spheres of influence,'' 

 such as, dui-ing the last few years, have resulted in the partition of the 

 continent of Africa. The doctrine of "Hinterland," is the old prin- 

 ciple under a new name. It is the principle which pervaded the old 

 charters of the American colonies and made them to extend their 

 claims from sea to sea. As it was then, so it is now ; enormous regions 

 are being marked off upon the map, regions whither white travellers 

 have barely penetrated and containing immense numbers of people who 

 have never seen a European. These are being allotted to one power or 

 another, without any more rational grounds then were the "Western or 

 Eastern Indies in 1493 ; and from time to time a Fashoda incident 

 crops up to demonstrate the absence of any governing principle. 



It has been argued that the perfect equality of each sovereign 

 state, without regard to its size or strength, is a modern principle of 

 international law. That however is doubtful, for it seems in the case 

 01 weak nations to depend rather upon the mutual jealousies of the 

 greater states. Grotius although, as before stated, he mentioned in 

 his preface the names of some of his predecessors in the field of inter- 

 national law, did not mention Francis a Victoria., a learned theologian 

 of Salamanca, who in two chapters of his work, Relectiones Theologicœ, 

 published first at Lyons in 1559, and then at Salamanca in 1565, went 

 far beyond Grotius and even surpassed the writers of the present day 

 in his humane and liberal yj&ws. The book is very rare, but Hallam 

 (Hist. Lit. Vol. 2) gives an account of it and there is a more detailed 

 analysis in Salomon's L'Occupation des Territoires sans Maitre. The 

 chapters bearing on the present question are those entitled de Indis and 

 de Jure Belli, and the fact that such views were at that date publicly 

 expressed by an ecclesiastical professor of high repute, is worthy of 

 serious attention. He maintained that the Spaniards had no more right 

 to the Indies by discovery than the Indians would have had to Spain if 

 they had discovered Spain — that, by public and private law, the Indians 

 were as Justly owners of their own lands as if they were Christians — 

 that the Indians did not lose their rights because they were unbelievers, 

 since they had not had the opportvmity of knowing the true faith — 

 that Jews and Sanacens who were hostile to Christianity retained their 



